What Google's price level ($ to $$$$) coincides with in rating and review volume, across 1,822 studied business profiles.
Google assigns a price level to many locations itself. We placed that attribute next to rating, review count and profile fields. This is observational research: it describes association, not cause.
Deep audit 26 August 2026 · free to cite under CC BY 4.0 · source: Google Maps Platform Places API
The price level is assigned by Google and is not available in every trade. Profiles without a price level are shown separately and are not included in the comparison between levels.
Every row below names how many profiles sit behind it. The $$$ and $$$$ groups are small, so read those figures as indicative.
+0.28★
average rating gap, $$$$ versus $
$$$$ 4.58 · $ 4.29
Profiles with a price level · n=1,822
The higher the price level in this sample, the higher the average rating. That is an observed association, not a cause.
18.8%
of $ venues sat below 4.0
$$$$ 3.8% · $$$ 4.4%
$ venues · n=409
Inexpensive venues in this study sat below 4.0 stars almost five times as often as very expensive ones.
607
median reviews at $$ venues
$$$$: 229
$$ venues · n=1,101
Review volume does not follow price: the mid tier collects the most reviews, the top tier the fewest.
The last row holds profiles for which Google returned no price level. Those sit outside the comparison, but they belong to the picture.
| Price level | n | Avg rating | 4.5+ | Below 4.0 | Median reviews | Website |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $Inexpensive | 409 | 4.29 | 44.5% | 18.8% | 474 | 88.5% |
| $$Moderate | 1,101 | 4.35 | 42.0% | 10.4% | 607 | 91.7% |
| $$$Expensive | 206 | 4.53 | 64.1% | 4.4% | 372 | 87.4% |
| $$$$Very expensive | 106 | 4.58 | 68.9% | 3.8% | 229 | 91.5% |
| —No price level set | 1,314 | 4.51 | 61.9% | 7.6% | 149 | 90.5% |
Ratings climb neatly with price level. Review volume does not: the mid tier serves the most people and therefore collects the most reviews.
$
Inexpensive
n=409
$$
Moderate
n=1,101
$$$
Expensive
n=206
$$$$
Very expensive
n=106
For the 1,314 profiles without a price level, the median sat at 149 reviews with an average rating of 4.51 stars. Those are mostly service businesses, with less passing trade and therefore fewer reviews.
It does not say that raising your prices raises your rating. More expensive venues in this sample receive fewer but often better-prepared visits; that is a different kind of visit, not a different kind of business.
It also says nothing about ranking. We do not measure positions in Google Maps and draw no link between price level and visibility.
For the wider figures there is the main study, and per trade there is more in the research programme.
Each answer refers to the profiles studied and names the sample the figure comes from.
In this sample yes: 106 very expensive venues ($$$$) averaged 4.58 stars versus 4.29 across 409 inexpensive venues ($). It is an observed association within the profiles studied, not evidence that price causes the rating.
The mid tier. The median $$ venue had 607 reviews, versus 474 at $, 372 at $$$ and 229 at $$$$.
1,314 of the 3,136 profiles studied (41.9%) carried no price level. Those are mostly service businesses where Google does not show this attribute.
We cannot say that. We only see that 18.8% of the $ venues studied sat below 4.0 stars versus 3.8% of $$$$ venues. Volume, expectations and visit type all play a role and are not measured here.
An attribute from $ to $$$$ that Google itself assigns to a location, mostly for hospitality and retail. It is not a field an owner can freely set.
Of the 3,136 deep-audited profiles, Google returned a price level for 1,822. That group is split across four levels and compared on rating, review count, website coverage and number of photos returned.
The groups differ in size ($: 409, $$: 1,101, $$$: 206, $$$$: 106). In the two smallest groups a handful of profiles can move the mean noticeably, which is why we also publish the median.
Price level correlates with trade: hospitality carries it more often than services. Differences between levels may therefore partly reflect trade mix. We do not publish individual business names.
This is version 1.0, published on 26 August 2026. This URL is permanent: new editions and corrections appear here rather than at a new page, so existing citations keep working.
This study is part of RecensioAI's research programme, where we keep our methodology and every edition. The main study is The State of Local Reputation 2026.
Run a free scan of your Google Business Profile and see how your rating and review volume compare with similar businesses in your price range and neighbourhood.
Journalists, agencies and researchers may use these aggregate figures freely under CC BY 4.0. One condition: cite the source and link back to this page.
RecensioAI (2026). Price Level vs Reputation (2026): ratings and review volume across 1,822 price-tagged Google Business Profiles in the United States and the Netherlands. https://recensioai.com/price-level-reputation-study
Canonical URL: https://recensioai.com/price-level-reputation-study
