Transparency

Methodology & accuracy

Most astrology tools ask you to trust them. We'd rather show our work: exactly how the engine computes, what it approximates, and how it scores against a chance baseline.

How the chart is computed

Known approximations (acceptable for an advisory tool): mean node (not true) for Rāhu/Ketu; single Lahiri ayanāṁśa; timezone offsets via IANA tzdata (not LMT for very old births); geocentric Moon. These can shift a boundary-case nakshatra/pada — documented, not hidden.

Do the timings line up? — lift over chance

We keep a corpus of documented lives with dated events. For each event we check whether the engine activates a relevant significator (natural/chara karaka, relevant-house lord, or a planet occupying/aspecting a relevant house) in the active daśā. Then we score the same events against the wrong chart — the difference is the honest signal.

95%
Real hit-rate
86%
Wrong-chart control
+9%
Lift over chance
21
Events · 8 charts

Read this honestly. This is a transparent heuristic proxy on a small hand-verified sample (A: 3 · AA: 4 · B: 1 Rodden-rated) — not proof of predictive validity, which astrology cannot claim. A hit-rate near the control means chance. We publish the control precisely so the number can't be read as more than it is; we're growing the corpus toward hundreds of verified charts.

By life area

death
100% · 6 ev
marriage
80% · 5 ev
career
100% · 4 ev
fame
100% · 4 ev
wealth
100% · 1 ev
child
100% · 1 ev

What the AI can and can't do

The advisor is grounded: it narrates only the deterministic engine's computed facts, and it can't compute or invent chart data. Sensitive topics — death-timing, medical/legal/financial directives, and crisis — are handled by a deterministic care-first playbook (no AI), in every supported language. Nothing here is a certainty; it's for guidance and reflection. See our privacy model and terms.