T↗TRUE DEMONLISTv0.2.0
INDEPENDENT GEOMETRY DASH RANKING / OCT 2026

Every placement.
A reason.

150 extreme demons. One independent take.
Precision, endurance, and the pressure of a full run —
with the logic behind every position.

Explore the rankings ↓
150
Levels in the collectionEditorial, not official ↗

Your list is the starting point.
The placements here are our interpretation.

THE CURRENT BENCHMARK
THE COLLECTION

The true order.

28 editorial comparisons.
Reference slots are clearly labeled.

VICTOR REVIEW / EDITION 04

Reference ranges, independent judgments. Automatic tag bonuses have been removed. 18 entries now have a player-evidence review, with direct completion descriptions and clearly labeled reports of victor comparisons. 28 entries have editorial comparisons in total; the remaining entries retain provisional reference order. AREDL and Pointercrate supply context and factual records, not endorsements of our exact positions.

Deep Dive

Our most thoroughly considered placements: player evidence, counterarguments, and what could change our mind. Review depth and placement confidence are separate.

New Deep Dives: GRIEF, ORBIT, and Green Bullet. Next reviews: Quanteuse processing + Nullscapes. Continuing down the list toward Sevvend.

⌕/
Loading levels…
RANKLEVEL / CREATOREXECUTION PROFILECHANGE
END OF COLLECTION ◇ EVERY POSITION IS OPEN TO DEBATE.
THE THINKING BEHIND THE LIST

Harder to execute.
Harder to finish.

We compare peak execution and consistency across a full run. Reference ranks suggest a neighborhood; they do not settle our editorial judgment.
AN INDEPENDENT, PROVISIONAL INTERPRETATION

Context is not a verdict.

A source list tells us where to look. Gameplay comparisons tell us what to argue.

I have not personally beaten these levels. True Demonlist is an editorial project, not a new victor consensus. AREDL, Pointercrate, and UDL can identify relevant comparison neighborhoods and factual records; their positions do not prove our exact slots.

The revised approach

01 / Observe

Separate factual gameplay features and exact versions from opinions about difficulty.

02 / Compare

Compare sustained precision, peak execution, consistency after practice, and full-run failure cost against specific nearby contenders.

03 / Qualify

State a working position, explain the tradeoff, and mark the uncertainty. A plausible comparison band is an editorial range, not a measured confidence interval.

No automatic tag score

Memory, XL length, high CPS, and two-input play no longer add ranking slots. A long level with consistent sections can be easier than a short level with an extreme execution gate. Learning a route and performing it reliably are different burdens. Reset cost and completion probability are also different things.

Editorial cases & reference slots

28 rated entries have explicit editorial comparisons. Each reviewed page separates gameplay context from the placement argument, shows a tentative comparison band, and states the reference record’s role. The remaining 122 are labeled “Reference slot”: their exact order has not been independently assessed. They retain supplied order relative to other unreviewed entries; movement from editorial insertions is not a difficulty reassessment.

Working slots allow a complete browsable list. They should not be read as 150 equally supported difficulty conclusions. A strong comparative victor account can overturn an editorial slot or move it outside the current illustrative band.

Evidence limits

This edition directly read completion-video descriptions and checked published reports of player comparisons. Eighteen entries show whose opinion was found, what it says, and how much it can establish. Reports with unnamed respondents are labeled as reports; they are not presented as direct interviews or a complete consensus. Linked runs were not independently audited or used to measure input windows. Raw attempts, fame, visual quality, and past top-one status are excluded from placement justification.

✦ Deep Dive

This distinction marks an extended placement review with linked player evidence, an explicit counterargument, and a clear explanation of what could change the verdict. It is assigned individually rather than awarded automatically for source count or rank. A Deep Dive can still have low confidence when the evidence conflicts. Flamewall, Society, Antarctic Lights, Thinking Space II, Amethyst, and Tidal Wave were the first six Deep Dives. GRIEF, ORBIT, and Green Bullet bring the collection to nine; the list filter opens all nine reviews.

How player evidence changes a placement

Specific comparisons from players who completed both levels carry more weight than a rough numeric estimate. Later comparisons can revise early verification impressions. Conflicting opinions remain visible; I do not average old rank numbers across different lists. A personal hardest or video title alone is insufficient. Physics, updates, CBF/CBS, and solo versus cooperative play must be considered before combining accounts. Limited evidence can justify holding a slot or reducing confidence instead of forcing a move.

Unrated+

Unrated+ has its own twelve-entry selection. A reference list’s order is context, and sparse gameplay evidence cannot prove an exact unrated slot. Original and unnerfed builds are kept distinct. Unverified projects remain unranked, with their videos labeled showcases.

Factual source snapshot: October 10, 2026. Individual editorial reviews are dated on their detail pages; the latest additions were reviewed October 14, 2026. This is a fixed editorial edition, not a live official ranking.

AREDL reference ↗ · Pointercrate reference ↗
SIDE BY SIDE

Which has the stronger case?

Select two levels to compare their placement and reasoning.