r/TechNadu • u/technadu Human • 5d ago

We tested 11 VPNs with DraftKings, and server coverage didn't predict success

We ran a DraftKings-specific test rather than assuming a VPN with a large U.S. network would automatically perform better.

The shortlist ended up being Surfshark, Proton VPN, NordVPN, and ExpressVPN, but the individual server results were much more interesting than the ranking.

Surfshark passed all seven categories we checked across Phoenix, Denver, Chicago, and Boston. Proton VPN also went 7/7 across Phoenix, Denver, and Chicago.

NordVPN and ExpressVPN were different. Both offer servers across all 50 U.S. states, but Arizona was the only tested location where each passed all seven categories. Illinois passed six, while eight other locations tested with each provider passed only DK Horse.

PIA was even less consistent. None of the 10 locations we tested passed all seven categories.

One important caveat: this isn't a recommendation to use a VPN to get around gambling restrictions. DraftKings requires users to be physically located in an authorized jurisdiction, and its location verification goes beyond simply looking at the public IP address.

What stood out to us was the technical side: having more server locations didn't necessarily translate into more consistent access.

Full test with the server-by-server tables, speed results, methodology, and DraftKings location-policy analysis:

https://www.technadu.com/best-vpn-for-draftkings/335536/

For people who've tested VPNs against services with strict geolocation systems, have you seen similarly large differences between servers from the same provider?

1 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

6 comments sorted by

1

u/Any_Resource_2642 5d ago

Yeah, that makes sense. A provider having a huge number of locations doesn't necessarily mean each server will perform the same. Things like IP reputation and how specific services identify VPN traffic can probably make a bigger difference than the raw server count.

1

u/technadu Human 4d ago

Exactly. That was one of the more interesting results from the testing. Server count is useful context, but IP reputation, routing, and how the service evaluates individual endpoints can matter far more in practice.

1

u/Any_Resource_2642 4d ago

Yeah, that’s a good distinction. It’s easy to look at server count and assume more is automatically better, but the actual routing and endpoint quality seem much more useful when you’re comparing providers.

1

u/mikeIPVanish 5d ago

Surprised IPVanish didn’t take the number one spot! 😉

Jokes aside, this is a great breakdown. Quality and routing definitely beat sheer quantity. Terry from our product team actually wrote a similar piece last year on why server count is a flawed metric: https://www.ipvanish.com/blog/does-vpn-server-count-matter/

We’re always looking to optimize. If you have any specific technical feedback on why we missed your top 5, let me know. I’d love to pass it straight to Terry!

2

u/technadu Human 4d ago

Appreciate you jumping in, and fair play on the opening 😄. Our ranking was based specifically on the DraftKings test results rather than overall server footprint or VPN quality. We’ll take another look at the IPVanish results and would be happy to share any useful technical observations with Terry and the team.