Critics give Perverts a B-Side Breakdown of 78 (C+), from 12 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 60 to 90.
By the numbers: 9 of 12 critics liked it.
| The gist | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beats Per Minuteby John Wohlmacher | 90% | 90 | 2025 | “Music News, Reviews, Interviews, Videos and MP3s” |
| Clash via Wikipediaby Vicky Greer | 9/10 | 90 | 2025 | |
| Slant via Wikipediaby Eric Mason | 4/5 | 80 | 2025 | “The singer finds peace and quiet not in literal death, but in the death of love.” |
| NME via Wikipediaby Kristen S. Hé | 4/5 | 80 | 2025 | “Ethel Cain’s ‘Perverts’ is no easy listen, but persisting through its bleak layers brings plenty of rewards – read the NME review” |
| The Independent via Wikipediaby Helen Brown | 4/5 | 80 | 2025 | “Listening to the alt-pop artist’s latest project feels like being trapped in a serial killer’s underground network of post-industrial tunnels” |
| The Line of Best Fit via Wikipediaby Matthew Kim | 8/10 | 80 | 2025 | “Immensely incomprehensible, scary and challenging, Perverts is Ethel Cain on her terms.” |
| DIY via Wikipediaby Ben Tipple | 4/5 | 80 | 2025 | |
| Paste via Wikipediaby Clare Martin | 7.6/10 | 76 | 2025 | “Paste Magazine is your source for the best music, movies, TV, comedy, videogames, books, comics, craft beer, politics and more. Discover your favorite albums and films.” |
| Spectrum Cultureby Kevin Korber | 75/100 | 75 | 2025 | “If Preacher’s Daughter was the sound of someone barely holding things together, then Perverts is the sound of that same person letting things fall apart completely.” |
| Pitchfork via Wikipediaby Sasha Geffen | 7.0/10 | 70 | 2025 | |
| Exclaim! via Wikipediaby Ian Gormely | 7/10 | 70 | 2025 | |
| The Guardian via Wikipediaby Alexis Petridis | 3/5 | 60 | 2025 |
Every Sunday: the week's new albums, scored by the critics. Plus our own reviews when we post them. Free, and one click to leave.
More from Ethel Cain
More Indie & Alternative from around 2025
Would you spin it again?
Be the first to answer. Results show once 3 listeners weigh in.
How the Breakdown works
Every outlet’s score is converted to 0–100 (2/5 is 40, 5.9/10 is 59, a B+ is 88) and averaged. Grades follow the B-Side scale: A is 90–100, B 80–89, C 70–79, D 60–69, F below 60. Approval is the share of critics who scored it 75 or higher; the Breakdown shows green at 75 and up, red below. Divisiveness asks a different question: not how many critics liked it, but how close their scores are to each other. Five critics who all give it 50 are Unanimous, even though none of them liked it. The labels run Unanimous, Broad agreement, Some debate, Divided, and Contentious. Replay rate comes from listeners, not critics: yes counts fully, a few tracks counts half, no counts zero. The gist quotes each outlet’s own summary of its review. Published is the date on the review itself, read from the outlet’s page, so you can see whether an album’s reputation came at release or years later. Scores marked est. come from reviews that publish no number. Scores marked via Wikipedia are archive ratings, mostly for older albums, taken from the “Professional ratings” box on the album’s Wikipedia page (published openly through Wikidata); each links to the original review when we can find it online, and to that Wikipedia entry when we can’t. When an outlet reviewed an album twice, years apart (often for a reissue), both scores count, each labeled with its year.
A-Side marks the critics’ top tier. An album earns it automatically, from its numbers alone: a Breakdown of 90 or higher, from at least 5 reviews, with at least 75% approval. Nobody hands it out and nobody can buy it; if new reviews pull an album below the line, it loses the badge.





Leave a Reply