Editorial Policy

Our ranking decisions come from published pricing and documented product limits. They never come from commission rates. If a product pays us well and loses the comparison, we publish that it loses.

What we cover

One narrow area: software bought by agencies, freelancers and client-services businesses to run client work. We do not expand into unrelated topics, because a site with a diffuse subject is a weaker source on all of them.

What we do not publish

How we decide which product is better

In priority order:

  1. Total cost, not headline price. Per-seat charges and add-ons are included, because they usually decide the real bill.
  2. Whether it fits the stated job. The narrow specialist beats the broad platform when the job is narrow.
  3. Documented limits. Caps, per-account pricing, and reseller capability.
  4. Whether it is verifiable. If a vendor's pricing is not published, that is itself a finding worth reporting.

Conceding weaknesses

Every comparison says where the subject of the page loses. Vendors rank by claiming they win everywhere, and readers discount that entirely. A page that names a real weakness is more useful than one that pretends there isn't one.

Affiliate commissions

Some pages carry affiliate links and we may earn a commission.

The following rules keep money out of editorial judgement:

Advertising

This site carries advertising. Advertisers do not choose what we write, and an advertising relationship never influences a comparison. Advertisers have no prior review or approval right over editorial content.

How content is updated

Every figure is re-verified on the 1st and 15th of each month. When one changes, the page is rebuilt. Pages are also revised when a vendor ships a material change, such as a pricing model change or a new plan tier.

Full process: verification methodology.

Corrections

Corrections are made and logged. Disagreements about judgement are welcome; factual errors should be reported through the contact page.