Transparent by design
How recommendations are made
We organize evidence around the consumer’s use case. We do not rank providers by what they might pay us.
The invariant
Provider CTA prominence must derive from the recommendation and selected use case—never affiliate compensation.
This rule is enforced structurally: editorial scores and commercial program records live in separate modules, and an automated invariant test verifies that changing commission scenarios cannot change the provider order.
What enters a comparison
- Current official pricing and terms, with a verification date
- Meaningful strengths and genuine weaknesses
- Best-fit and poor-fit use cases
- Cancellation, renewal, and migration considerations when available
- A “neither” or “keep what you have” outcome when it is the best fit
Page-quality gate
A comparison remains non-indexable until it has enough verified sources, an answer-first summary, multiple decision fields, and recent verification. This prevents mass publication of thin pages.
Private financial information
Private recurring-spend analysis stays outside the public comparison and commercial systems. Affiliate partners do not receive private financial history because someone viewed or clicked a comparison.
Prohibited in V1. No future commercial use without specific informed affirmative consent, strict data separation, qualified legal review, and confirmation that the proposed use is lawful under then-current financial/privacy rules.
Corrections and updates
Price snapshots are append-only: a new observation is added instead of rewriting history. Material corrections should record what changed, why, and when.