Editorial Policy

We publish reviews and comparisons of services that compete with our own product. That is a conflict of interest. This page sets out the rules we follow because of it, so you can judge the content against them.

Where Competitor Facts Come From

Primarily from the competitor's own public pages, read directly, with the date of reading recorded on the page. Secondarily from our internal competitor-research library, which carries its own last-updated date and is cited as such.

Every competitor page shows a "last verified" date. If that date is old, treat the page as old.

What We Do Not Publish

Ratings, star scores, download counts or user numbers for competitors. We cannot verify them and they are the easiest figures in the world to invent.

Feature claims we have not seen stated by the product itself. Where a source is silent, the comparison table shows "not verified" rather than a guess — including where a guess would flatter us.

Any suggestion of affiliation, partnership or endorsement. Every competitor page states that we are independent of the brand it discusses.

How We Handle the Conflict

Three rules. We apply the same verification standard to our own product as to everyone else's — where we do not have a feature, the table says so. We name genuine advantages of competitors, including where they beat us. And we say when a competitor is the better answer for a particular reader, because a comparison page that always concludes "choose us" is an advert, and readers can tell.

Corrections

If something here is wrong, tell us and we will fix it and update the review date. That applies to competitors as much as to readers — if you run one of these services and we have described it incorrectly, get in touch.

Unreviewed Pages

Pages that have not been through a human editorial review are marked noindex and kept out of our sitemap until they have. That is why some pages on this site carry a note saying exactly that.

Last reviewed 2026-08-17.