Editorial methodology
How Buyerlytic researches software, verifies pricing and product facts, handles corrections, and keeps affiliate relationships out of editorial decisions.
Purpose and scope
Buyerlytic publishes research to help people make software and online business tool purchases they will not regret. This page explains how an article is researched, what we will and will not claim, how we handle corrections, and how our commercial relationships are kept separate from editorial decisions.
The policy applies to every review, comparison, buying guide, and category page on this site. Where an individual article departs from it, the article must say so explicitly.
Independence and funding
Buyerlytic is reader-supported. Some outbound links are affiliate links, and we may earn a commission if a reader purchases through one. That commission is paid by the merchant and does not change the price the reader pays.
Affiliate relationships do not buy coverage, placement, a positive verdict, or the removal of a limitation. Vendors do not receive articles before publication and do not approve edits. If a product is a poor fit for the reader it is written for, the article says so regardless of whether an affiliate programme exists.
You can read the full commercial terms in our affiliate disclosure.
How we research
Most Buyerlytic research is documentation-based. That means we work from the provider's own published material rather than pretending to have used every product personally:
- Pricing pages. Plan names, prices, billing periods, renewal terms, and currency are taken from the provider's own pricing page and recorded with an access date.
- Terms and policies. Refund windows, cancellation rules, usage limits, and data export options are read from the provider's legal and help documentation.
- Feature documentation. Feature claims are checked against help-centre articles or product documentation, not against marketing headlines alone.
- Third-party evidence. Where independent reporting or public incident history is relevant, it is cited and treated as evidence with its own limitations.
When an article is based on hands-on use, it states that clearly and describes what was used, for how long, and on which plan. We never describe documentation research as testing, and we never invent usage experience, screenshots, or performance figures.
Verification and dates
Every article shows a publication date, the date it was last updated, and the date its product facts were checked. Draft articles show no verification date and are never published or promoted.
A verification date means the facts were checked against primary sources on that date. It does not mean the product will behave the same way forever. Software pricing, plan limits, and ownership change frequently — often without notice — so readers should confirm current terms on the provider's own site before purchasing.
How we compare products
A comparison is only useful if both sides are equivalent. Unless an article says otherwise, comparisons use:
- the same plan tier or the closest available equivalent;
- the same billing period, so a monthly price is not compared with a multi-year rate;
- the same usage assumptions, stated in the article;
- renewal pricing as well as introductory pricing.
When providers make a like-for-like comparison impossible, the article explains the difference instead of flattening it into a table.
What we do not do
- We do not publish paid reviews, paid rankings, or sponsored verdicts.
- We do not use star ratings, scores, or awards that are not backed by a published method.
- We do not invent testimonials, customer counts, certifications, or testing results.
- We do not promise savings, income, rankings, or business outcomes.
- We do not use misleading buttons or imply that a link guarantees a discount.
- We do not redirect readers to a merchant without disclosure.
Recommendations and scores
Buyerlytic currently uses narrative verdicts rather than numeric scores. A single number tends to hide the trade-offs that matter most — a product can be excellent for a solo blogger and unsuitable for a five-person team on the same day. When a verdict is given, the article explains the criteria behind it and names the reader it is written for.
If a scoring system is introduced in future, the calculation, weighting, and evidence requirements will be published on this page before any score appears in an article.
Corrections and updates
We correct factual errors when we find them, and we record material corrections in the article. If a provider changes pricing or terms, the article is updated and the verification date is changed.
To report an error, use the contact page. Please include the article URL, the claim you believe is incorrect, and a source if you have one. Corrections take priority over new coverage.
Use of AI tools
Drafts may be prepared with the assistance of AI tools. AI output is treated as a first draft, not a source: before publication, product facts must be checked by a human editor against primary sources, and the verification date must be recorded. AI tools are not used to fabricate testing, quotes, credentials, or reader experiences, and no article is auto-published without review.
Editorial contact
Questions about this policy, correction requests, and complaints go to the editorial team through the contact page. We do not accept payment to change editorial content, and we do not offer to remove accurate criticism of a product.