Comparison Methodology

Our Comparison Rules

A comparison page is a maintenance commitment, not a page you write once and forget. To maintain absolute Trustworthiness (E-E-A-T), we adhere to strict rules before publishing any comparison:

• Primary Data Only: Every fact, fee, and limit must come from the provider's own current published terms, not secondary sources or PR releases.
• Like-for-Like Use Cases: Both products must be genuinely comparable for a defined, specific business use case (e.g., 'Sole traders who deposit cash weekly').
• Explicit Exclusions: We explicitly state who each product may NOT suit, not just who it suits. A product's limitations are as important as its features.
• No Arbitrary Scoring: We do not publish arbitrary star ratings, 'out of 10' scores, or aggregate rankings. We publish facts, limits, and pricing, allowing the reader to decide which factors matter most to their business.
• Strict Maintenance: A comparison is immediately unpublished if we cannot verify its facts on our required schedule.

No 'Best' Product

We do not declare any financial product to be universally the 'best'. A business bank account that is perfect for a freelance designer with low transaction volume may be entirely wrong for a retail shop with high cash deposits.

Instead of 'Best Business Bank Account', we frame our comparisons around specific needs: 'Best for cash deposits', 'Best for accounting integration', or 'Best for fast setup'. We compare products based on utility, not absolute rankings.

Why Some Comparison Pages Are Not Live

Comparison pages for our partners (such as Tide and Capital on Tap) against named competitors are held back until the comparator facts are verified directly and the comparison is approved for accuracy.

We would rather have no comparison page at all than publish an inaccurate, outdated, or misleading comparison just to capture search traffic.