Our standards
Editorial guidelines.
A useful comparison explains which provider fits your situation and why. These standards guide the evidence and reasoning behind our recommendations.
Our purpose
Make a better-informed B2B decision.
We publish comparisons of software, tools, and business services. Each recommendation should help you judge a provider against the needs of your business.
01 / Relevance
Start with a specific buyer
A procurement platform for a company running SAP ERP faces different requirements from one for a small business. We define the buyer and the deciding factors before comparing providers.
02 / Evidence
Support the facts with sources
Prices, product capabilities, and performance claims need supporting evidence. We use original sources and keep conditions, such as a billing term or plan requirement, beside the facts they qualify.
The same evidence standard applies to each provider. We do not imply that we have tested a product when the comparison is based on published information.
03 / Recommendations
Explain why one option fits
Our comparisons name a recommended provider for the stated buyer. The reasoning must connect that provider’s strengths to the buyer’s needs. Alternatives get a specific use case where they are a better fit.
04 / Editorial review
Check the claim and the reasoning
Factual review checks the evidence behind the claims. Editorial review checks whether the recommendation follows from those facts and whether the language is clear enough to act on.
Our publishing standards require human editorial oversight before publication.
05 / Corrections
Help us correct the record
If a feature has changed or you find an error, send the article URL and supporting details to editorial@whatisbest.com.
Our editorial desk reviews corrections and product updates. You can also read the current editorial policy.
Meet the people behind the pages.
Explore the backgrounds of our editors and contributors.