Tools, tested
Most "best tool" pages are written by someone with a stake in the answer — usually a vendor ranking itself, occasionally an affiliate site ranking whoever pays most. The tables are always full, every cell confidently filled, and almost none of it was measured.
We do the opposite. We publish the method before we run anything, we test what can actually be tested, and where we could not measure something we leave the cell empty and say why.
Test results and recommendations are independent of monetization. A free or non-affiliate product must rank first whenever the prespecified evidence shows it performs best.
That rule is structural, not a promise. Affiliate availability, commission rates, and revenue potential are excluded from every score this site computes — the test results and the decision tools alike. Where a top-ranked product pays us nothing, the page says so.
What's here now
Research tools
Software for systematic reviews and evidence synthesis: a pre-registered screening benchmark, a pricing and feature tracker built from vendor pages, and a rule-based selector that shows you which tools were eliminated and exactly why.
How we work
Three kinds of claim, kept deliberately separate and never blended into a single score: what wetested ourselves under a published protocol, what thepublished evidence says about things we could not test, and what weverified from primary sources such as vendor pricing pages, with the date we checked.
The reasoning is in how we test. If you can show that something here is wrong, we want to know — corrections are published as corrections, dated, with the previous value still visible.