Skip to content
SideIncomeHQ
Editorial standard

How we research this, and what we don't claim

Every tool page on this site carries a short note about its sourcing. This is the long version: the four kinds of source we use, the four claims we deliberately do not make, and exactly how the site earns money. Written once here so the pages themselves can stay about the tools.
Sources
Vendor docs + primary
Figures
Dated when checked
Testing
Not claimed
Ranking order
Never for sale

What a page on this site is built from

The category this site writes in has a specific failure mode. A review claims a testing regime it never ran, quotes a price that changed eighteen months ago, and ranks the tool that pays best. All three are invisible to a reader who has no way to check.

We cannot fix that for the whole category, so we do the one thing available to us: state the sourcing, date the figures, and keep the commercial arrangement in plain sight rather than in a footer.

The four sources

In rough order of how much weight they carry on a typical page.

Where the facts come from
Vendor documentation
Published pricing pages, plan-limit help articles, and feature documentation, read directly rather than summarised from another review.
Primary institutional sources
Google Search Central for search behaviour, the IRS for tax treatment, the SBA for business formation. Cited on the page where used.
Public user reviews
Read for the pattern of recurring complaints and praise, never quoted as a measurement. Used to answer "what annoys people six months in".
Our own build
This site is built and ranked using the free Google stack described in these guides, which is the one workflow we can speak to directly.
Stated plainly

The four things we do not claim

Most of what makes a review trustworthy is what it refuses to say. These are the claims we have decided not to make, and they are the reason some pages here are less confident than the ones outranking them.

If a page ever appears to claim one of these, that is a mistake and we want to hear about it through the contact form.

Not claimed anywhere on this site
Hands-on trials
We have not run multi-month paid trials of every tool we write about, and no page implies we have.
Testing hours
No "300 hours across 40 tools" claim appears anywhere on this site, because we did not spend them.
Income screenshots
No earnings screenshots, because we have none that would be honest to publish.
Testimonials
None invented. If a quote is not real and consented to, it is not here.

How the money works

Two revenue lines, both disclosed on the pages they affect. Affiliate links pay a commission when a reader buys, at no extra cost to them, and carry rel="sponsored". Sponsored placements are sold directly and labelled as sponsored where they appear.

Neither one sets the order of a recommendation. The practical test of that claim is whether a site ever tells you not to buy something it would earn from, and this one does: the Ahrefs page spends several paragraphs explaining who should not subscribe yet, and the free tools guide exists to argue that most readers should spend nothing at all.

How dates and corrections work

Every price on the site carries the month it was checked. Pages are revised when a vendor reprices or renames a tier, and the modified date moves when they are. A dated figure that has drifted is a fixable problem; an undated figure that looks current is not.

If you find one that no longer matches the vendor's own page, the contact form reaches an actual person and corrections get made.

Source: Google Search Central SEO Starter Guide
FAQ

Questions about how we work

Do you actually test the tools you review?
Not in the sense that phrase usually implies. We do not run multi-month paid trials of every tool, and we say so on each tool page rather than burying it. What each page is built on is the vendor's own published pricing and plan documentation, dated at the point we checked it, plus the pattern of complaints and praise in public user reviews. Where a figure comes from the vendor, it is cited. Where something is a judgement call, it is written as one.
Why publish tool reviews without hands-on testing?
Because the most commonly wrong information in this category is not subjective experience, it is the price. Reviews go stale, tiers get renamed, and entry plans get added and never mentioned again. Reading the current documentation carefully and dating the figure is genuinely useful, and it is a claim we can stand behind. Pretending to a testing regime we did not run would be the dishonest option, not the rigorous one.
How do you make money?
Two ways, both disclosed. Some outbound links are affiliate links that pay a commission at no extra cost to you, and they carry rel="sponsored". Separately we sell clearly-labelled sponsored placements, which are marked as such on the page. Neither arrangement changes the order of our recommendations, and we publish "do not buy this yet" verdicts on tools we have affiliate relationships with.
How current are the prices on this site?
Every price carries the month it was checked, stated on the page next to the figure. Vendors in this category reprice often, so a dated figure is more useful than an undated one that looks current. If you are about to subscribe, confirm the number on the vendor's own page first, and tell us if it has moved.
Who writes this?
SideIncomeHQ is published as an editorial brand rather than under a personal byline. Pages are researched and written against the sourcing standard on this page, and the commercial relationships behind them are disclosed. We would rather be plainly an editorial publisher than manufacture a persona with credentials it does not have.
What do you do when you get something wrong?
Correct it on the page and update the modified date. Pricing drifts, plans get renamed, and documentation changes; a page that is never revised is a page that is quietly going stale. If you spot a figure that no longer matches the vendor's own page, tell us through the contact form and we will check it.
Do you accept payment for a better ranking in your guides?
No. Sponsored placements are sold and labelled as sponsored, and they sit outside the recommendation order. The order in a comparison guide reflects the judgement described on this page. Anyone offering to buy a position gets pointed at this paragraph.
Advertise with us