Accuracy
Every factual claim about a product — a price, a seat minimum, a limit, an integration, a plan name — must be traceable to the vendor's own published material or to documentation we can link. Claims we cannot verify are either attributed to whoever made them or left out.
- Prices are recorded with the date they were read.
- Plan names are quoted as the vendor spells them, not normalised.
- Limits are stated in the vendor's units, including the awkward ones.
- Screenshots are taken from the live site and are not retouched.
Sources and attribution
We prefer the vendor's own pages, documentation and changelogs over secondary coverage, and we link to them. Where we rely on another publication's reporting, it is named. Aggregator review scores are not treated as evidence: they measure who asked for reviews, not how good a product is.
Opinion, and where it belongs
A review takes a position. That position is argued from facts stated in the same piece, and a reader who disagrees with the conclusion should still be able to use the facts. We do not hide a negative judgement behind neutral phrasing, and we do not manufacture balance by inventing a downside for a product that does its job well.
Conflicts of interest
Contributors disclose to editors any employment, consulting, equity, family or vendor-partner relationship touching a product under review, and are recused where one exists. Softmarque does not hold positions in the companies it covers.
AI and automation
Automation may be used for research collection, screenshot capture, transcription and data handling. Editorial judgement, the score, and every factual claim are the responsibility of a human editor, and material facts are verified against a primary source before publication.
Scope limits
Softmarque publishes general business software research. Nothing on this site is personalised financial, legal, tax or accounting advice, and a review of accounting or invoicing software is not a substitute for a qualified professional.