The issue of how our reviews are written is kind of a big deal for us, because it goes to the very heart of why we created Investing Insiders.
We’re not here to massage brands’ egos. We’re here to give consumers answers. That means we’re very clear about where our priorities lie and how we work.
Our editorial policy is simple: we cannot be paid to change our opinion.
Our reviews are written independently and without influence from platform providers. They are based on our own experiences as investors and traders, and an impartial data-driven appraisal of how a provider performs in relation to their peers in areas such as fees, asset choice, research tools,
Read full editorial guidelines.
Read MoreOf course, we do need to get paid for our work. (Sadly, we still have bills to pay.)
So this is the model we use…
Once our reviews are written, we approach top-rated providers to see if they’d like to add an affiliate link to that review. That allows readers who are interested in their products to click through and visit their site. Although we may receive a commission in exchange for adding these links, we do not change our reviews at the request of providers. Nor do we manipulate results to match up with the companies who offer us the best deal, or recommend products or providers that we don’t believe deserve a top spot.
We do give providers the opportunity to identify any factual errors we may have made (for example, a change in the cost of a service or product) so that we can correct them before publication. That’s essential, because presenting incorrect information could disadvantage our readers (as well as land us in a whole heap of trouble) so allowing providers that opportunity is just common sense.
It’s a lengthy process! Which is just how it should be. We don’t bash out reviews without taking the time to really get to know these platforms, or rehash what we’ve seen written elsewhere. That’s why you’ll find that, although lots of other platform reviews seem to present the same information, ours often read very differently.
Our process runs something like this:
Our goal is to make sure we don’t miss a thing. To help ensure we don’t miss something important, and that we judge providers fairly, we use a standardised scorecard system.
Scorecards run to scores of different features and data points. The small sample below gives you a flavour of how thorough we are.
Stock fundamentals
Live pricing
Open price
Previous close
Day’s range
Year low
Year high
Yield
Volume
Market cap
5Y performance
P/E ratio
P/B ratio
P/S ratio
PEG
Debt-to-equity data
Beta
EPS
Analyst ratings
Social sentiment scores
Forecasts
Ex-dividend date
Dividend payment date
Dividend record date
Dividend history
Company ownership information
Top shareholders
Company financials
Company news
Live news feed from reputable sources
ESG exposure data
Amount of short interest shown
We make every effort to ensure the information we publish is completely accurate and fairly represented, and that when information changes, we update our reviews, guides and recommendation pages as soon as we’re notified.
We perform regular checks of platforms’ key information pages, and use software to help us pick up on anything we might have otherwise missed. However, it is inevitable that, in an industry where figures fluctuate often, we may not always have the most up-to-date information on the website. It is our policy to correct significant errors as soon as possible after we’re made aware of them.
If you wish to request an amendment or correction, please let us know the details by completing our contact form
Contact