Sponsorship, advertising, referral arrangements, or partnerships cannot change eligibility, position, evidence grade, or editorial conclusions.
Editorial Policy
Rules governing independence, evidence, conflicts, corrections, sponsorship, and the publication of rankings and firm profiles.
Core rules
A commercial ranking does not prove residential quality; revenue does not prove sustainability; a general firm award does not replace category-specific project evidence.
Firm-reported figures, incomplete project credits, and gaps in public data are labeled rather than presented as confirmed fact.
Conflicts and separation of roles
Anyone with a material financial, professional, or personal relationship to a firm under review must disclose it and may be removed from the relevant editorial decision. Commercial conversations and ranking decisions are handled separately. A sponsored profile does not receive preferential review of corrections or ranking evidence.
Corrections and changes
Correction requests should include a primary source whenever possible. The editorial team reviews the claim, project credit, date, and relevance to the published conclusion. Material corrections are recorded in a changelog; small typographic changes may be made without a separate entry.
Right of response: Firms may submit evidence or challenge a factual statement. They may not require the removal of accurate, relevant information as a condition of participation.
Publication standards
- · Rankings state their assessment period, eligibility rules, and known limitations.
- · Sponsored links use an appropriate disclosure and are separated from editorial ranking entries.
- · Images require documented authorship or permission.
- · Placeholders and unverified claims are not published as completed editorial content.
- · A ranking page should explain why each firm appears in that specific category.