About
Disclosure policy
If we recommend a tool, you should know whether we might earn money from it, and how we prevent that from corrupting the recommendation.
This is the plain-language version of our disclosure policy. The goal is simple: if we recommend a tool, you should know whether we might earn money from it, and you should understand the rules we follow to keep recommendations honest.
If you want the "how we decide what's true" side of this, read: Editorial standards. If you want how often content gets reviewed, see: Review policy. If you want to browse the recommendations themselves, start at Tools & templates.
This page answers two practical questions: where money can show up (affiliate links, sponsorships, partnerships) and how we prevent money from dictating the conclusion (process constraints).
Summary (the short version)
- Sometimes we use affiliate links. If you buy through one, we may earn a commission.
- Sometimes we have partnerships or other material relationships. We disclose them.
- If we ever publish a sponsored placement, it will be labeled clearly as sponsored.
- We do not sell personal data or build ad profiles. See: Privacy policy.
- We do not accept pay-to-rank arrangements.
- We aim to recommend tools that are reliable, boring, and easy to explain, because boring tools are the ones you actually keep using.
Disclosures give you context. You can always go directly to the tool.
Why disclosure matters (beyond "legal compliance")
The internet has a trust problem. "Recommendations" often mean one of these:
- Someone genuinely likes a tool.
- Someone is paid to promote a tool.
- Someone is paid and pretending it's #1.
Disclosure is how we keep #2 from pretending to be #1.
But disclosure alone isn't enough. A site can disclose and still be biased if it:
- optimizes for commission rates instead of user outcomes,
- ignores cheaper/better alternatives,
- or publishes "top 10 tools" lists that exist to funnel clicks.
So our disclosure policy includes two layers:
- what we disclose (money relationships),
- how recommendations are made (process constraints).
What we disclose
A "disclosure" is our plain-language way of saying: there is a money relationship here. When a relationship is material (meaning it could influence judgment), we disclose it, and we try to keep labels consistent so you can spot them quickly: "Disclosure", "Affiliate link", or "Sponsored" near the point where you would decide to click.
1) Affiliate links
An affiliate link is a trackable link that can generate a commission if you purchase after clicking.
When we use affiliate links:
- we label them on the page,
- we do not hide them in vague language,
- and we do not require you to click them (we often include non-affiliate alternatives where possible).
What to look for: a short disclosure line near the first monetized link, and occasionally a small label next to a button or link. The wording may vary, but the meaning should not: if you buy after clicking, we may earn money.
2) Sponsored placements
A sponsored placement is when a company pays to be featured.
If we ever accept a sponsored placement:
- it will be labeled "Sponsored" in plain language,
- we will not allow sponsorship to overwrite factual claims,
- and we will not present sponsored placements as "the best" by default.
(If you never see sponsored placements on the site, that's because we're not doing them.)
Sponsored means the placement is paid. It does not mean we endorse every claim about the product, and it should be obvious at a glance.
3) Partnerships and material relationships
A partnership is a relationship that could reasonably be perceived as influencing recommendations: direct payment, free access beyond normal trials, consulting relationships, revenue share, etc.
If a relationship is "material" (meaning it could influence judgment), we disclose it.
A useful way to think about "material" is the reader test: would a reasonable reader want to know this before acting on the recommendation? If yes, we treat it as disclosure-worthy.
What we do not do
This section is deliberately blunt.
- We do not recommend tools we would not use ourselves (or recommend to a friend) given the assumptions stated.
- We do not accept pay-to-rank or "we'll pay you to move us up" arrangements.
- We do not hide affiliate relationships in unclear language.
- We do not sell personal data or build advertising profiles.
- We do not write fake "reviews" of tools we haven't tested.
- We do not pretend a tool is universally best when it depends on budget, country, or workflow.
The core constraint here is simple: money cannot buy the conclusion. If a tool is recommended, it is because we believe it fits the stated use case and constraints. Paying us cannot turn a non-recommendation into a winner.
If any of these constraints ever change, we will update this page and note it in the change log style used elsewhere on the site. See how we treat updates: Review policy.
Where you will see disclosures on the site
Disclosures should be visible where decisions happen. You can expect disclosure language to appear:
- On a tool page that links to a product/service (for example, in Tools & templates or a specific tool page).
- Near the first affiliate/sponsored link on a page (not buried at the bottom).
- On pages that compare multiple tools, if and when those pages exist.
If a link could earn money, the disclosure should be close enough that you understand the context before you click.
If you ever think a disclosure is missing, please report it: Contact.
Examples of disclosure placements
These are simplified examples of placement and labeling.
Example A: Tool page disclosure near the top
Placement: above the first call-to-action.
Example text: Disclosure: This page contains affiliate links. If you buy through one, we may earn a commission. We do not accept pay-to-rank arrangements.
Example B: Inline label on a specific link or button
Placement: next to a link that may be monetized, especially when there are multiple outbound links.
Example label: "Affiliate link" or "Sponsored" (when applicable).
Example C: A comparison page disclosure
Placement: near the top and near the first set of outbound links (for example, above a comparison table).
Example text: Disclosure: Some links below are affiliate links. Our selections are based on stated criteria and constraints, not commission rates.
Example D: A sponsored placement card
Placement: on the sponsored item itself, not only in a footer.
Example label: "Sponsored" in plain language, plus a short sentence explaining what that means.
If the language feels vague or buried, please flag it.
How recommendations are made (the process constraints)
A trustworthy recommendation system needs constraints. Otherwise, incentives creep in quietly.
1) We optimize for "still works six months from now"
Freelancers don't need novelty. They need reliability. So we prefer tools that:
- don't require constant fiddling,
- are easy to explain to a client,
- and don't break your workflow during a busy week.
That bias toward "boring" is intentional.
2) We state assumptions when a recommendation depends on them
A tool recommendation that ignores your constraints is not a recommendation. It's a guess.
So we aim to state assumptions like:
- budget (free/cheap vs paid),
- country/jurisdiction,
- team size (solo vs agency-of-one),
- workflow (Google Docs vs Notion vs PDF-first),
- client type (B2B invoicing vs platform payouts).
If we fail to state key assumptions on a page, consider it incomplete and please flag it.
3) We prefer workflows over "tool worship"
Tools don't fix systems; they amplify systems.
Most of our tool pages are designed to support a workflow described in a Codex page. For example:
- pricing math -> How to set freelance rates -> Rate Calculator
- scope control -> Freelance contract clauses -> SOW template + Change request addendum
- payment discipline -> Getting paid on time -> Invoice template + follow-up sequence
The recommendation is usually "use this workflow," not "buy this product."
4) We treat "tool failure modes" as first-class information
Most recommendations skip the part you actually need: how the tool fails.
A useful recommendation includes:
- where it shines,
- where it breaks,
- and what to do when it breaks.
That's why tool pages include "common pitfalls," and why Codex pages focus on failure modes like late payment, scope creep, and over-commitment.
5) We allow ourselves to say "it depends"
Some advice should not be simplified into a single winner.
For example:
- invoicing tools differ by country and tax compliance,
- contract language differs by jurisdiction and risk profile,
- analytics tools differ depending on privacy constraints.
When it depends, we'll say so, and route you to the relevant evergreen explanation rather than pretending certainty.
How money interacts with content (and how we guard against distortion)
Here are the main ways money can distort content, and the guardrails we use.
Distortion risk: recommending the highest-commission option
Guardrail: we aim to recommend based on suitability and constraints, not commission rate. If we recommend a paid tool, we also try to name simpler/lower-cost alternatives when they exist and are plausible.
Distortion risk: only covering tools that pay
Guardrail: the existence of an affiliate program should not decide what we cover. We aim to publish what is useful for the workflow, and disclose monetization when it exists rather than shaping the conclusion around it.
Distortion risk: never mentioning competitors
Guardrail: if we publish comparison pages in the future, they should include real alternatives and clear selection criteria, not "everything is amazing."
Distortion risk: softening criticism to keep a relationship
Guardrail: tool criticism is allowed. If a tool has meaningful drawbacks, we should name them.
Distortion risk: hiding sponsorship
Guardrail: sponsorship (if present) gets labeled clearly. No exceptions.
Reader controls: how to verify and how to opt out
You shouldn't have to trust us blindly.
- If a page makes a factual claim, it should either cite sources or be clearly framed as a recommendation with assumptions. See: Editorial standards.
- If you dislike affiliate links on principle, you can still use the site: you can search the tool name and sign up directly.
- If you want to understand data practices, read: Privacy policy and Cookie policy.
Practical rule of thumb: if you are about to spend money or switch a workflow, pause for ten seconds and ask, "What is this page optimizing for?" If the answer is unclear, treat the recommendation as incomplete.
FAQ
Do affiliate links affect what you recommend?
They can, which is exactly why disclosure and process constraints exist. Our goal is to recommend what is most useful under stated assumptions, not what pays the most.
What's the difference between "affiliate," "sponsored," and "partnership"?
Affiliate means a link may generate a commission if you buy after clicking. Sponsored means a company paid for placement and it must be labeled clearly as sponsored. A partnership or material relationship is any relationship that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the recommendation (direct payment, revenue share, paid work, or free access beyond normal trials).
What if the best option doesn't have an affiliate program?
Then the best option is still the best option. The existence of an affiliate program should not decide the recommendation. If we include monetized links, they should be disclosed; if we do not, that absence should not be used as a reason to hide an alternative.
How do I know a page is up to date?
Look for "Last reviewed" and the change log on Codex and tool pages. How we define and schedule reviews is described here: Review policy.
Will you ever accept sponsored posts?
If we do, they will be labeled clearly as sponsored. But sponsorship would not be allowed to override factual claims or hide meaningful drawbacks.
Do you accept free access or other perks?
Sometimes evaluation requires access. If we receive free access beyond a normal trial or any other benefit that could reasonably be perceived as influencing judgment, we treat it as a material relationship and disclose it.
Do you sell my data?
No. We do not sell personal data or build ad profiles. Details here: Privacy policy.
I think a disclosure is missing. What should I do?
Please report it with the URL and what you observed: Contact.
How to report a missing disclosure
Treat this like reporting a bug.
- Send the URL via Contact.
- Tell us what you saw and what you expected to see.
- If you can, quote the link text or describe the button (for example, "the primary button under the first section").
Helpful details: where the link appears and which specific link looks undisclosed. If we confirm a disclosure should have been present, we will update the page so the money relationship is clear where the decision happens.
Related links
- Browse templates and calculators: Tools & templates
- How we decide what's reliable: Editorial standards
- How pages get updated: Review policy
- Data practices: Privacy policy
Status
- Last reviewed: February 7, 2026
- Change note: Expanded explanations, added a mini table of contents, added labeled disclosure placement examples, and clarified reporting.