Last reviewed: 16 September 2026
Home › Editorial policy
Editorial policy
Most sites in this category disclose their funding model in small italic text near the top and move on. We'd rather give it a page.
How we're funded, right now
As of this writing, this site has no paid placements, no lead-generation fees, and no lender relationships of any kind. Nothing on this site earns us money yet. That's not a permanent promise — a site needs a sustainable model to keep operating and keep researching — but it means every finding published so far was reached with zero financial relationship to any originator being evaluated. We do not accept payment from an originator or brokerage in exchange for a favorable finding, a passing grade, or a listing in the Register's passing directory — see how we actually reach a pass or fail for the evidence a finding is built on.
No paid "verified originator" badge — a deliberate choice, not a placeholder
Some review platforms sell a subscription that comes with the ability to display a rating badge, respond to complaints, or influence visibility in ways that quietly compromise independence. We won't build a paid "verified originator" badge here, at any price point: eligibility for anything we publish requires already passing every applicable point on our standard, and no fee changes that.
What we would disclose, if a revenue channel is ever introduced
If we ever introduce one, our commitment is:
- No originator can pay to change a finding. A failing verdict against our published standard stays a failing verdict regardless of any commercial relationship.
- Any compensated relationship is disclosed on the specific page it affects — not only in a footer link or a separate policy page nobody reads.
- Vetting stays commercially blind. Grading happens identically whether or not an originator participates in any future commercial arrangement — see our methodology for the full structural commitment.
- Any future monetization is a flat, fixed fee — never a per-loan cut. RESPA Section 8 bans any fee contingent on a specific referred consumer's closed loan (see our standard), and this site's own future revenue model is deliberately structured to stay on the right side of that line, the same way LendingTree, Bankrate, and Credible already do.
No lender or rate grading, ever — not a funding question, a scope question
We don't grade the interest rates, product design, or financial health of any mortgage lender, funded or not — see our standard for why. That boundary isn't about avoiding a conflict of interest; it's about not making a kind of claim (a forward-looking financial judgment about rates or a company) this site isn't built to make responsibly.