Trust & methodology
Editorial policy
How UK Software Stack researches software decisions, separates facts from judgement and keeps commercial relationships behind the editorial conclusion.
Decision first. Evidence second. No dead-end conclusions.
Core editorial pages answer one of four questions: Compare, Do I Need It?, Switch or Worth It?
Source hierarchy
Material product claims are normally checked against primary sources such as vendor pricing pages, support documentation and official terms. Regulatory claims are normally checked against GOV.UK, HMRC, ICO or another relevant authority.
Community discussions and independent publishers can help reveal real-world problems, but they are not normally the sole source for a plan, price or compliance claim.
Facts versus judgement
A vendor can document what a product includes. It cannot decide whether that product is worth buying for a particular small-business situation.
We separate documented facts from UK Software Stack editorial judgement and avoid pretending that a feature list is a recommendation.
Testing and hands-on claims
We do not claim to have personally tested a product or workflow unless that testing actually took place. Documentation-based comparisons are described as such.
AI-assisted work
AI tools may assist with research organisation, drafting, coding and quality control. They do not replace source verification for material software facts.
Commercial independence
Affiliate availability is considered after suitability. Commission cannot buy a favourable comparison, suppress a better alternative or turn a “do not buy” conclusion into a purchase recommendation.
Updates and corrections
Fast-changing data such as prices, plans and AI features is reviewed more frequently than stable guidance. The underlying Fact Ledger records sources and verification dates.
If you spot a material change, please contact us.