Methodology

Cheaper, not “better”. We compare price and capability coverage — we do not score subjective quality.

Products have facts. You have requirements.

Every product page is generated from structured data: plans, observed prices, usage limits, and a controlled list of capabilities (like “conditional logic” or “payment collection”). Alternatives are computed from that data — never hand-picked, never hard-coded.

How a product qualifies as an alternative

• It must cover every capability you mark as required. Missing one excludes it — it is never just ranked lower.
• Its plan must support your usage (for example, your monthly response volume). Plans capped below your volume are excluded.
• Its effective price — for a stated scenario of seats, usage, billing period, and currency — must be genuinely lower.

Every claim has a scenario and a source

A claim like “72% cheaper” is always tied to a defined comparison scenario, and every price or capability fact traces to an official source (usually the vendor's own pricing page) with the date we last checked it. You can see both on every comparison page.

What we do not do

• No universal “best” score. Reviews and ratings never drive the ranking.
• Vendors cannot pay for a higher capability match or organic ranking.
• A vendor can become cheaper — for example with an exclusive discount that genuinely lowers what you pay. That may change the ranking because your price actually changes.
• Facts we have not verified stay unknown. We would rather show a gap than invent an answer.