Methodology
How We Evaluate Competitor Reviews and Alternatives
This page explains how EzUGC produces competitor comparisons so readers can understand the evidence model behind each recommendation.
Core Principles
- Use public vendor documentation and live product pages for claims.
- Prefer workflow-level comparisons over checklist-only comparisons.
- Label pricing and feature snapshots with clear update dates.
- Mark assumptions explicitly when direct confirmation is not available.
- Refresh major comparison pages at least once per quarter.
Evidence Standard
- Claim: make one direct, operational statement.
- Proof: cite the specific source and include the snapshot date.
- Scope: state what the claim does and does not cover.
- Mark internal reporting clearly and avoid presenting it as third-party validation.
Validation Inputs
- Pricing and packaging details from official pricing pages.
- Feature verification from product docs and in-app checks where available.
- Fit recommendations based on ad-team workflow requirements.
- Structured data validation using Rich Results guidelines.
Update Cadence
Major comparison and review pages are refreshed quarterly.
Pages may be updated sooner when pricing plans, feature sets, or positioning change significantly.
Last methodology update: 2026-02-17.