Editorial policy
Parity exists to tell merchants what payment processing actually costs. These are the rules every piece of content on this site follows.
Independence from revenue
Ratings, rankings, verdicts, and fact-check results are produced with no input from providers. No provider can pay to be reviewed, improve a score, suppress a finding, or preview content before it publishes. Referral relationships, where they exist, are handled by a separate part of the product and are disclosed on how we make money.
Every claim needs evidence
Reviews are composed exclusively from a structured research file: published rate cards with source links, real merchant statements, regulator complaint data, aggregated platform ratings, and vetted editorial extracts. A deterministic check verifies that every number in a published review appears in that research material — a draft with an unsupported price or statistic cannot auto-publish. Full detail is in the methodology.
AI assistance, human accountability
We use AI to draft reviews from our research data, and we say so. AI is a drafting tool, not an authority: drafts are constrained to the evidence, challenged by automated review passes, and held for human editorial approval whenever any check fails. The Parity team is accountable for everything published under its name.
Original writing only
We read other reviewers to know what the market believes, and we credit critic consensus where we show it. But our text is checked for phrasing overlap against every source we researched — content that leans on someone else's wording is rejected before publication.
Freshness and corrections
Reviews regenerate when the underlying data changes — a price change, a new batch of statements, a shift in platform ratings — and every page shows its last-reviewed date. When we get something wrong, we correct the underlying data and regenerate the content. Report errors to corrections@checkparity.com.