These guidelines describe how pages on Data Rooms Providers are researched, written, reviewed and corrected. They apply to every provider profile, comparison, industry and region page, and blog article.
Our aim
A reader should be able to use any page on this site to make a better shortlist decision, without needing to trust us blindly. That means stating facts plainly, showing where judgments begin, and making it easy to check both.
Sourcing
- Primary sources first. Provider facts come from the vendor’s own pricing, security and product pages, trust centers, documentation and release notes.
- Official sources for rules. When a page discusses law, regulation or a security standard, we cite the regulator, the legislation or the standards body directly, not a summary of it.
- No borrowed reviews. We do not quote ratings, review counts or testimonials from third-party review platforms.
- Nothing invented. If we cannot confirm a price, a feature, a certification or a hosting location, we leave it out. We never invent customers, awards or office locations.
Facts and judgments
Facts are things a reader can verify: a published starting price, a listed certification, whether a product offers single sign-on. Judgments are our assessment of what those facts mean in practice, such as how easy a room is for a first-time bidder.
We keep the two apart. Facts are stated without qualifiers. Judgments are framed as ours, are tied to the pillars in our methodology, and are applied with the same yardstick across all providers.
Prices
All prices are shown in US dollars, exactly as the provider publishes them, with the billing unit (per month, per user per month). Where a vendor does not publish a price, we show “On request”. Prices are always indicative and can change without notice, so every pricing reference carries a reminder to confirm with the provider. Region pages may mention local currencies for context but never quote local prices we have not seen published.
Language
- Plain, international English with US spelling.
- Concise and precise. No hype, no superlatives we cannot support, no invented urgency.
- Limitations are named as clearly as strengths. Every provider profile lists both.
- Trial terms are described exactly as the vendor states them.
Independence from commercial interests
Some outbound links on the site are affiliate links, as described in our disclosure. The people who research and score providers do not see commission figures, and commission is never an input to a rating, a shortlist or a comparison verdict. Vendors may send us product updates, which we verify independently, but they never review or approve our copy before publication.
Review before publication
Every page is checked before it goes live for:
- Factual accuracy against our recorded sources.
- Consistency of scores and wording with the methodology.
- Working internal links and correct citations to official sources.
- Clear, neutral language and compliance with these guidelines.
Pages are published under the Data Rooms Providers research team rather than individual names, because each page reflects a shared process rather than one person’s opinion.
Updates
Each page shows the date it was last updated. Prices, trial terms and features are re-checked every quarter, and all pillar scores are reviewed in full once a year. Material changes, such as a new certification or a pricing overhaul, are reflected as soon as we have confirmed them.
Corrections
If you believe something is wrong, write to us through the contact page with the page address and, if possible, a source. We investigate every report. Confirmed errors are corrected promptly and the page date is updated. Where a correction changes a rating or a recommendation in a meaningful way, we say so on the page.