Methodology
How a number reaches this site, what disqualifies one, and what happens on the day a published figure turns out to be wrong.
Last reviewed 30 July 2026
Deposit minimums are read, not repeated
Every minimum published here was taken off the funding screen of a live advertiser account. Registration was completed on all eight platforms during July 2026, and the recorded value is whatever appeared at the moment a payment method had to be chosen — not a headline from a vendor blog, and not a figure carried over from a rival comparison.
That distinction matters more in this category than in most. Deposit thresholds appear on no authoritative index anywhere, so a wrong number invented once travels through a dozen pages within a quarter and acquires authority purely by repetition. Treating any of them as settled, including the ones here, is how budgets get planned against fiction.
Four tiers of evidence
Claims are graded before publication, and the grade decides how the sentence around them is written.
- Read from an account. Deposit thresholds, funding methods, targeting parameters, dashboard features. Stated flatly, because a reader can repeat the observation.
- Published vendor documentation. Public rate cards, help-centre articles, platform changelogs. Attributed to the vendor by name, because the vendor chose what to publish.
- Named third-party measurement. Invalid-traffic datasets, bot-population studies, industry reports carrying a stated method. Cited with the measuring party attached.
- Practitioner reporting. Clearing prices buyers say they pay. Always rendered as a spread with a month against it, never as a benchmark, and never dressed up as measurement.
A claim that cannot reach the third tier is either handed to whoever made it, in their own name, or omitted. Nothing here is asserted on the strength of a vendor describing its own quality.
What gets thrown out
- Values with no reachable origin, however often they recur.
- Undated screenshots, which prove a state existed without proving when.
- Self-assessed quality claims with no verification partner identified.
- Suspiciously round figures appearing identically across competing pages, which is the signature of copying rather than checking.
How often it is re-read
Entry thresholds are re-checked quarterly, and immediately after any platform announcement touching payments or funding. Clearing prices move faster than any static page can honestly track, which is precisely why they are presented as spreads carrying the month they were gathered rather than as current rates.
Corrections
A figure demonstrated to be wrong is fixed where it stands and the review line on the affected page moves the same day. Nothing is deleted quietly and no correction is buried in a footnote. Evidence goes to the corrections mailbox listed here. None of the grading above can be bought: the money behind the site is described in the disclosure, and the boundary of what gets covered at all in the scope note.