A best-of list is honest when a reader can see three things: the rules used to rank, the evidence behind each rank, and any money you stand to make from the click. Write the criteria before you look at products, back every placement with your own testing notes, disclose earnings where the reader will see them, and revisit the list on a schedule.
This guide is for bloggers, editors, niche site owners and agency writers who publish comparison posts. It covers how to set criteria, what counts as proof, how revenue can leak into a ranking, where disclosure belongs and how to word it, and how to keep the list current. It is not legal advice. Rules differ by country and change over time, so check the official pages for the markets you serve and ask a qualified lawyer about your own situation.
Start With the Criteria, Not the Products
A ranking is only as trustworthy as the order in which you made your decisions. If you pick favorites first and write criteria afterward, the criteria will quietly be reverse-engineered to crown them.
Turn the reader's situation into a short list of tests
Begin with the person who opens the list. Someone choosing a note-taking app for a research team cares about different things than someone who wants a quick personal journal. Google's guidance on writing high quality reviews (Opens in a new tab) recommends evaluating from the user's perspective and focusing on the decision factors that matter most for the product. Use that as your filter: choose the few factors that would change a reader's mind, and drop the rest.
Say why each criterion exists
One sentence per criterion is enough. If you weight criteria, show the weights, and add a line telling readers which criterion to prioritize if their situation differs from your assumption. This turns the list from a verdict into a tool.
A criteria table you can copy
| Criterion | Why it matters | How you test it | Evidence to keep |
|---|---|---|---|
| Setup and first run | Shapes the first impression | Same starter task for every product | Step notes, screen recording |
| Core function | The reason the product exists | Shared set of test tasks | Results table |
| Price and hidden costs | Changes the real total | Vendor price page, checked on a date | Link and date checked |
| Support and documentation | Matters when something breaks | Send a real question | Reply notes |
| Limits | Shows who should look elsewhere | Read plan limits and restrictions | Official plan page |
Criteria checklist before you test anything
- Were the criteria written before the product shortlist?
- Does each criterion map to a real reader decision?
- Are weights and reasons visible on the page?
- Will every product face the same tests?
- Is there a written rule for dropping a product, such as discontinued or unavailable?
What Counts as Proof
Calling something "best" is a claim. The same Google guidance says that when you recommend a product as best overall or best for a purpose, you should explain why, with first-hand evidence, and that ranked lists should carry enough useful content to stand on their own.
The kinds of support the guidance lists
The guidance names several habits: show you are an expert, support your review with visuals, audio or links to your own experience, share quantitative measurements of how the item performs in key categories, explain what sets it apart from competitors, and cover comparable options along with which suits particular uses. It adds that quality and originality matter more than length. Map each habit to a field in your own template so none gets skipped.
What a testing note should say
- When you tested it, which version and which plan.
- Which tasks you ran and what happened.
- Any measurement, and how you took it; if you did not measure, say so plainly.
- Strengths, weaknesses and who it does not suit.
- Anything you received from the vendor, such as a free account or a loaned unit.
If you did not test it
Never present a product as tried if it was not. Turkey's Ministry of Trade makes the same point in its announcement of influencer guidance: according to that page, a product or service that has not been experienced cannot be endorsed or presented as experienced. That guidance targets social media influencers, and the page does not address blogs separately, but the honesty principle applies to any format. If you include an untested product, label it as summarized from official documentation and keep it out of the top positions.
Evidence strength at a glance
| Evidence | Strength | How to show it |
|---|---|---|
| Your own logged test | High | Date, version, tasks, outcome |
| Official docs and price pages | Medium, time-sensitive | Link plus date checked |
| User reviews | Low to medium | Describe the pattern, never one quote as proof |
| Vendor marketing claims | Low | Quote as a claim, not as fact |
For a worked comparison of strong and weak presentation, see the good versus weak sponsored post analysis.
When Money Touches the Ranking
A conflict of interest exists whenever your income could depend on which product wins. You may not be able to eliminate it, but you can manage it and you can show it.
Keep the ranking rule separate from the revenue
If every top position pays a commission and every bottom position does not, readers will draw their own conclusion. Anchor the order in the criteria table, include products that pay you nothing, and let them win when they test well. A list where a non-paying product sometimes ranks first is more believable than one where income and rank always line up.
The thin affiliate trap
Google's spam policies (Opens in a new tab) describe thin affiliation as publishing content with product affiliate links, and add that not every site that participates in an affiliate program is a thin affiliate. What separates the two is whether the page gives readers original value. Copied vendor descriptions and lists with no evaluation drift toward the problem; your own tests and criteria move you away from it.
Link attributes are not disclosure
Google's outbound link guidance (Opens in a new tab) says to mark advertisement or paid-placement links with the sponsored value, describes nofollow as still acceptable though sponsored is preferred, and does not name affiliate links on that page. Read it together with our guide to affiliate links and rel attributes. Either way, a rel value talks to search engines. Disclosure talks to people, and one does not substitute for the other.
Conflict decision rule
- If you receive anything from a vendor, whether commission, free product or ad spend, say so next to that product and near the top of the post.
- Evaluate products that pay you nothing with the same tests and keep them in the list.
- If a benefit could influence the order, make the ranking rule and criteria table visible.
- If you have a commercial partnership that makes fair ranking impossible, leave that product out of the ranking or place it in a separate sponsored section.
- When unsure, disclose more rather than less.
Disclosure: Placement, Wording and Links
A disclosure that nobody sees does not do its job. For detail, see the official pages cited below.
What the FTC page says
The FTC's Endorsement Guides questions and answers (Opens in a new tab) state that a disclosure should be placed where it easily catches consumers' attention and is difficult to miss, and that a disclosure in the comments or behind a hyperlink is easily avoidable and therefore not clear and conspicuous. On affiliate links, the page says you should disclose your relationship to the retailer clearly and conspicuously on your site, that "paid link" right next to an affiliate link should be an adequate disclosure, and that "commissionable link" is probably not clear. It adds that terms such as "affiliate link" or "buy now" may not tell readers that you are paid. On free products, it says it does not matter whether the company gives you a code or ships the item, and that your connection should be disclosed everywhere you endorse the product. These statements were written for the United States.
What the Turkish Ministry page says
If your readers are in Turkey, the Ministry of Trade's announcement of its influencer guidance (Opens in a new tab) is dated 7 May 2021 and says the Advertising Board adopted the guidance as a principle decision on 4 May 2021. According to the page, a post must show that it is a commercial advertisement in an understandable form and place, covert advertising is prohibited, and receiving money, a free product, a service or a discount from an advertiser must be disclosed. Advertisers, agencies, media organizations and influencers are each held responsible for compliance. The page gives no article or penalty numbers, so none are given here. The guidance is addressed to social media influencers; for a blog or comparison site, consult the Ministry's pages, current Advertising Board decisions and a lawyer.
Where to place it
| Location | Visibility | Advice |
|---|---|---|
| Top of the post, before the first recommendation | High | Put the general statement here |
| Beside each product entry | High | Short note wherever you earn something |
| Right next to the link | High | Short label, details linked to the top |
| Bottom of the post | Low | Only as an addition |
| Separate policy page | Low | Supplement, not a replacement |
Example wording
These samples show a style, not a guarantee of legal sufficiency.
- Top of post: "Some links in this list earn us a commission at no extra cost to you. Commission does not decide the order; the criteria table below does."
- Beside an entry: "We earn a commission if you buy through this link."
- Free access: "The vendor gave us a free trial account to test."
- Untested entry: "We did not test this product. The summary comes from the vendor's official documentation."
For sample phrasing and layout choices, see the guide on disclosure wording and placement, and for gifted items, the guide to free product reviews.
Plain words win
Use words an ordinary reader understands. Jargon such as "affiliate" or "monetized link" can leave a visitor unsure that you earn money. "We earn a commission" is hard to misread. If you publish in more than one language, write the disclosure natively in each rather than translating word for word, and check each language's audience against the official pages of its market.
A Template for Every Entry
Once the criteria and proof rules exist, the post itself follows a repeatable pattern. Using the same pattern for every product keeps comparisons fair and exposes gaps before you publish.
The opening: answer, scope and disclosure
Start with the short answer: who the list is for, how many products you covered and by what criteria. State what you left out. Place the general disclosure here, before the first product, so readers know your position while they read the ranking.
The entry card
Give each product the same fields in the same order: who it suits, what testing showed, strengths, weaknesses, who should look elsewhere, price source with the date checked, and any earnings note. A fixed card makes an untested or half-tested entry obvious to you before it is obvious to a reader.
The summary table
Add a compact table comparing products by criterion. Every cell must come from something written in an entry card; a table should summarize, not introduce new claims. Describe status with words such as "included", "not available" or "limited" rather than color alone, so everyone reads the same thing.
The closing: choose by situation
Instead of crowning one winner for everyone, end with a short rule: "pick A if the team is tiny, B if integrations matter, C if budget is tight". This echoes the guidance to cover alternatives and say which suits particular circumstances.
Keeping the List Current
A best-of list tells readers these products are good right now. Prices, plans and features change, and an unchecked list slowly becomes inaccurate.
Set a review rhythm
Check fast-moving categories more often and slow ones less often. You need not announce the interval, but a visible "last checked" date builds trust.
What to do at each review
- Re-check price and plan pages and note the date.
- Re-run tests where the product changed, then re-rank against the criteria table.
- Remove products that were discontinued or changed beyond recognition.
- Confirm the disclosure still matches your relationships, and add new ones.
- Check links and their attributes, such as sponsored or nofollow.
- Change the "updated" date only when something actually changed.
Be honest about dates
Refreshing a date without changing anything misleads readers. Write a short change note instead, such as which product moved and why.
Pre-publish checklist
- Were the criteria written first, and are they visible?
- Does every entry have a dated testing note?
- Are untested products clearly labeled?
- Does every entry that earns you money carry a short note?
- Is the general disclosure at the top, not behind a link or in the comments?
- Are paid or affiliate links marked with the right rel value?
- Is there a named owner and a review date?
- Have you checked the official pages for each market you serve, and asked a lawyer where needed?
Worked Scenario: One Honest Comparison
This scenario is fictional. A site that reviews productivity software plans a list of note-taking apps for research teams. The editor writes the criteria first: capture speed, search quality, sharing controls, export options and price clarity. Each app then gets the same three tasks, and the editor logs dates and versions. Two apps pay the site a commission; one does not.
Ranking and disclosure
The criteria table drives the order. The app that pays nothing lands second because it did best on search and export. The post opens with a short disclosure explaining that some links earn commission and that the table, not commission, sets the order. Each paying app carries its own line. A fourth app could not be tested; it sits last with a note saying it was summarized from official documentation.
After publishing
The editor schedules a recheck, keeps a change log and verifies pricing pages again. Nothing in this process promises a ranking in search results. The goal is to help the reader decide with confidence.
Edge Cases: Gifts, Sponsored Slots and Client Work
Real publishing rarely fits a clean template. Three situations come up often enough to settle in advance.
Free products and review units
If a vendor sends a unit or an account, record it in the testing note and mention it beside that entry. The FTC page says the connection should be disclosed everywhere you endorse the product, so repeat the note in newsletters and social posts that reuse the list. If the vendor asked for an outcome, such as a positive score, you have crossed from review into advertising, and the post should be labeled as sponsored.
Paid placement inside a list
Some sites sell a featured slot. Keep such slots visually and verbally separate from the ranked entries, label them as paid, and never present them as the result of your tests. A paid slot that looks like a ranked entry defeats the point of publishing criteria at all.
Lists written for a client
When an agency writes a list for a client whose product appears in it, the commercial relationship is part of the story. Agree up front that the client does not set the order, that the client product is tested with the same tasks, and that the post carries a disclosure. If the client insists on a fixed position, publish it as sponsored content and verify the applicable rules with the official pages and a lawyer.
Corrections and reader challenges
Readers will sometimes point out that a price changed or a test result looks wrong. Treat each message as a chance to improve: re-run the test, correct the entry and add a dated correction note. A visible correction history is a trust signal, and it shows that the ranking follows the evidence rather than the other way around.
Mistakes to Avoid
These errors recur in honest-looking lists. Each has a simple fix.
Writing criteria after ranking
Criteria written afterward become justification. Make them the first step of the draft and record any later change.
Hiding disclosure at the end or in a policy page
Readers should know about the relationship while reading the ranking. Put a general sentence at the top and a short note by each affected entry.
Treating vendor copy as evidence
Repeating a marketing line is not a test. Quote claims as claims and write your own results separately.
Listing only products that pay
If every product pays you, the list reads as a sales page however clear the disclosure. Choose products from the whole category by criteria and describe your scope in the post.
Softening the negatives
An entry with no real weakness loses credibility. Give every product at least one concrete limitation tied to something you observed.
Letting the list go stale
Recommending a discontinued product damages trust. Name an owner and keep a calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I make a best-of ranking defensible?
Write your criteria before choosing products, run the same tasks on each one and keep dated testing notes. Google's review guidance says to explain with first-hand evidence why something is best. Tie the order to the criteria table.
Do affiliate links make a page low quality?
No. Google's spam policies say not every site that participates in an affiliate program is a thin affiliate. The difference is whether the page offers original value through real evaluation and evidence, as opposed to copied descriptions and unsupported lists.
Where should the disclosure go?
Where readers will see it before they act on the ranking: near the top of the post and beside each entry that earns you something. The FTC page says disclosures in comments or behind a hyperlink are easily avoidable. This is not legal advice; check the official pages for each market you serve.
What does the Turkish Ministry of Trade page say?
This answer is not legal advice. The Ministry page says influencer posts must show they are commercial advertising, covert advertising is prohibited and benefits such as money, free products or discounts must be disclosed. It addresses social media influencers, so check the official pages and a lawyer for blogs and comparison sites.
Should affiliate links use sponsored or nofollow?
Google's outbound link guidance prefers the sponsored value for advertisement or paid-placement links and calls nofollow still acceptable. That page does not name affiliate links. A rel value is for search engines and does not replace a visible disclosure.
How often should I update the list?
Review it on a schedule that matches how fast the category changes. Re-check prices, plans and rankings each time, update disclosures for new relationships, and change the updated date only when something truly changed.
Conclusion: Make Trust Part of the Ranking
An honest best-of list rests on four habits: criteria written in advance, rankings backed by testing notes, a clear disclosure where readers will see it, and a schedule for updates. Managing and showing a conflict of interest is better than trying to hide it. No step guarantees a particular search ranking. This article is not legal advice; for the advertising and consumer rules that apply to your audience, consult the official pages of each market and a qualified lawyer.
If you want help producing comparison and list articles with consistent evidence and disclosure, you can look at the content writing service at Akua Adforce; scope and terms are on the product page.
Post a comment
Please log in to leave a comment. Login