Our Editorial Standards

Every comparison article on this blog follows the same testing process. We run a shared, multi-week sample of trades — typically 200 trades across equities, forex, and futures — through each tool being compared.

• We pay for the highest available plan on each tool so we're evaluating the full feature set, not a limited trial.
• Each platform is evaluated blind by two reviewers who score independently before comparing notes.
• We test the website, desktop platform, and mobile app where each exists.
• Scoring criteria — pricing, ease of use, feature depth, and overall value — is fixed before testing begins, not adjusted afterward.

Every article is written or reviewed by a named member of our team.

If you spot an inaccuracy in one of our articles, tell us at support@supertrader.me. We verify the claim, correct the article, and update the "last updated" date shown on the page. Material corrections are noted inline.

SuperTrader is a trading journal product, and we include SuperTrader in our own "best alternatives" comparison articles. We disclose this directly on every comparison article we publish.

We hold every product we compare — including our own — to the same testing methodology described above. Where we link to a competitor's product, that link may or may not be an affiliate link depending on the partnership in place at the time of publication; this does not change how a product is scored.