Methodology
How scoring works
SiteBartar matches your stated constraints before ranking. Editorial scores exist for directory context only — they do not enter quiz or comparer math.
Belief engine
Verticals: Newsletter platforms, website builders
Weights: Belief alignment (~45%), budget fit (~35%) — editorial score is not used in matcher ranking.
Example: Simplicity + monetization → Beehiiv vs Substack tradeoffs surfaced in why-not notes.
Constraint engine
Verticals: Prop trading firms
Weights: 100% constraint fit from your stated rules (payout speed, market, drawdown preferences).
Example: Futures + fast payout → Topstep/Apex favored; news-trading penalties surfaced explicitly.
Use-case engine
Verticals: Crypto exchanges
Weights: 100% use-case fit (spot, fees, regulation, staking) from quiz answers.
Example: US beginner + compliance → Coinbase/Gemini; low-fee active trader → Binance/Bybit caveats.
Confidence levels
- High — clear gap between #1 and #2, few conflicting answers
- Medium — quick mode or close scores; read why-not notes
- Low — conflicting priorities; we rank by your top stated constraints
Updates
Prop and crypto attributes reviewed monthly minimum; SaaS quarterly. Changes appear on tool pages and the rule changelog.