1. What is the DollarVisor editorial policy?
Quick Answer: It’s the rulebook every page on DollarVisor is produced under, who writes, who reviews, what counts as a checkable fact, where AI is and isn’t allowed, and what happens when we get something wrong. If the methodology governs our numbers, this policy governs our words.
DollarVisor covers insurance, credit cards, loans, and investing: decisions where a wrong or bought answer costs readers real money. So the editorial policy exists to protect one thing: your ability to trust what you read here without taking our word for it. It’s built on the same three promises as the rest of the site:
- State-level numbers. Writers must localize costs and rates to the reader’s state wherever the source data allows. National averages are a fallback, never the lead.
- No pay-to-rank. Editorial and advertising never mix. No company can pay, gift, or negotiate its way into coverage or up a ranking: the full revenue picture is on the advertising disclosure page.
- Show the math. Every verdict ships with the table, source link, or calculator behind it, so readers can audit the reasoning.
The five sections below turn those promises into enforceable rules: independence, fact-checking, the writer-vs-reviewer split, AI disclosure, and corrections.
Who enforces these rules?
A three-person team with real names, real credentials, and a published review split. Meet the DollarVisor team →
2. Our independence rules
Quick Answer: Five standing rules keep money away from editorial: no pay-to-rank, no sponsored content, no affiliate-ordered lists, no gifts or junkets, and a hard wall between ad operations and writers. Each rule has a named enforcement mechanism, summarized in the table below and expanded on the about page.
| Rule | What it means | How it’s enforced |
|---|---|---|
| No pay-to-rank | No company can buy a position in any ranked list | Rankings are ordered only by the published scoring weights in the methodology |
| No sponsored content | We publish no paid posts, advertorials, or “partner content” | Standing policy: there is no rate card and no sales contact for editorial space |
| No affiliate-ordered lists | Commission payouts never decide what ranks where | The site earns from display ads, not affiliate commissions: see the advertising disclosure |
| No gifts or junkets | Writers and reviewers accept no payment, product, or perk from any company we cover | Team policy, attested annually by each member on the authors page roster |
| Ad-editorial wall | Writers don’t know which ads will run beside their work | Display ads are placed by Google’s ad network, not by anyone on the editorial team |
DollarVisor editorial independence rules, August 2026. If you ever spot a page that appears to break one, report it: see Section 6.
These rules aren’t just good manners: regulators watch this space. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Circular 2024-01 warns that comparison sites can violate federal law when payments, not reader interest, decide what gets recommended. Our answer is structural: there’s no mechanism through which payment could reach a ranking.
3. Our fact-check standards
Quick Answer: Every checkable claim must trace to a primary source before a page ships, and the standard varies by claim type, as the table below shows. Numbers that can’t be traced get cut, not softened. The full source register lives on the methodology page.
“Fact-checked” is an easy phrase to print and a harder one to define. Under the DollarVisor editorial policy it means each type of claim carries its own verification bar:
| Claim type | Verification standard | If it can’t be met |
|---|---|---|
| Rates, premiums, APRs, APYs | Traced to a government or regulatory source (state DOI, NAIC, FDIC, Federal Reserve, Freddie Mac) and linked inline | Stated as a qualitative range with a date, or cut |
| Product terms and fees | Checked against the provider’s own published disclosures on the date of writing | Flagged “verify with provider” and dated |
| Tax and legal figures | Matched to the current IRS, HUD, or FHFA publication for the correct tax year | Not published: no exceptions on tax figures |
| Company conduct claims | Backed by CFPB complaint data, state DOI complaint indexes, or a public enforcement action | Cut: we don’t print conduct claims on rumor |
| Judgment calls (“our pick”) | Backed by the scoring table on the page and signed off by the reviewing specialist | The verdict doesn’t ship without its math |
DollarVisor fact-check standards, August 2026. The same bar applies to every vertical, from car insurance to savings accounts.
The working rule our editors repeat: an unlinked number is an unfinished sentence. If a stat can’t carry its source with it, it doesn’t go in the article.
Fact-checking as a discipline is bigger than one site, and it’s worth seeing how professionals everywhere approach it. The short video below (from Crash Course’s Navigating Digital Information series) explains how fact-checkers verify claims, which is the same habit we ask of our own editors and our readers.
4. The writer-vs-reviewer rule
Quick Answer: No money page on DollarVisor is published on one person’s judgment. The writer and the reviewing specialist are always different people, and the reviewer holds a relevant credential in that vertical: see the authors page for each one.
The split works like a newsroom’s two-signature rule. Here’s who reviews what:
| Content vertical | Specialist reviewer | Credential behind the review |
|---|---|---|
| Insurance & loans | Marcus Delgado, Insurance & Loans Specialist | Licensed property & casualty insurance producer |
| Investing & banking | Priya Raman, Investing & Banking Specialist | FINRA SIE and Series 65 exams |
| Credit cards | Rachel Hartman, Lead Editor, with rate data checked against Federal Reserve releases | A decade of consumer-finance editing; every APR figure source-traced per Section 3 |
| Trust & policy pages | Written by Rachel Hartman, reviewed by both specialists | Full-team sign-off: no page reviews itself |
DollarVisor review assignments, August 2026. Bylines on every money page name both writer and reviewer.
Two details make the rule bite. First, the reviewer can block publication: a page that fails review goes back, not out. Second, the same split applies to corrections: whoever wrote a page never judges an error report against it.
Want the numbers side of these rules?
The methodology page documents our data sources, scoring weights, and update schedule: the system this editorial policy protects. Read the DollarVisor methodology →
5. How we use AI, and where we never do
Quick Answer: DollarVisor uses AI tools for research collation and drafting assistance, and never for rates, rankings, or verdicts. Every published page passes the same human fact-check and specialist review described in Sections 3 and 4, regardless of how the first draft was produced. Questions about this disclosure go to the contact page.
We’d rather over-disclose than let readers wonder. Here is exactly where AI assistance is allowed in our workflow and where it is barred:
| Workflow stage | AI allowed? | Human control |
|---|---|---|
| Research collation and source gathering | Yes | An editor verifies every source link before it’s used |
| First drafts of explainers and guides | Yes, with disclosure | An editor rewrites, then the Section 4 specialist review applies in full |
| Rates, premiums, and rate tables | Never | Humans pull every figure from the primary sources in the methodology |
| Rankings and scores | Never | Ordered only by the published scoring weights: no generative step anywhere |
| Verdicts (“our pick”) and final publication | Never | A named human reviewer signs off; their name appears in the byline |
DollarVisor AI-assistance disclosure, August 2026. This table is reviewed whenever our tools or workflow change.
This mirrors what Google itself asks of publishers: its guidance on AI-generated content says the standard is original, people-first work with clear accountability: however it’s drafted. Our position is simpler still: AI can help gather and draft, but a person with a name and a credential owns every claim we publish.
6. Our corrections policy
Quick Answer: Report an error via the contact page or contact@dollarvisor.com. A specialist who didn’t write the page checks it against the primary source within two business days, and confirmed errors are fixed immediately with a dated correction note left on the page.
The corrections commitment in the DollarVisor editorial policy has four parts:
- Anyone can report. Readers, companies we cover, regulators: the intake route is the same for everyone.
- Independent check. The writer-vs-reviewer rule applies: the person who made a possible error never judges the report about it.
- Visible fix. Confirmed errors are corrected immediately, the page’s updated date changes, and a dated note says what changed. We don’t silently swap numbers.
- Pattern review. The corrections log is reviewed monthly; a repeated error type triggers a process fix, not just a patch. The step-by-step workflow and timelines are published in the methodology.
7. Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is the DollarVisor editorial policy in one sentence?
Advertisers never touch editorial, every money page gets a credentialed second reviewer, every number traces to a primary source, AI never produces a rate or a verdict, and confirmed errors are fixed fast with a visible note. The about page explains why the site was built around these rules.
2. Who reviews DollarVisor content before it’s published?
A specialist who didn’t write it: Marcus Delgado (licensed P&C insurance producer) for insurance and loans, Priya Raman (FINRA SIE and Series 65) for investing and banking, and Lead Editor Rachel Hartman for credit cards and site-wide standards. Their credentials are on the authors page.
3. Does DollarVisor use AI to write its content?
AI tools may assist with research collation and first drafts, and that’s disclosed in Section 5. AI is never used to produce rates, rankings, scores, or verdicts, and every page passes the same human fact-check and specialist review before publication regardless of how it was drafted.
4. Can advertisers influence what DollarVisor writes?
No. Display ads are placed by Google’s ad network, so writers don’t know which ads will run beside their work, and there is no sales channel for coverage, placement, or rankings. The full revenue explanation is on the advertising disclosure page.
5. How does DollarVisor fact-check its numbers?
By claim type: rates trace to government sources, product terms to provider disclosures, tax figures to the current IRS publication, conduct claims to CFPB or state DOI records, and verdicts to the scoring table on the page. A number that can’t meet its bar is cut or stated qualitatively with a date, never left unsourced.
6. What happens when DollarVisor gets something wrong?
Report it through the contact page or contact@dollarvisor.com. Someone other than the writer checks the claim against the primary source within two business days, and a confirmed error is fixed immediately with a dated correction note on the page. Corrections jump every other job in the queue.
DollarVisor provides information, not financial advice. Rates change often and vary by state and personal profile, always verify current figures with the provider before you buy. See our full disclaimer.
See something this policy should have caught?
Tell us. An independent reviewer checks every report against the primary source within two business days: that’s this policy doing its job.