IndexFair processes personal data under CCPA/CPRA. Privacy notice · Privacy & contact.
This page lists brands where our founder has a commercial relationship that we firewall in code. We publish the methodology score. IndexFair currently places no affiliate-tagged outbound links on rating surfaces, and these brands are structurally barred from ever earning affiliate revenue through IndexFair.
Our founder discloses at /founders that he is a co-founder of UFFILIATES.me, an affiliate network whose partner brands are licensed gambling and betting operators. Where a UFFILIATES partner brand overlaps with the IndexFair catalogue, that commercial relationship is firewalled in code. Editorial independence requires a structural protection — not an editorial promise — so the firewall is enforced in code rather than asserted in copy, and it applies to every brand in the catalogue that falls within scope, regardless of vertical.
IndexFair has no affiliate relationship with any VPN provider. No founder holds a commercial relationship with a VPN brand, so no VPN brand is subject to this firewall. VPN profiles show verifiable facts (jurisdiction, ownership, published audit history) alongside user-reported service quality — no overall VPN safety rating is published — and clicks to a VPN provider's website are direct, not affiliated.
No brands are currently subject to the firewall. This list is curated by editorial staff and is populated when a UFFILIATES partner relationship overlaps with the IndexFair catalogue.
For each brand listed above, the brand page may still show a neutral official-website link, but it renders a firewall disclosure and never an affiliate-tagged outbound CTA. There is no path through our site that earns affiliate revenue from a firewalled brand. Today IndexFair also places no affiliate-tagged links for non-firewalled brands. The methodology composite is computed normally; the firewall is on the commercial relationship, not on the editorial scoring.
The exclusion list is stored as structured rows in our database () linked to the seeded UFFILIATES affiliate-program row. Membership is changed only via an audit-logged admin action; the audit trail is preserved on remove via soft-close () rather than DELETE. To verify the firewall is enforced, open any brand page from the list above and confirm the firewall disclosure appears next to the official-site CTA and that the outbound link is not affiliate-tagged.
brand_affiliate_linkvalid_tovalid_to set, row retained). The active list above intentionally excludes those entries.IndexFair data is a product for anyone; the rating is not for sale. This register makes who pays for our data as public as who is scored by it. Subscribers that are themselves rated — a rated brand, or an organisation under common control with one — are listed by name, with their access tier (own-cell analytics only) and start date, so any observer can confirm that paying did not change their score. Buyers that are not rated entities (media, investors, payment providers, suppliers, market entrants, consultancies, regulators) are disclosed in aggregate by class, without individual names, since they create no conflict with a published score.
Naming follows ownership: an organisation under common control with a rated brand is named through the same corporate ownership root that the revenue-concentration caps below resolve, so the register cannot be evaded by subscribing through a subsidiary or a sister company.
No data subscriptions exist. The register is published here before the first subscriber, not after.
The same independence firewall that bars affiliate revenue above applies to data sales: no pay-to-preview, no pay-to-improve a score, no custom or private weighting, no paid re-runs, no exclusive early access to score changes for a scored brand, and no named-competitor product sold to a rated operator in its own market. If a subscriber conditions renewal on a score outcome — “we won't renew unless the score improves” — we record it and publish it at the pattern level in our transparency report; we do not act on it. This list is published before any paid surface opens.
Some prospective buyers are conversion-coupled to what we rate: their commercial success depends on promoting a brand we score. Sales to such buyers are licensed through four gates, recorded here individually because each is separately testable. All four must hold; if any gate fails, the sale is refused.
The boundary these gates draw is not “aggregate claims are sellable to anyone”: a standard aggregate artifact is permissible only after a recipient × use × rights × jurisdiction gate — know-your-business checks, a declared use, and a fail-closed refusal on undeclared use. A full promoted-brand portfolio is not required for that narrow aggregate lane; it becomes necessary only where named-brand entitlement or optimisation is requested, which the artifact gate above already forbids.
No compensation, grant, token, or referral fee from a rated brand funds or influences its rating; any commercial relationship is disclosed on the register above. To prevent issuer-pays drift, we cap revenue concentration from rated entities: revenue from rated operators in aggregate stays at or below 15–20% of ARR, any single rated entity at or below 3–5%, and any single vertical segment at or below 20%. We publish an annual transparency report on revenue mix and cap adherence, and maintain an independent review committee; sales compensation is firewalled from scoring.
No B2B revenue has been recorded yet, so the caps below have nothing to measure against. This monitor snapshot is published before the first subscriber, not after.
For the founder's conflict-of-interest disclosure, see /founders. For the methodology underlying every published score, see /methodology.