How we compare
investment companies.

What matters when comparing investment companies

Choose between self-directed brokerage, automated investing, and personal advice. Compare the specific account and service that match how you want to invest.

Questions the research must answer

• Do I want to manage my investments or get advice?
• What is the all-in annual cost?
• What investments and accounts are available?

Gather comparable evidence

Research should identify the legal entity and official website, collect written pricing and terms, check relevant registrations, and record the date and source for each material fact. Comparisons should use the same scenario wherever pricing is personalized.

A provider’s statement is labeled as company information. It does not, by itself, establish superior quality, customer experience, or an independent test result.

Explain strengths and limitations together

The comparison should help you understand who a service may suit, what it costs, and why another option may fit better. Missing information remains unverified rather than becoming an assumed advantage or disadvantage.

Publish scores only when the evidence is complete

The proposed model uses a 100-point rubric with category-specific weights. Each criterion receives a documented 0–5 assessment, multiplied by its weight and divided by five. No numerical company score is published without the required evidence and reviewer signoff.

Identity, availability, core costs, and material terms are required. Critical contradictions must be resolved, and all required criteria must be complete. Customer ratings, editorial scores, and list positions are separate concepts.

Make it easy to correct the record

Sources should be revisited when a material fee, product, restriction, or company status changes. Readers and companies can prepare a factual correction through the same channel.