How we choose featured partners

Two lists doing two different jobs

The rankings are methodology output. Each of the 8 platforms gets a public-information score across product, price, care process, pharmacy and terms, and the table is those scores in descending order. Each criterion earns 0, 1 or 2 points; the total does not measure clinical quality. Affiliate status is not an input to that calculation and no promotional decision writes back into it.

The featured surfaces are the homepage cards, the affiliate strip and the sticky bar. They exist to make money and we say so. A reader arriving with "just tell me where to start" intent gets a short answer there; a reader who wants to argue with us gets the full score-sorted table two scrolls down. Both are on the same page, and the featured pick carries its real score in both places.

Everything on the featured surfaces also appears in the rankings at the position its score earned. A commercial placement has never moved a row in the objective table.

The floor, and exactly who it lets in

Selection runs on the live roster, so this section changes when the data does. Against today's approvals and scores, the rule produces the lists below.

The four guardrails that keep this honest

A commercial concession without constraints is just pay-for-placement with better manners. These four are the constraints, and each one is checkable from the rendered page.

1. 1. The label says Top Pick, never number one

   A featured partner is called "Our Top Pick" or "Featured Partner". The words "#1", "best" and "highest-scored" are reserved for whoever actually leads on score, and the featured surfaces render them only when the featured provider is the leader.

2. 2. The real score is always on screen

   The featured pick shows its own score, unrounded and unhidden, on every surface it appears. A promotional slot never hides the number that would let you argue with it.

3. 3. The actual score leader is named alongside

   Wherever a featured partner appears above a higher-scored provider, the higher-scored provider is named in the same block, with its score and a link to its review. A reader who wants the disclosure comparison gets it without leaving the card.

4. 4. The rankings table stays score-sorted

   Every objective surface, the homepage table, the wing rankings, the comparison pages, sorts strictly by score descending. Commission does not change a row. Every published total is the sum of the five recorded criterion points.

The worked example, live

The featured-pick override is currently switched on and it pins Winona to the Top Pick slot. Winona scores 8.0/10, holds a Transparency Grade B, is priced at $54 per 28 days, and pays us a commission on a qualifying signup.

What the arrangement costs us is worth stating: the top slot on the women's wing rankings points at a provider we earn nothing from, and readers who follow the merit answer generate no revenue at all. That is the trade, and it holds because the rankings are the only asset this site has.

Every partner, every score and every price is listed on the featured partners page.

What would remove a partner

• A score that drops below 7.0 on re-verification. Eligibility is recomputed from the score at build time, so a drop takes the featured slot away without anyone having to remember.
• A corroborated billing-surprise pattern or an unanswered regulatory complaint, both of which also cap the Transparency Grade regardless of what the provider discloses.
• A published claim we can no longer verify. When a price stops being checkable, the fact drops to a reported label and the score moves with it.

The scoring rubric and the correction policy live in the editorial policy. The commercial relationships are in the affiliate disclosure. The score-sorted rankings are on the women's wing homepage and at the men's TRT rankings.