Guest messagingTurnoversProperty operationsCompliance
Methodology

How we test software, and what has to happen before we recommend it

This page exists so nobody has to take "we're honest" on faith. Here's exactly what a system goes through before it earns a rating on this site - and what stage each one is at right now.

Four stages, in order - nothing skips ahead

1. Listed

The tool is on our radar

It solves a real problem for self-managing hosts and is worth understanding, even before we've used it ourselves.

2. Notes published

We've documented what it does

A plain, feature-by-feature breakdown based on public documentation and, where possible, a trial account. No verdict, no star rating, no "best for" claim yet.

3. In testing

We're using it against a real workflow

Set up against an actual booking calendar, over a real turnover cycle - not a five-minute demo click-through.

4. Rated & recommended

A verdict is published

Only at this stage does a page carry a recommendation, and only then does an affiliate link appear next to it - clearly marked as one.

Right now, every system on the Systems page is at stage 1 or 2. None have reached stage 4 yet. The page for each one says which stage it's at, so you're never guessing.

What we actually judge, once testing starts

Setup time

How long from signing up to a working, correctly-synced calendar - for someone doing it themselves, not a developer.

Fit for a small operation

Whether the tool is actually built for 1–5 properties, or whether it's a scaled-down version of software meant for portfolios of 50+.

Pricing transparency

Whether the real cost is clear upfront, or only visible after a sales call - and what it actually costs at the size most of our readers operate at.

Support when something breaks

Response time and quality when a sync fails or a double-booking risk shows up - tested with a real support ticket, not assumed.

Independence

We don't accept payment in exchange for a rating, a ranking position, or favourable coverage. Where a link on this site is an affiliate link, it's disclosed next to the link itself, not just in a footer note. A commission being available on a tool never moves it up a ranking - the criteria above decide that, and only once testing is actually complete.

Why publish this before we've rated anything

Because the alternative - staying quiet until we have opinions to share - leaves you with no way to check our work. Publishing the process first means you can hold us to it once the verdicts do arrive.