Our Research Methodology
This page documents exactly how we build comparison tables, verify figures, and decide what counts as a reliable source. It exists so you don't have to take our accuracy on faith.
Primary sources we use
| Data type | Primary source |
|---|---|
| Fund expense ratios & holdings | Fund prospectus / issuer fact sheet (Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, State Street, iShares) |
| Historical fund performance | SEC EDGAR filings and issuer-published NAV history |
| Retirement account contribution limits | IRS.gov official publications and revenue procedures |
| Inflation, interest rates, market indices | Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED), Bureau of Labor Statistics |
| Broker account features & fees | Broker's own published fee schedule and account agreement |
How comparison tables are built
Comparison data lives in a structured dataset, not hand-typed per article. When we update a figure — say, an expense ratio change — it updates everywhere that figure appears (the comparison article, the relevant category hub, and any calculator that uses it as a default). This is a deliberate design choice: hand-typed figures drift out of date silently, and we don't want stale numbers presented as current.
What we exclude
We exclude: figures without an identifiable primary source; performance claims from marketing material that don't match the underlying prospectus; and any statistic we can't independently verify within a reasonable time. When we can't verify something, we either omit the claim or state clearly that it's an estimate and why.
Update cadence
| Data category | Refresh frequency |
|---|---|
| Expense ratios & fund fees | Quarterly |
| IRS contribution limits | Annually (January), or on IRS announcement |
| Broker fee schedules | Quarterly, or on announced change |
| Historical return figures | Annually |
Calculator methodology
Our calculators use standard, published financial formulas (compound interest, amortized fee drag over time, marginal tax-bracket comparisons for Roth vs. Traditional accounts). Each calculator page documents its formula and assumptions directly beneath the tool — nothing is a "black box." Calculators are educational estimates, not projections of actual future performance, which can't be predicted.
Email corrections@wealthguides.online — see our corrections process.
A worked example of the process
To make this concrete: when we published our comparison of major brokerage providers, the process looked like this. First, we pulled each provider's current fee schedule and account-minimum disclosures directly from their own published documentation, not from a comparison aggregator. Second, we noted the exact date each figure was retrieved, since these pages can change without notice. Third, a second pass compared our draft's stated figures against those same source pages again, immediately before publication, to catch any provider update that happened during drafting. Fourth, we set a quarterly reminder to repeat the check. This is not a special process reserved for one article — it's the default for anything involving a specific, checkable number.
What we do when sources disagree
Primary sources occasionally conflict — a provider's marketing page states one figure while its formal fee schedule states another, for instance. In that situation, we default to the more formal, legally binding document (a prospectus or fee schedule over a marketing page) and note the discrepancy if it's material enough to matter to a reader's decision. We don't average conflicting figures or guess; if we can't resolve a conflict confidently, we say so explicitly in the article rather than presenting a single number as more certain than it is.