Three principles
Everything in our method follows from three commitments that we apply even when they make a page less compelling.
- Normalise before comparing. Two products are only comparable once liability and settlement are established.
- Describe structure, not values. Structures are stable; specific numbers are not.
- Never compress into a score. A single rating hides the trade-off the reader actually needs to see.
The five dimensions we normalise on
Every card page and comparison uses these, in this order.
| Dimension | Question it answers |
|---|---|
| Liability | Who is legally responsible for the balance? |
| Underwriting | What inputs determine capacity, and how often are they reassessed? |
| Settlement | Is the balance paid in full each cycle, or may it revolve? |
| Controls | What is enforced at authorisation versus reported afterwards? |
| Records | What documentation and data are produced, and how do they reach the ledger? |
Why we do not score
A score is a weighting decision presented as a measurement. Whoever chooses the weights decides the outcome, and the reader cannot see the choice — which is precisely why scoring is so common in affiliate-funded comparison content.
Instead we lay out the dimensions and let readers apply their own weights. A company that cannot accept a personal guarantee has a completely different answer from one that can, and no single score can serve both.
- Scores hide the weighting that produced them.
- They imply precision that the underlying data does not support.
- They invite commercial pressure to adjust the weighting.
- They discourage readers from thinking about their own constraints.
How pages are structured
Card reference pages follow a fixed sequence so that two pages can be read side by side without the structure getting in the way: overview, card type, corporate spending, formats, controls, limits and eligibility, expense capture, related products, questions and sources.
Guides are structured around a process rather than a product, and always state where a rule is jurisdiction-specific.
The limits of this method
Being clear about what a method cannot do is part of using it honestly.
- We cannot tell you whether a specific company will be approved for anything.
- We cannot report current pricing, limits or terms — those come from the provider.
- We do not assess service quality, support responsiveness or reliability.
- We do not evaluate financial strength or counterparty risk.
- We describe general patterns, which will not fit every company.
Frequently asked questions
Because it determines who bears the consequences if things go wrong, and it changes the risk profile more than any feature. Every other dimension is easier to interpret once liability is settled.
No. We document structure from primary sources rather than reviewing user experience, which would require access we do not have and would introduce exactly the relationships we avoid.
Yes, and that is the intention. The five dimensions apply to any commercial card product regardless of who issues it.
Keep reading
Sources and further reading
Every factual statement on this page is checked against primary documentation. Terms change frequently, so confirm details with the provider before acting on them.
- Visa — commercial payment solutions Network-level background on commercial card products and data levels.
- Mastercard — commercial payments Network-level background on commercial card programmes.
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — credit card resources Background on card terminology, billing cycles and consumer-vs-commercial distinctions.
- FASB Accounting Standards Codification Reference point for accrual, expense recognition and close-process statements.