Editorial Policy
The standards we hold ourselves to when ranking, reviewing, and comparing calorie tracking apps. Where we believe the consumer calorie-tracker review category has standards problems, we describe what we do differently.
Rankings are determined by the rubric, not by the publisher
Every ranking decision on this site is anchored to our published 100-point rubric. No app is ranked higher or lower than its rubric score warrants because of business relationship, app popularity, or marketing pressure. If we genuinely cannot reach a defensible score, we say so and decline to rank rather than guess.
Sources for factual claims
- App pricing and features — verified against the app's official website or App Store/Play Store listing within the past 30 days before publication
- Database sizes — sourced from the app publisher's public statements or third-party industry reports; we cite the source
- Nutrition science claims — sourced from peer-reviewed literature, cited by DOI where available
- Direct quotes from app makers — sourced from public statements (blog posts, podcast interviews, App Store descriptions); we link the source
- User experience claims — sourced from our own testing of the app; we do not rely on aggregated user-review data without our own verification
What we will not publish
- Accuracy claims we cannot back with test data — "99% accurate" type claims that lack methodology
- Sponsored placements — we accept no payment for ranking position or coverage
- Comparative claims using language that exceeds the data — "X is the most accurate" requires test data; "X has a higher accuracy ceiling architecturally" is what we can defensibly claim before test data publishes
- Medical advice — we publish information about apps and dietary assessment; we do not diagnose, treat, or replace clinical care. See our medical disclaimer
- Claims about competitor apps' internals we cannot verify — we will not state what's inside a closed-source app without verifiable evidence
How we handle errors
Substantive errors are corrected on the affected page with a dated note, and a record is kept on our corrections page. Typo-level fixes are made silently. The threshold for a logged correction is: did the error affect a ranking, a score, a verdict, or a factual claim about an app? If yes, it's logged.
Authorship model
Reviews are currently unbylined under "By the Calorie Rankings editors." Named contributor bios will be added as RDN/clinical credentials with verifiable sameAs chains are confirmed. We prefer unbylined to falsely-bylined.
Conflicts of interest
No editor or contributor on this site has a financial relationship with any reviewed app publisher. If this changes, the relationship will be disclosed on the affected pages and on our about page. We do not maintain affiliate accounts with any reviewed app — see our no-affiliate disclosure.
AI usage
We use AI tools for research summarization, copy editing, and content drafting. A human editor verifies and approves every factual claim before publication. Full disclosure: how we use AI.
Reader feedback
We respond to substantive correspondence within a few business days. For editorial questions, corrections, or factual disputes, email editors@calorierankings.com.