Editorial policy

Whichapp is an independent comparison site for Employer of Record (EOR), global payroll, and contractor management providers. We do not sell payroll or EOR services. We review, compare, and advise.

This page sets out how we decide what to cover, how we rate providers, and how we handle the commercial realities of running an editorial site in a category where every major vendor runs a partner programme.

Who we write for

Our reader is a senior People Operations, Global Payroll, or HR leader making a shortlist or procurement decision. They know the category. They do not need definitions of what an EOR is.

They need trade-offs, specifics, and enough substance to defend a recommendation internally to Finance, Legal, or the board.

Every page is written to that brief. If an article reads like generic SaaS marketing copy, it is failing its purpose and we rewrite it.

What we cover

We cover three provider categories:

  • Employer of Record (EOR): providers that hire full-time employees on your behalf in countries where you have no legal entity.
  • Global payroll: providers that run payroll across multiple countries through owned entities, partners, or aggregator platforms.
  • Contractor management: platforms that handle contracts, compliance classification, and payouts for independent contractors.

Within those three, we cover the providers readers are actually shortlisting.

That includes the global leaders (Deel, Remote, Rippling, Multiplier, Oyster, Papaya, Velocity Global, and the rest of the top tier), plus selective mid-market and regional providers when they have a credible claim on a specific use case or geography.

We will not cover a provider purely because they pay the highest commission. We will add a provider to the list when at least one of our readers is likely to shortlist them.

How we rate providers

Every review is built around five assessment dimensions. We score narratively, not numerically, because a star score hides more than it reveals in this category.

  1. Entity footprint and coverage: which countries the provider serves through owned entities versus partners, and what that means for speed, compliance ownership, and cost.
  2. Compliance depth: how the provider handles local employment law, tax, statutory benefits, and classification risk. This matters most in high-risk jurisdictions like the UK (IR35), Germany, France, Brazil, and India.
  3. Pricing and contract terms: transparent pricing or not, fee structure, minimum commitments, volume discounts, and what “enterprise pricing” actually buys.
  4. Platform quality: the software itself: self-serve quality, reporting, integrations with HRIS and payroll systems, API depth, and how the product feels for a People Ops team using it daily.
  5. Support and escalation: named CSM or pooled queue, in-region support, response SLAs, and what happens when a payroll or compliance issue goes wrong on day 3 of a new hire.

Every review states each dimension’s strength and its limitation. We do not publish reviews where a provider wins on every dimension, because no provider does.

Our independence and how we make money

We earn affiliate commissions when readers click through to a provider from our site and sign up.

Those links are marked with rel="sponsored" as required by Google and the FTC, and are disclosed on every page where they appear.

Affiliate commissions have no influence on editorial content, rankings, or what we say about a provider. To keep that honest, we follow these rules:

  • Editorial is written before commercial placement. The review is drafted, reviewed, and quality-gated before any CTA or commercial block is added.
  • Every provider is assessed on the same rubric. A provider with no affiliate programme is rated on the same five dimensions as a provider that pays commission.
  • We name limitations. A review that only names strengths is a marketing page, not a review. Every Whichapp review includes specific, named limitations.
  • We correct mistakes publicly. If we get a factual detail wrong (a coverage claim, a pricing figure, a product capability), we update the page and note the correction date.

If any of that ever appears to slip, please tell us. Email: editorial@whichapp.site.

How we verify claims

Every load-bearing claim on Whichapp falls into one of three categories:

  • Verified: a specific, named source, a regulatory citation, or a statement directly attributable to a provider’s own documentation or pricing page.
  • Editorial judgement: our assessment, clearly labelled as such. Read as “in our view” rather than as a verified fact.
  • Research gap: where we do not have enough signal to make a call, we say so rather than hedging.

We do not hedge in lieu of evidence. A sentence like “Provider X is often considered to have strong coverage in Asia” with no source behind it is not neutrality. It is filler. We remove it.

Update cadence

Every live page carries a last reviewed date. We target a full review of each active provider page at least every six months, or sooner when:

  • a provider changes its pricing or business model,
  • a regulatory change affects its product (for example, IR35 or the EU pay transparency directive),
  • we receive a credible reader correction or a provider-side clarification.

Older pages are not automatically accurate because they are on the site. If a date is more than six months old and the page is covering a moving target, treat it as due for a check.

Who writes Whichapp

Whichapp is published by a small editorial team with backgrounds in People Operations, global payroll, and category-specialist B2B publishing.

Named author bios are live across all review, comparison, and country guide pages.

Until then, every page is produced against a shared editorial operating system that covers voice, evidence standards, comparison rules, structure, and publish gates. Every article passes a 17-check pre-publish gate and an 18-check quality gate before going live.

That is what is accountable for quality today.

Corrections and feedback

If you find an error, a stale claim, or a point of view you disagree with, we want to hear about it. Email editorial@whichapp.site with the page URL and what you believe needs correcting.

We read every email. We respond to factual corrections within five working days and update the page with a dated correction note where warranted.