Independence
Rankings, verdicts, and recommendations are set by the published methodology. Providers cannot buy a higher rank, a stronger verdict, or exclusion of competing evidence.
Editorial Policy
Standards for coverage, sourcing, and corrections
VidScore publishes practical guidance for people choosing AI video models. This page explains the editorial rules behind that work and the line between evidence, interpretation, and uncertainty.
Sourcing
We prefer first-party documentation, directly usable provider pricing, and public benchmark tracks. When sourcing is thin, we reduce confidence instead of overstating certainty.
Scope
VidScore focuses on decision support for AI video buyers and builders: pricing, availability, quality evidence, and workflow fit. We do not treat marketing launches as verified capability by default.
Corrections
AI model pricing and availability move quickly. Our corrections policy is built around speed with evidence, not speed without it.
Material pricing or availability errors should be corrected as soon as they are confirmed.
Updated pages should carry a refreshed timestamp so readers can see when the guidance changed.
If evidence is unresolved, we would rather note uncertainty than replace one guess with another.
Disclosures
If commercial relationships, sponsorships, or affiliate programs are introduced, they should be disclosed clearly and should not alter the methodology, ranking weights, or individual verdicts.
What we publish
We publish comparisons, pricing guides, use-case recommendations, and benchmark summaries when there is enough evidence to help a reader make a better decision than they would from product pages alone.
Read the scoring rules next
The editorial policy explains how we publish. The methodology page explains how numbers, trust tiers, and ranking logic are applied on the site.