Loading CryptoCardHQ…
Source-led crypto card research

Published editorial rules

How CryptoCardHQ researches a crypto card

This methodology applies to the .com publication from August 4, 2026. It replaces unsourced ranking language, generic “expert review” labels, and assumptions inherited from the former site.

Published and last reviewed August 4, 2026

Source hierarchy

The most specific provider document wins

A marketing homepage may be useful, but it cannot override a detailed fee schedule or cardholder agreement. When two official sources conflict, we disclose the conflict and avoid presenting the disputed fact as settled.

Level 1Binding provider documentsCardholder agreements, programme terms, fee schedules, eligibility rules, and legal disclosures.
Level 2Operational provider documentationHelp-centre articles, support documentation, product pages, and official announcements.
Level 3Direct observationsA dated test carried out by the publication, with the country, account tier, transaction path, and limitations disclosed.
Level 4Secondary referencesUsed to discover a claim, never as the only support for a material fee, eligibility, custody, or reward statement.

Editorial workflow

Six checks before publication

01

Define the user decision

A page begins with one decision, such as comparing total non-USD spending cost. Keyword variants are not separate editorial purposes.

02

Collect primary sources

We save the provider URLs that support each material claim and note the date on which they were checked.

03

Separate unlike concepts

Merchant acceptance is not onboarding availability. Points are not cash. A custody description is not a safety guarantee.

04

Calculate a realistic route

Where possible, the analysis follows funding, conversion, card spend, FX, withdrawal, paid tiers, and reward conditions.

05

Publish limitations

Missing documentation, geographic ambiguity, temporary promotions, and provider-controlled conditions remain visible in the conclusion.

06

Review index eligibility

A page enters the sitemap only if it is distinct, current, sourced, server-rendered, self-canonical, and useful without relying on another page.

Freshness and verification labels

Checked: the cited source supported the claim on the displayed review date.

Time-sensitive: a promotion, reward season, waitlist, or jurisdictional rule may expire and must be rechecked immediately before use.

Unconfirmed: no sufficiently specific primary source was available. The field is not used to decide a winner.

Stale: the source check is older than the page's permitted review window. Stale commercial pages are excluded from the sitemap until reviewed.

Ratings and “best” claims

A card is not “best” in the abstract. Any ranked result must define the user, country, spending route, comparison date, weights, and disqualifying conditions.

Rewards are discounted for paid tiers, asset risk, caps, locked balances, and conversion costs. Country acceptance is not used as proof that residents can apply.

Legacy star ratings remain outside the indexable research set while their source trail and scoring inputs are rebuilt.

What “reviewed” does and does not mean

A document review means we examined published provider materials. It is not a hands-on card test. A hands-on review must disclose the tester's jurisdiction, account tier, funding method, date range, and transactions attempted. CryptoCardHQ does not use “tested” as a generic synonym for “researched.”

Commercial relationships

Affiliate links do not create evidence

Some links may generate compensation. A provider cannot purchase a favourable conclusion, a higher score, inclusion in the indexable set, or removal of a sourced limitation.

Where a research page contains an affiliate destination, it is labelled near the link. Primary-source citations point to the supporting provider document, not an affiliate redirect.

Corrections and challenges

Email support@cryptocardhq.com with the affected URL, disputed statement, and the most specific primary source available. Material changes are reviewed against the source hierarchy and dated on the page.

Index eligibility checklist

Distinct searcher purpose
Primary sources visible
Accurate review date
Original analysis beyond a product summary
Server-rendered main content
One self-canonical URL
No robots block or noindex
Internal links from a maintained page