This page explains how we research, write and correct our work. If you’re citing Vorexa, evaluating our reporting, or just curious how it gets made, this is for you.
How we choose what to cover
We prioritise topics where existing coverage is thin, promotional, or contradicts itself. If three trade publications are already saying the same thing in the same way, we’re probably not going to be the fourth.
How we source
Primary sources first: direct data, first-party surveys, filings, interviews, technical documentation. We rely on secondary sources only when primary data doesn’t exist for a given question, and we say so explicitly when we do.
Independence
Nobody who appears in, or is materially affected by, a piece of Vorexa research sees it before publication, and nobody pays for a favourable outcome. Anyone can request a correction after publication, through the same channel and with the same scrutiny as any other reader.
Corrections
When we get something wrong, we fix it and note what changed and when at the bottom of the piece. We don’t quietly edit mistakes out of the archive.
Review process
[Every report is read by at least one other person on the team before it’s published, and any claim involving numbers is checked against its original source before it goes out.]
Questions about our methodology on a specific piece? Contact us.