How we research and review providers
Our goal is simple: help founders understand which provider fits their situation, what it really costs, and what trade-offs matter before they choose.
We review for a specific user: people running Estonian companies
Bestfit focuses on services and software that matter when forming, operating and scaling an Estonian company. That includes company formation, banking and fintech, accounting, tax and VAT, payroll and EOR, legal services and business software.
We do not try to list every company in a market. A provider enters the research scope when its service is relevant to our audience, available to the target customer, and comparable on factors that can be checked.
Being included in a comparison means the provider is relevant enough to research; it does not mean we recommend it.
We start with the decision the reader actually needs to make
A comparison is useful only when providers are assessed against the same customer problem. We therefore define the use case first and only then decide which providers and criteria belong in the comparison.
Who is choosing, what problem are they solving and which providers are genuinely relevant?
We document pricing, scope, eligibility, features, limitations and important service conditions.
Important claims are checked against first-party sources, official sources and practical experience where available.
We avoid rewarding a provider merely because its marketing page contains more features or broader claims.
We actively look for restrictions, extra fees, weak fit, operational friction and situations where another option is better.
Prices, products and rules change, so time-sensitive information is reviewed again.
Our score is editorial, not commercial
Where a Reviewer Score is shown, it uses a 100-point framework. The weights reflect the factors that usually matter when a founder or company is choosing a provider.
Affiliate commissions, referral fees, advertising arrangements and common ownership contribute zero points to the Reviewer Score.
We prefer evidence that can be checked
Not all information has equal weight. For factual claims, we prioritise sources that are direct, current and verifiable.
Provider pricing, terms, product documentation, official registers and regulator or government information.
Real workflows and professional experience can help explain how a service works beyond its marketing copy.
Reviews and community discussions can reveal recurring themes, but subjective claims are not treated as verified facts.
We care about true expected cost
A headline price can be misleading if the typical customer also needs mandatory add-ons, transaction fees, extra users or a higher plan. Where possible, our comparisons explain the expected cost rather than repeating only the lowest advertised price.
A commercial relationship cannot buy the top position
Bestfit may earn affiliate commissions, referral fees or other compensation from some providers. These relationships can help fund research and keep the site free to use, but they are kept separate from editorial scoring.
A non-paying provider can rank first when the evidence supports it. A commercial partner can rank lower, be described as a poor fit for a particular user, or be excluded from a recommendation entirely.
Bestfit is operated by Saldo Accounting OÜ. Where common ownership or another material relationship is relevant, we disclose it.
“Last checked” tells you when important comparison data was verified
Provider information changes. Pricing, product scope, eligibility, partner terms and regulatory requirements may all become outdated.
Where appropriate, Bestfit displays a “Last checked” date. It indicates when important comparison information was most recently reviewed, not that every sentence on the page changed on that date.
If we identify a material factual error, we correct it. Providers and readers can also flag information that appears outdated or inaccurate.
No comparison can replace your own circumstances
Bestfit is designed to narrow the field and make trade-offs easier to understand. It is not personal legal, tax, accounting or investment advice.
Provider suitability can depend on ownership structure, residency, transaction flows, regulated activity, country exposure, business model and other factors that a general comparison cannot fully capture.
Found something that has changed?
Send corrections or supporting information to info@saldo.ee. We would rather fix a material error than leave outdated information online.