Industry Analysis

The VPN Review-Site Independence Scorecard

"Independent" is the most overused word in VPN reviews — and some of the sites using it are literally owned by VPN companies. Here's a fair, criteria-based grade of who's actually independent. We graded ourselves too.

By the VPN Insider editorial desk · Analysis based on public ownership records and each site's own disclosures · References. June 2026.

A reader can't easily tell a real review from a rate card — they look identical. Both have star ratings, "we tested 30 VPNs" language, and a confident #1. The difference is structural and invisible from the page: who owns the site, how it gets paid, and whether it's willing to rank a product that pays it nothing. So we built a scorecard around those questions and applied it evenly — to the big affiliate players, to our closest competitor, and to ourselves.

The five questions that actually matter

We grade each site on five yes/no criteria. None of them is about how slick the site looks — they're about incentive structure, which is what survives contact with a sales quarter.

  1. Independent ownership — is the site free of ownership by any VPN it reviews?
  2. Clear affiliate disclosure — does it plainly say it earns commissions, per FTC guidance?2
  3. Ranks non-paying VPNs fairly — will it place a no-commission provider (like Mullvad) at or near the top on merit?
  4. Transparent, checkable methodology — can you see how scores are produced, with sources?
  5. Commission separated from ranking — is payout data structurally walled off from the scores?

The scorecard

Site / typeIndep. ownerDiscloses affiliateRanks non-payers fairlyOpen methodGrade
vpnMentor / WizCase
owned by Kape, a VPN holding co.
NoPartialNoPartialF
Typical "Top 10 VPN" SEO sites
commission-ranked listicles
VariesPartialNoNoD–
Independent, affiliate-funded reviewers
transparent, commission-funded
YesYesYesYesB+
Subscription-funded press
e.g. Wirecutter model
YesYesYesPartialA–
VPN Insider (us)
independent, commission-firewalled
YesYesYesYesA–

Grades reflect incentive structure, not content quality on any given day. A conflicted site can still publish accurate facts; the grade measures how much the business model pulls against the reader.

The hard fail: when the reviewer owns the product

The clearest conflict in the industry isn't subtle. Kape Technologies — which owns ExpressVPN, CyberGhost and Private Internet Access — also bought Webselenese, the company behind the review sites vpnMentor and WizCase, in 2021 for roughly US$149 million.1 That means a VPN holding company owns "independent" sites that review VPNs, including its own. After the acquisition, those sites' rankings favored Kape-owned brands. No methodology disclosure can fix that incentive; the reviewer and the reviewed are the same balance sheet. This is the single most important thing to know about VPN reviews, and it's why we devote a whole page to who owns what.

The honest middle: affiliate-funded but transparent

Most of the better sites are genuinely independent of VPN ownership and openly disclose that they earn affiliate commissions. The strongest of them publish a written methodology, and some even rank a no-commission provider like Mullvad near the top despite earning nothing from it — a good-faith setup we grade accordingly. The structural caveat we'd flag fairly applies across the board: headline "top picks" still tend to link out through affiliate URLs, and the highest-paying brands have a way of surfacing near the top. Transparent disclosure reduces the conflict; it doesn't erase the gravitational pull of which links pay. "No pay-to-play" is a claim worth respecting and worth verifying — the difference between disclosing commissions and ranking independently of them is the whole game.

Where we put ourselves — and our own conflict

It would be dishonest to grade everyone else and exempt ourselves, so: VPN Insider is affiliate-funded too. We earn a commission if you subscribe through some of our links. The difference we've built the whole site around is a commission firewall — payout data is kept structurally separate from scoring, our rankings are driven by real-user sentiment we can't monetize, and the VPN we rank #1, Mullvad, pays us exactly nothing. We give ourselves an A–, not an A, for the same reason we cap every affiliate-funded site: as long as any link earns a commission, the only honest claim is "walled off," not "immune." We'd rather show you the wall than pretend there's no money.

The test that cuts through everything

Find the highest-rated VPN that pays no commissions (Mullvad is the usual litmus). If a site ranks it at or near the top, the site can probably afford to be honest. If that VPN is missing or buried under brands with big payouts, you're reading a rate card with a star rating on it.

How to grade any site yourself in 60 seconds

You don't need our scorecard — you can run the test on any review site you land on. Check three things: Who owns it? (search the site name plus "owned by" — if a VPN company appears, stop.) How does it get paid? (look for an affiliate disclosure; no disclosure is itself a red flag.) And where's Mullvad? (the no-commission control case). Those three questions will tell you more than any "we tested 47 VPNs" headline.

References

  1. CyberInsider, "VPN review websites owned by VPN companies" (Kape / Webselenese / vpnMentor / WizCase, 2021). cyberinsider.com
  2. U.S. Federal Trade Commission, "Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers" / affiliate disclosure guidance. ftc.gov
Independent · affiliate-funded · rankings not for sale. This page is editorial opinion and analysis based on publicly available ownership records and each site's own published disclosures, offered as fair commentary. We name our own affiliate funding and grade ourselves by the same criteria. Other sites are welcome to a right of reply.

VPNInsider.org · Industry Analysis · updated monthly · June 2026.