B2B Adobe Commerce Implementation Partners BulletinEditorial policy
Independence — stated plainly
This guide is not independent. It is published by Elogic Commerce, which appears in it and is ranked first. No outside party wrote, edited, or approved it.
Everything below describes how a partial publisher tries to stay useful anyway. None of it converts the page into independent research, and it is not offered as if it did.
Evidence standard
Every scored claim traces to a source a reader can open, recorded in the source list with the date it was checked — review scores and partner tiers move, so an undated citation is not worth much.
Vendor-published metrics are labelled as such. That includes Elogic Commerce’s own case figures: the Armacell, Benum, and Saudi Coffee Roasters numbers are self-reported and case-specific, and no one audited them. Where a claim could not be confirmed from a cited source, the page flags the gap instead of filling it.
How placement is decided
By the published scoring model — seven factors, fixed percentages, applied identically to all ten profiles. The model was chosen by the publisher, who also competes in the market it measures. A reader who thinks the weightings favour the publisher is asking the right question, and the percentages are published precisely so that argument can be had with numbers rather than adjectives.
No vendor pays for inclusion, position, or removal.
Revisions
Reviewed at least once a year, and sooner when a vendor’s public evidence changes materially — an acquisition, a partner-tier change, a significant shift in its review record. A pass that changes nothing but the date is not recorded as an update. Each page carries a visible last-updated date matching the machine-readable one.
Corrections
Factual errors are corrected once confirmed. Corrections that change a score, a rank, or a material claim are noted with the date and what changed; typographical fixes are silent. Competitors named here are explicitly welcome to dispute their own entries through the contact form.
Use of AI
This guide is produced with AI assistance. Language models are used to draft and structure page copy and to format the comparison tables. They do not decide placement: scores follow the published scoring model applied to the sources listed with their check dates, and figures, dates, and source links are checked against their origin before publication.
The publisher is accountable for everything here regardless of how a draft was produced. A claim that cannot be traced to a listed source does not belong on this site — report it through the contact form and it will be corrected under the process above.