The wording is what draws scrutiny, not the number.
Small brands lose sleep over claims, and they are right to. The wording around a number is what draws scrutiny, not the number itself. So the same read that fills your dashboard comes with guidance on how to phrase it: what is safe to say as written, what needs softening first, and what belongs in a higher tier of evidence entirely. You get the proof and the guardrails in the same place.
The Claims Packet, itemized.
Every claim your data supports, in the exact wording you may publish, with the disclosure that rides next to it and the file that defends it. Publication is your call, at the end, not a decision you make when you sign.
- The claim bank. Every claim the data supports. Exact wording, the figure, the sample size, the timepoint. Nothing to guess at.
- The disclosure set. Long form and short form, with the rules for which goes on a product page, an email, a retail one-sheet, a paid ad.
- The alteration rules. What you may change (type, color, placement) and what voids the substantiation (changing the figure, rewording the sentence, shrinking the disclosure).
- The do-not-say list. Written for your category and your claim, not a generic banned list.
- The full report. Every outcome, including the ones that did not move.
- The substantiation file. Retained, and it is the thing that answers a challenge.
You always get the packet. It contains every claim the data supports. This is a consumer perception study: it records what your customers reported about their own experience, measured against their own starting point. It is not a controlled clinical trial, and we say so before you have to.
Your claims in your voice, the measurement in ours.
Everything you publish from your results is written in two voices that never blur. Your product claims stay in your voice, attributed to you, your responsibility, the way they are today. The measurement stays in ours: observed, not promised, carried with a confidence level and the limits stated plainly. Keeping the two apart is what lets the measurement read as honest evidence rather than as marketing you wrote about yourself, and it is what keeps you on the right side of the line.
"Made for people who want to feel the difference, our formula is the nightly ritual our customers come back to."
In a measured group of customers, most reported a meaningful change against their own starting point within a few weeks.
Illustrative, how the two voices sit together on a product page or affiliate script.
Same number, two very different levels of risk.
The dashboard gives you an observation. We help you turn it into a statement you can publish. A raw read might show that most of your customers reported a meaningful change against their own baseline within a few weeks. Said carelessly, that becomes a promise about the next buyer, the kind of claim that needs a controlled study behind it. Said well, it becomes an honest, observed statement. We make sure you are always on the safe side of that difference.
Said carelessly
Example"Our formula delivers a meaningful change within a few weeks."
Said well
Example"In a measured group of our customers, most reported a meaningful change against their own starting point within a few weeks."
A lot of useful ground, with one clear line.
Experience and perception
How your customers responded and what they reported feeling. That covers a lot of useful ground:
- Educational content
- Creator and affiliate scripts grounded in real customer experience
- Retention and onboarding messaging
- A documented record you own
Study-grade claims
The strongest claims, the kind that require separating your product's effect from everything else, need a controlled study. We tell you which side of that line any given claim falls on, before you publish it, not after.
The line that keeps an honest claim honest.
Every published result carries a short, plain disclosure: that the data is self-reported, reflects within-person change, and is not a controlled clinical trial. It is not fine print to hide. It is the line that keeps an honest claim honest. If your customers repeat a result, they note that the measurement was commissioned by you, which is what keeps an "independently measured" mention truthful.
Three reasons, built into the structure.
A ten-year-old contract research house rarely offers any of them.
The analysis plan is locked and date-stamped before anyone enrolls.
Nobody goes hunting for the flattering timepoint afterward, because the timepoint was fixed before there was data to look at.
The complete distribution goes in the report.
Including the customers it did not move. We will show you the number we did not dress up.
Our pricing is published, and our fee does not move with your result.
We are paid the same whether your responder rate comes back strong or weak, and we take no percentage of your sales, ever.
A measurement vendor paid to produce a helpful number produces a number worth exactly what a skeptical retailer thinks it is worth. Ours is not built that way, and that is not a philosophy. It is the structure.
See a read, and the claim it supports.
Start with a responder snapshot, and we will show you the number and the way to say it, side by side.