Why More SaaS Companies Are Publishing Real User Ratings Separately From Editorial Scores
Software review sites are increasingly distinguishing staff editorial ratings from genuine, user-submitted aggregate ratings — a response to growing scrutiny of inflated review scores.
A single "4.8 out of 5" rating on a software review page has historically conflated two very different things: a reviewer's professional assessment, and an actual statistical aggregate of real customers' experiences. Treating these as interchangeable — or worse, presenting an editorial score using schema.org markup meant for genuine review aggregates — has drawn increasing scrutiny from search engines and AI answer systems alike.
The fix is straightforward in principle: label editorial scores as editorial, and only mark up genuine aggregate ratings as aggregates, with an honest count reflecting how many real ratings actually exist. We've applied this distinction across our own tool pages — see any tool's "at a glance" specs table for both figures presented separately.
Frequently asked questions
- When was this article about "Why More SaaS Companies Are Publishing Real User Ratings Separately From Editorial Scores" published?
- This article was published on June 24, 2026. Kreemhunt dates every article so you can judge how current the information is.
- Where can I read a full review of Notion?
- Kreemhunt maintains a full, regularly updated review of Notion covering pricing, pros and cons, and alternatives in the Productivity category.
- Is this news article fact-checked?
- Yes. Kreemhunt's editorial team writes and reviews every article before publication. Where we report on claims made elsewhere, the original source is linked directly in the article.