A strong source is not simply a high-ranking page. For financial facts, authority, recency and direct relevance matter more than search position.
POLICY & DISCLOSURE
Sources & Research Methodology
A strong source is not simply a high-ranking page. For financial facts, authority, recency and direct relevance matter more than search position.
Decision-focusedUseful information before action.
ReviewedNamed review responsibility.
Source-backedOfficial sources for material facts.
Source hierarchy
| Tier | Preferred evidence | Typical use |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Statute, regulator, court, official government | Law, limits, licensing, rights, complaints |
| 2 | Current agreement, product data and verified operating records | Amounts, rates, terms, funding, credit inquiry |
| 3 | Verified first-party business/location records | Addresses, hours, phones, services, team, history |
| 4 | Reputable secondary research | Context and consumer education |
| Benchmark | Third-party market and ranking pages — discovery only; never authoritative evidence for legal, licensing, pricing or product claims | User terminology, usability patterns and unanswered questions |
Freshness rules
- State/legal data receives scheduled and trigger-based review.
- Rates, fees, amounts and funding claims are product-feed dependent.
- Branch NAP and hours come from the branch record, not copied directory snippets.
- Privacy/consent pages are rechecked when law or site data flow changes.
How secondary research is used
Secondary research can identify user expectations and information gaps. Legal facts, rates, branch information and product claims are independently verified from authoritative or first-party records.
Evidence visible to users
YMYL pages show primary sources, reviewer and last-review date. Historical pages distinguish archived evidence from current operations.
Sources and review record
Google — Creating helpful content: View source →
CFPB: View source →
Last reviewed: August 22, 2026. Reviewed by Natalie Randrup — Lending Compliance & Documentation Reviewer. Re-check when law, product, privacy, messaging or location operations materially change.
Customer reviews
4.6/5
879 reviews
Overall it was a good experience, just not perfect. Verification took longer than the actual application. I’d use it again if I really needed to, but I’d still compare the total cost first.
JS
Jack ScottLine of Credit
Needed a little breathing room and the online process was pretty smooth. The application itself was simple and didn’t take forever.
NE
Nicholas EvansDebt Consolidation
Overall it was a good experience, just not perfect. I had to call once and the rep was friendly and clear. Good overall, just make sure the payment dates work with your budget.
CR
Cheryl RussellCash Advance
I had an unexpected expense come up and this was simple to work through. The application itself was simple and didn’t take forever. No long story here — it did what I needed it to do.
FL
Frank LopezPayday Loans
The online part was easier than I thought it would be. Verification took longer than the actual application. One small hiccup kept it from being five stars for me.
JB
Janet BryantInstallment Loans
Read the terms, not only reviews
- Check total cost and payment dates
- Confirm state availability
- Review approval and funding conditions
- Compare alternatives before borrowing
Review the cost, terms and fit before you decide
Keep your amount, state and repayment preference in view as you continue through MVP Cash Advance.