How we research and write.

Fashionaholic is an independent, self-funded project. It is not a retailer, and it is not owned or sponsored by a fashion brand. The same small team that builds the free wardrobe calculators writes and reviews the guides, comparisons, and analysis published here.

Where a piece reflects a named contributor's own expertise, it carries their name and links to their own work, so you can check their track record rather than take ours on trust. Our beauty coverage is contributed by Viktoria of vioda.makeup, a working makeup artist. Everything else is published under a collective byline — the TRY Editorial Team — rather than an invented individual persona. We do not create fictional authors or attach fabricated credentials to our writing.

Pieces under /reports are qualitative industry analysis. They are written from public reporting, platform and retailer commentary, and patterns we observe in search behaviour. They are not primary market research: we do not run consumer panels, and we do not commission surveys.

Where a specific figure appears in a report, the source is named inline and linked. If a claim is not attributed, treat it as our editorial reading of the market rather than a measured statistic. We would rather publish a clearly-labelled judgement than a number that looks precise and is not.

Every tool on this site is deterministic and runs entirely in your browser. There is no model guessing behind them, no account required, and nothing is uploaded. The formula, thresholds, and assumptions behind each one are written out on that tool's own page so you can check our arithmetic or disagree with our benchmarks.

Cost per wear, for example, is simply price divided by wears, benchmarked against a $3-per-wear reference point that we state openly rather than hiding in the result.

We do not accept paid placements, sponsored entries in roundups, or payment for a favourable mention. Where we compare TRY to other wardrobe apps, we say plainly what those apps do better.

TRY is a paid subscription and PRETTY is a paid tool, so we have an obvious commercial interest. The honest mitigation is disclosure rather than a claim of neutrality: assume we are biased toward our own products, and weigh our comparisons accordingly.

If something here is wrong, we want to fix it rather than defend it. Substantive corrections are made in place and the page's updated date is changed.

In August 2026 we audited our own back catalogue and removed a large number of unsourced statistics that had been presented with more precision than our research supported, along with the pages that were built mostly around them. That audit is the reason some older report URLs now redirect.