The whole model in one sentence: booster pays for this site, and this site sends
readers to booster — that link is the entire business, and it's why you should read our
rankings with the same healthy skepticism you'd bring to any vendor's comparison page.
What we ask to be judged on is whether the facts hold up.
What we earn, item by item
- booster referrals: when you click "See how booster works" and become a booster program, booster benefits. That is the site's purpose and its only revenue mechanism.
- Competitor links: nothing. No affiliate relationships, no referral fees, no sponsored slots. The "not a partner — we earn nothing from this link" notes are literal.
- Paid placement: doesn't exist. No platform can pay to appear, move up, or soften its cons. There is nothing to buy.
- Ads: none.
Why we built it this way
Every major platform in this market publishes comparison content that ranks itself first
— on its own blog, where the self-interest is obvious from the URL. We chose a separate
site with a louder disclosure instead, because the useful assets this market is missing
— a maintained all-in fee table, a
true-cost calculator, reviews that print their sources —
deserve better than a corporate blog, and because we think being beatable on the facts
is a stronger position than being unfindable on the ownership.
What would change your mind about us — and what we do about it
- If a fee figure is wrong, the corrections policy fixes and logs it publicly.
- If booster stops deserving #1 on the published rubric, the honest options are to fix the product or change the ranking — the rubric's weights are public either way.
- If you'd rather get this information from a party with no stake at all: your state athletic association and the NFHS publish vendor-neutral fundraising guidance, and we'd genuinely rather you read them too than trust us blind.
See what we're selling →