89% of consumers use online reviews when researching a product or service*.

However, consumers need to feel confident that reviews are authentic, conflicts of interest are avoided, and negative reviews aren’t removed for spurious reasons.

Trustpilot is the world’s largest review platform with over 350 million reviews. Crucially for business owners, these reviews usually appear on the first page of Google when a consumer searches for a company.

However, a new report from Grizzly Research has alleged malpractice, while also casting doubt on the authenticity of some reviews.

It’s important to note that Trustpilot strenuously denies the report’s allegations, saying in a response issued on 5 December: “The report is built on a basic misunderstanding of Trustpilot’s business model. It ignores publicly available information about our scale, policies, data, and enforcement, and makes a series of demonstrably false accusations, including:

• It is false to claim that Trustpilot creates unsolicited review profiles to sell subscriptions. Over 97% of businesses on the platform do not pay for a subscription. Consumers and businesses create profiles for free. 70% of reviews on free profiles are 5 stars.
• It is false to claim that fake reviews are managed differently for paying vs free businesses. All businesses – whether free or paid – must comply with the same guidelines and are held to the same moderation principles.
• It is false to claim that we have traded the integrity of reviews for revenue. We have c.200 people focused on ensuring trust and integrity across our platform and have removed 6.7m reviews from the platform so far this year. We have successfully brought lawsuits against bad actor businesses and review sellers.”

Helpfully, Trustpilot goes on to share data comparing reviews removed for paying and free business profiles in 2025, which were broken down as follows:

• Free business profiles (by star rating): 14% were negative, 85% were positive, and 1% were neutral.
• Paid business profiles (by star rating): 14% were negative, 84% were positive, and 2% were neutral.

Stick or twist: Should you keep using Trustpilot?

Despite these denials, Trustpilot’s share price fell by over 30% last week, wiping around £240 million from its value. The long-term damage to Trustpilot’s reputation is harder to quantify, and it leaves businesses that collect online reviews with two big questions to answer:

1. If they use Trustpilot, should they continue to do so?
2. If they use other platforms, how can they and consumers be confident they’re playing on a level field?

Let’s answer each of those now.

We’ve never recommended Trustpilot to our UK clients for three main reasons.

Firstly, we believe that Google reviews are more valuable for a business. Secondly, Trustpilot reviews don’t appear when a potential client searches for an adviser’s name, for example, John Smith. And, finally, we’ve always thought the cost was too high for most firms, with an entry price at £269 per month.

However, we do work with some firms that collect reviews on Trustpilot, and these will naturally be worried.

Right now, we don’t recommend that any advice/planning firms move away from Trustpilot or stop collecting reviews on the platform.

Authenticity checks at Google and VouchedFor

Instead of Trustpilot, we’ve always recommended that UK advisers/planners collect reviews on Google and VouchedFor.

However, as we said earlier, consumers need to be confident that reviews are authentic.  So, it’s important to understand how both Google and VouchedFor ensure reviews are as accurate as possible.

Google

Earlier this year, following pressure from the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), Google took steps to clamp down on fake reviews.

The CMA reports these steps, which also apply to other review platforms, include:

• An enhanced approach to tackling fake reviews: Google has committed to rigorous steps to detect and remove fake reviews – enabling it to rapidly identify and investigate businesses and reviewers that profit from fake reviews.
• Consequences for rogue reviewers around the world: Individuals who repeatedly post fake or misleading reviews for UK businesses (positive or negative) will have their reviews deleted and will be banned from posting new reviews, regardless of their location.
• Consequences for UK businesses: The undertakings mean that businesses found to be boosting their star ratings via fake reviews will have prominent “warning” alerts added to their Google profiles to flag to consumers that suspicious activity has been detected. This will be visible on businesses’ Google profiles, where their overall review scores are shown. Businesses will also have their review function deactivated, meaning they cannot receive any new reviews. Those firms that repeatedly engage in fake review activity will have all their reviews deleted for six months or more.
• Easier reporting: These undertakings commit Google to put in place a robust reporting function that allows consumers to easily and quickly report concerning reviews. This includes the ability to report “incentives” – i.e. a payment or reward in exchange for a positive review – which will apply regardless of whether the incentive is offered in person or online.

Sarah Cardell, Chief Executive of the CMA, is quoted as saying: “When it comes to tackling fake reviews, Google is leading the way. Left unchecked, fake reviews damage people’s trust and leave businesses who do the right thing at a disadvantage.”

“The changes we’ve secured from Google ensure robust processes are in place, so people can have confidence in reviews and make the best possible choices. They also help to create a level-playing field for fair dealing firms.”

VouchedFor

VouchedFor has always made its position very clear: “Ensuring the reviews on our public website are legitimate, genuine reviews is of utmost importance to us”.

They have a range of measures to ensure that, including:

• Reviewers must confirm they have been a client in the last five years (or have met the adviser as a prospective client for a “First Impression” review) before leaving any feedback.
• Reviewers are asked to consent to VouchedFor asking for evidence of this professional relationship if required, and a review cannot be left without that consent.
• Advisers must verify anyone who leaves feedback without being invited directly by the adviser or their firm to do so. If the review isn’t verified by the adviser, VouchedFor’s automated process kicks in to contact the client and ask for evidence of the relationship.
• VouchedFor has an automated algorithm running continuously to look for signs that might indicate a fraudulent review.
• Finally, VouchedFor also conducts spot checks by asking advisers to provide evidence of the client relationship.

VouchedFor also has clear guidance on the types of reviews they will remove:

1. When an incomplete review is left
2. A review is abusive or discriminatory
3. The reviewer isn’t recognised as a client
4. A review doesn’t pass verification checks
5. Duplicate reviews are left within a short timeframe.

And, before you ask, no, it doesn’t matter whether you pay the Verified fee or not. VouchedFor is clear on this: “No, we treat all advisers the same when it comes to removing negative reviews”.

Authenticity and transparency are everything

Online reviews are incredibly influential, helping both businesses and consumers, but only if they’re authentic and the platform is transparent.

We’re pleased to see Google taking steps to ensure both boxes are ticked, and we’ve never had any concerns about VouchedFor.

We’re here to help if you’re struggling to get reviews

89% of consumers read reviews before buying a product or service, and Yardstick clients have 178% more VouchedFor reviews and 286% more Google reviews than their peers/competitors.

That’s because we know how important they are, and the best ways to get them.

If your Google and VouchedFor review numbers aren’t as impressive as you’d like them to be, then email abi@theyardstickagency.co.uk or call 0115 8965 300 and we’ll arrange a call to explain how we can help.

*Source: Which?