Methodology

RIKAZ’s company profiles and verification tool report facts with dates, not verdicts. This page explains how.

What a check rests on

• Regulator registers first. A licence, its number and the regulator that issued it are taken from the regulator’s own register or an official page, and the date of the check is shown.
• Company pages second. Where a company states that it is licensed, we record the claim and treat it as unconfirmed until a register shows it.
• Official warnings. A warning about a named entity is shown only when it comes from a regulator or another official body, with a link to it.

Verification statuses

Each check ends in a factual status that says what the evidence supports, together with the basis for it. Statuses include: licence confirmed in a regulator register, licence named by the company but not confirmed, official warning published, possible clone of another firm, insufficient data, unregulated according to our research, and unable to verify. A status is never a recommendation. “Unable to verify” means we could not confirm the point from the sources we checked, not that the company is unsound.

Rules we keep

• One data source per profile. The licence, fees and status shown in the header, tables and text of a profile all come from the same record, so they cannot contradict each other.
• A source and a check date for every fact. The date shown is the date we last looked at the source.
• Pros and cons, documented. We do not publish a profile that lists only strengths.
• We describe what we actually did. We say whether we relied on public documents or used the service, and we say “tested” only when we did.
• No “trusted” badges and no absolute judgements. We show the evidence and leave the conclusion to the reader.
• No accusations. We do not single out a company with a warning unless it rests on a published warning from an official body, and we link to it.

Company verification and profiles are available in Arabic at /verify/ and /companies/.