About toolweight

  • Weighted comparisons of developer infrastructure, ranked on the things your project needs.
  • Not the things a vendor wants measured.
  • No money changes hands, because credibility is the only asset a comparison site has.
Comparisons
12
Tools tracked
156
Money changing hands
$0
Written from
Australia

Why it exists

  • Search “best email sending API” and page one is affiliate content.
  • The ordering is a payout table, not a ranking.
  • The top tool’s “cons” are compliments in disguise.
  • Most of it is disclosed in grey six-point type, and still worthless.
  • The ordering you needed to trust is the exact thing that was sold.

Credibility is the moat

  • A comparison site’s only asset is whether a senior engineer believes it.
  • Expensive to build, trivial to destroy, impossible to buy back.
  • So independence is the product, not a phase.
  • No house tool, no partner tier, no mechanism to move a row for a cheque.

How that shows up in the build

PrincipleWhat it means
No affiliate linksEvery outbound vendor link is plain. No tracking, no redirect hop, no commission.
No sponsored placementRoster membership is an editorial call, argued in public issues. Nothing is paid in.
No advertisingSo no reason to block AI crawlers. robots.txt welcomes them, because being cited is the distribution.
No accounts or email gateNothing to sign up for. Every page, the dataset and the API are open and ask nothing of you.
No tracking analyticsNothing to sell, so no audience to sell.
Every value citedSource URL, date and confidence on every cell, with the stale ones listed in public.

What it costs, and who pays

  • Nothing, and me.
  • A static site built from a git repo: hosting is rounding error, research is time.
  • No funding, no company, no revenue model in a drawer.
  • If that changes it will be said here first, never ads or affiliate money.
  • The dataset is CC BY 4.0, with a JSON API, an MCP server and a markdown twin of every page.
  • Take the numbers, feed them to an agent, build something better.
  • Attribution is the only condition.

Where it is written from

  • Australia, so Sydney availability, AUD pricing and .au support are first-class fields, not footnotes.
  • Which is why Australian SMS providers get their own category.
  • An awkward market the vendor docs are evasive about, so someone should write the numbers down.

Getting it wrong

  • This site will contain errors: prices move the week after they are verified.
  • Some facts were read off an error message at eleven at night.
  • The fix is not pretending otherwise, it is making every claim checkable.
  • Read the methodology, check the source on any cell that matters, and if it is wrong, say so.
  • Corrections come before new content, and vendors use the same public queue as everyone else.

How it works · Methodology · Sources & staleness · Attribution & licensing