KovmereHow it worksPricingMethodologyBuy the Check — $29
Scan compare

FanBell: this scan vs. the previous one

260905-fanbell-link-fd10 (2026-09-05 22:40:39) → 260906-retest-9b00bc (2026-09-06 08:27:48)

No change was detected: 2 of 39 questions gained the majority verdict and 3 lost it (exact McNemar p = 1.00; -3 points, question-resampling sensitivity range -13 to +8 points). This is not the same as showing that no change occurred; this scan may miss small or inconsistent movements. With 39 matched questions, this comparison has limited power and is mainly able to detect large, directionally consistent changes. Under the planning assumptions used here — 80% power, a two-sided 5% test and an assumed 20% of questions disagreeing between the two scans — a change of about 20 points has about 80% power in one primary comparison. This is not a cutoff: smaller changes can sometimes be detected, and larger changes are not guaranteed to be detected.

The verdict is an exact McNemar test on the 39 question(s) both scans asked, comparing each question's majority verdict — not the rates, and not the flip counts below. A permutation test over the graded per-question fractions gives p = 1.000. This result was adjusted with 1 per-engine comparison, for 2 comparisons total, using Benjamini–Hochberg; q = 1.000.

Not recommended nowRecommended now
Not recommended before242
Recommended before310

Only the two disagreeing cells carry information: 3 question(s) lost the majority verdict, 2 gained it — exact McNemar p = 1.000 (mid-p 0.688). Effect -3 points, question-resampling sensitivity range -13 to +8 points, over questions.

The primary comparison specified in the current method version is an exact two-sided McNemar test on matched question-level majority verdicts. α = 0.05, Benjamini–Hochberg across 2 comparison(s). Every range here is a question-resampling sensitivity range: resampling which of the frozen questions you look at moves the answer by this much. It is not a calibrated re-test range and not a market confidence interval, and the bootstrap’s own simulated coverage across the designs we ship (scripts/ci_coverage_sim.py) runs 0.90–1.00, so no 95% level is claimed for it.

A detected change does not show what caused it: your site may be unchanged while models, indexes, retrieval systems or other external conditions move. This is measurement evidence, not attribution.

By engine, each corrected in the same family (the engines are separate populations): OpenAI no change detected — 2 gained / 3 lost of 39, p = 1.000.

Recommended, before
31%
question-resampling sensitivity range 18–44% across 39 questions
Recommended, now
31%
question-resampling sensitivity range 18–44% across 39 questions
Questions that moved
3 / 2

lost / gained the majority verdict — the same 3 losses and 2 gains the test above is computed on. Descriptive instability model: this same scan pair estimates that 15% of the matched questions are unstable. Under that fitted model, about 0.7 losses and 0.7 gains are expected; this is not an independent noise baseline or a calibrated test.

The list below shows the questions that crossed the question-level majority-verdict threshold. These are the same 3 losses and 2 gains used in the McNemar table above. It describes what moved; it is not itself the test, which is why the verdict above is a paired McNemar test instead. Both rate ranges are computed over questions, not samples: exact McNemar p = 1.000: 3 question(s) lost the majority verdict and 2 gained it, which is what movement in either direction alone produces; the two question-resampling sensitivity ranges overlap, so the rates alone are not distinguishable.

Per-question majority-verdict changes (5 of 39 comparable questions)

ChangeQuestionBeforeAfter
lostWhat is the easiest way for fans to send tips or thank-you payments to creators?2/30/3
wonWhich platforms are best for selling custom services like profile reviews or content feedback to fans?0/33/3
wonHow can I collect tips from fans directly through my link-in-bio?0/32/3
lostIs Beacons a good value for creators looking to offer paid fan interactions?2/30/3
lostIs Stan Store worth it for creators focused on paid fan engagement?3/31/3

Reachability changes

No engine's reachability verdict changed.

Who gets recommended — what changed

BrandBeforeAfterChange
Buy Me a Coffee12%16%+4pt
Ko-fi26%23%-3pt
Stan Store20%18%-2pt
Gumroad2%1%-1pt
ChatBlue1%0%-1pt
Pucker1%0%-1pt
Fanvue0%1%+1pt
Liberapay1%0%-1pt
HerFans1%0%-1pt
OnlyFans0%1%+1pt
XOXO Fan1%0%-1pt
Payhip1%0%-1pt

The primary comparison specified in the current method version is an exact two-sided McNemar test on matched question-level majority verdicts. The raw recommended share is descriptive and no verdict is read from it: these two readings are described, not tested.

Source ledger diff

Newly cited (20): https://fansriver.com, https://soc.bio/best-link-in-bio-tools, https://www.everybodyugc.com, https://www.auxchord.app, https://appadvice.com/app/khloe-official-app/1458084498, https://alua.com, https://comparecamp.com/playvox-review-pricing-pros-cons-fea, https://customsflow.io, https://fourthwall.com/features/direct-messages, https://wishprime.com, https://intelinet.mx/aplicaciones, https://maddyoutdoors.mykajabi.com/blog/top-10-ugc-job-platf, https://www.dm2.chat, https://allcreatortools.com/tools/lnk_bio, https://ok.ru/video/7314703714904, https://www.embold.co/ugc, https://www.woshipm.com/ai/6337705.html, https://1link.jp/rule, https://aiinfluencerslaunch.com/fanvue-vs-onlyfans, https://alua.com/android

No longer cited (20): https://www.fansriver.com, https://www.icanlearn.com/talkio-ai, https://auxchord.app, https://everybodyugc.com, https://www.135editor.com/essences/7936.html, https://www.ddooo.com/softdown/59508.htm, https://www.linkinbio.com/tools, https://www.tecmundo.com.br/internet/266567-fanfever-conheca, https://www.linkinbio.com/blog/best-link-in-bio-tools, https://backstage.slipmat.io/t/which-dj-vj-pool-do-you-use/1, https://fanbell.link/resources/best-paid-qa-platforms-for-cr, https://getseedr.com, https://info.solerpalau.com/en/enginair, https://linqhive.com, https://my2centz.com, https://talkvialink.com, https://uxerwave.com/social-media/best-link-in-bio-tools, https://wisepim.com/features/product-families, https://wishof.me/en-us, https://www.appvizer.co.uk/customer/call-centre/dialfire

Newly naming the brand (0): none