Golfers are right to be skeptical. The internet is full of “reviews” that are rewritten marketing copy built to earn a quick affiliate commission. When you’re spending $700 on a launch monitor or $5,000 on a full simulator build, you deserve to know exactly where a recommendation comes from. So here’s ours, plainly.
What we do today — and what we don’t
XS Golf is, right now, a research-and-synthesis publication. We do not run a physical testing lab yet. What we do instead:
- Read and cross-reference manufacturer specifications, then check them against independent data where it exists.
- Aggregate owner reviews, forum threads, and expert consensus across many sources — so a single loud opinion doesn’t skew a recommendation.
- Compare devices and gear on the specs that actually matter for the way they’re used, including space and budget constraints (our 10-10-16 framework for simulator builds).
- Track pricing so our “best value” calls reflect what you’ll actually pay.
We’re telling you this up front because the alternative — implying hands-on testing we don’t yet do — is exactly the kind of thing that earns the skepticism above. We’d rather you trust a smaller claim that’s true.
Editorial independence
Our recommendations are not for sale. We have never accepted, and will not accept, payment or free gear in exchange for a positive write-up or an inflated score. If a $3,000 launch monitor is outperformed by a $700 one, we’ll say so.
We don’t currently run affiliate links. When we add them, we may earn a commission if you buy through our links — at no cost to you — and we’ll disclose it clearly on every page where it applies. Affiliate payouts will never influence a score or a recommendation.
Where we’re headed (commitments, with dates)
These aren’t things we do today. They’re what we’re building, and we’re putting dates on them so you can hold us to it:
- Hands-on testing (target: 2026) — A structured, repeatable protocol for launch monitors and simulators, run against a known reference device, with shot counts and conditions published per review.
- A tester panel (target: 2026) — Players across handicap ranges, with PGA-professional cross-validation where we can arrange it.
- A re-test policy (target: 2026) — Revisiting flagship products at 6–12 months to catch durability issues and software changes.
- An annual transparency report (first edition: 2026) — Our brand relationships, our methods, and an honest account of where we fell short.
As each of these goes live, this page changes from “committed” to “in place” — and you’ll be able to see exactly when it happened.
Our allegiance is to the golfer
If you ever want to know how we arrived at a rating, ask. We’ll show our work.