Plumb
C+

Pet product reviews

All About Cats (now Cats.com)

Cliverse Media DAO LTD

Editorial reviews Free to read Visit All About Cats (now Cats.com) ↗

Cats.com is a well-staffed editorial affiliate site with genuine veterinary oversight and a stated no-free-samples policy, but its revenue depends entirely on affiliate commissions from the same products it ranks, making full independence structurally impossible.

What it's really for Drive affiliate purchase clicks through veterinarian-branded product rankings

What our grade covers The grade on this page is about Cat food brands, dry/wet food, litter, supplements, and accessories ranked in best-of lists, not everything the site does.

Medium Scoring Confidence Mostly sourced, but a detail or two still needs a primary source, so the grade could shift slightly.

Follow the money

Cats.com earns affiliate commissions from Amazon Associates, Chewy, Nom Nom, and other pet retailers linked in its rankings. The affiliate disclosure page states the site "receives a small commission if you travel to the vendor website via affiliated links and make a purchase." This creates a structural incentive to rank purchasable products from high-commission partners prominently, regardless of whether placement is explicitly sold.

Source →
Operating since
2014 (12 years) · source
What it costs you
Free to read The reviews are free to read.
How they make money
Affiliate commissions from Amazon Associates, Chewy, Nom Nom, pet insurance providers, and other pet-product retailers embedded in ranked listicles.
What they do
Veterinarian-reviewed editorial site producing best-of listicles and in-depth reviews of cat food, litter, and pet products. Claims to buy its own test products and refuses free samples; backed by 30+ veterinary advisors who review health content.
What to watch for
Rankings are built on staff research, customer-review aggregation, and limited hands-on testing — not systematic controlled lab tests. Affiliate commissions flow from every retailer link (Amazon, Chewy, Nom Nom, etc.), so top-ranked products generate revenue when readers click through, which is an inherent financial incentive even if placement is not formally sold.
Composite score
2.70 / 5.00 → grade C+

How the grade was reached

Independence · 30% weight 2 / 5

Does the site take money from the very entities it ranks? Pay-for-placement, vendor-funded data, and affiliate commissions all pull this down. The less the ranking can be bought, the higher the score.

Evidence basis · 30% weight 3 / 5

What is the ranking actually built on? Hands-on testing scores highest, then verified first-hand reviews, then opinion or popularity surveys and self-reported figures, then pay-to-rank, which scores lowest.

Method transparency · 20% weight 3 / 5

Is the methodology published, specific, and reproducible? Can a reader see how a given rank was reached, or is it a black box?

Conflict disclosure · 10% weight 3 / 5

Are commercial relationships, sponsorships, and affiliate arrangements disclosed clearly and near the rankings themselves, rather than buried?

Manipulation resistance · 10% weight 3 / 5

How hard is it to game? Controls against fake reviews, solicited reviews, and vendor gaming raise this; an open box anyone can stuff lowers it.

Evidence

Compare with others

Others reviewing pet care (compare all →)

← Back to the Report Card