A tool’s Flux Score blends an editorial base (a starting estimate of significance) with community votes and, where present, review ratings. Early on the editorial base dominates so the board is never empty; as real votes and reviews accrue, they take over. The leaderboard is context-aware— it scopes to the category you’re viewing — and sortable by Viral (votes + trending), $$$ (reported earnings), and New (date added). It is never alphabetical, and rank is never for sale.

Each workflow’s income starts as a labeled editorial estimate. The moment real users report, we replace it with the community distribution, and we lead with the denominator:

N reported · median $X/mo · Y% made any money · updated Zd ago

We show the median, not the average (one $50k report shouldn’t move the headline), and we count the $0s — the percentage who made any money at all is the most honest number on the page.

Known bias: people who earn a lot have reasons to stay quiet, and the loudest reporters skew toward the extremes. Treat every figure as self-reported and unverified unless a report carries an attached proof link. These are not income guarantees — most people earn less, and some earn nothing.

Articles are AI-assisted and human-directed. The standard: every hard number — a benchmark score, a funding round, a market stat — should trace to a primary source. Corrections: flux@aeriox.co.

Algorithmic rankings (Flux Score, the leaderboard) and editorial workflow rankings are never paid. Any sponsored placement, if we run them, will be visually distinct, permanently labeled, and kept out of the ranked order. Affiliate links may earn Flux a commission and never affect rank — see About.