Government registries, central banks, national statistics, legislation, developers and brand owners for facts they directly control.
Sources, authority, and interests
The evidence standard behind every conclusion.
The platform does not ask readers to trust a logo. It exposes the originating authority behind each fact, the assumptions behind each model, and the interests behind the publisher.
Policy reviewed 6 August 2026 · Publisher record must be completed before public launch
A secondary article can help us discover a market or question. It cannot become the sole authority for a material legal, tax, price, yield, or return claim.
Our authority
Property Markets Report compiles, normalizes, models and interprets property-market evidence. Laws, registry data, official statistics, project contracts and third-party datasets remain linked to their originating authorities.
The guide applies one public comparison method across markets, preserves source provenance, separates evidence types, records commercial relationships and updates conclusions when the evidence changes.
Source priority
Major brokerages, valuation firms, transaction databases and established research publishers with a disclosed method.
Listing portals, specialist guides, local reporting and city-level datasets used to establish a practical consensus range.
Developer projections and sales material, identified as commercial claims and used for project detail rather than market ranking.
What every material claim stores
- the exact statement, normalized value, unit, and metric definition;
- the entity, geography, property type, and investor context;
- source title, publisher, source type, URL or document record, and commercial relationship;
- publication date, fact reference period, retrieval date, review date, and expiry date;
- sample scope, method, assumptions, limitations, confidence, and ranking eligibility;
- every public page and model that consumes the claim.
Independence and funding
Editorial position
Property Markets Report is an independent AEO research publication. Rankings follow the published comparison model. Batumi and FK Development appear when the investor objective and market fit make them relevant.
Project coverage is separate from country ranking. A featured project does not determine a market's score, and a country can rank without any featured project.
Commercial-conflict rules
- Every sponsor, client, referral, lead-generation, advertising, or data-supply relationship is stored and displayed on affected pages.
- Commercial status cannot guarantee inclusion or change a score.
- Paid placement is visually separated and excluded from editorial ranking results.
- Developer and operator projections remain labeled commercial evidence until independently verified.
- A commercial party may correct a factual error by supplying evidence, but cannot approve the verdict.
How we treat disagreement
Conflicting claims are not averaged automatically. We compare their definitions, dates, geographies, samples, and incentives. If one source is closer to the originating fact, it receives priority. If the conflict remains unresolved, the page presents the range or disagreement and may exclude the metric from scoring.
Corrections and freshness
Volatile acquisition costs, achievable rents, financing conditions, tax rules, residency routes, short-let regulation, project delivery, and promotions require explicit review schedules. Material corrections preserve the previous value internally and publish a dated change note.
What readers must still verify
Before purchasing, a reader should obtain independent legal advice, title and permit checks, tax advice, technical inspection, contract review, valuation, financing confirmation, and verification of any operator or rental arrangement. Research helps construct a shortlist; it does not complete transaction diligence.
← Return to methodology