← Back to Reports

Media and Third-Party Coverage on Grizzly Research’s Investigation Into Trustpilot Group PLC – Grizzly Research LLC

Grizzly Research alleges Trustpilot's paid subscriptions drive inflated ratings and review-gating rather than true customer satisfaction.

An obscure cash-back site called Freecash.com carries more than 249,000 Trustpilot reviews and a 4.8-star rating, while Gmail, one of the world's largest email services, shows just 1,525 reviews and a 1.6-star rating.

That gap repeats across industries: in comparisons of opticians, U.K. broadband providers, and washing-machine brands, companies flagged as paid Trustpilot subscribers cluster near 4.5 stars while non-subscribers with equal or larger market share sit below 2. Grizzly Research, which holds a short position in Trustpilot's securities and related derivatives, alleges the platform's ratings function less as a measure of customer satisfaction and more as a marker of who pays for a subscription.

Ticker: TRST.L (Trustpilot Group PLC)
Research Firm: Grizzly Research
Report URL: https://grizzlyreports.com/media-and-third-party-coverage-on-grizzly-researchs-investigation-into-trustpilot-group-plc/?ref=shortreport.fyi
Position Disclosure: Holds a direct or indirect short position in Trustpilot securities and related derivatives as of publication and says it may continue trading those securities.


Thesis

Grizzly Research alleges that Trustpilot's paid business subscriptions operate as an extortion-like model in which non-paying businesses absorb damaging reviews while paying customers get tools to improve their scores.

  • Pay-to-Improve Ratings: Across opticians, U.K. broadband, and washing-machine comparisons, businesses flagged as paid subscribers cluster at 4.5 stars or higher while non-subscribers with comparable or greater market share sit under 2.
  • Review-Gating Allegation: Interviewed business owners say Trustpilot would not remove misleading reviews, including ones meant for similarly named companies, unless they subscribed, a pattern sources called "bullying tactics" and dubbed the "Trustpilot Mafia."
  • Selective Enforcement: The report alleges paying clients can flag negative reviews for aggressive removal, sometimes in ways said to violate Trustpilot's own policies, while "massive spam from fake accounts" is allegedly tolerated for paying companies despite Trustpilot's public claims of AI and manual fake-review detection.
  • Understaffed Integrity Team: A former insider says founder Peter Holten Mühlmann described the content-integrity team as "50 people strong," but the insider believed it had "6 people at most."
  • Tolerated Review Spam: Accounts including Jeff Blitstein (15 five-star reviews), David Long (14), and Ryan Schutte (11) posted repeated positive reviews for trading app Trade Algo, a pattern the report says Trustpilot allows to persist.
  • Cross-Border Rating Gap: Vodafone UK, flagged as a paid subscriber, holds a 4.6-star rating from 108,052 reviews despite 6% U.K. market share, while Vodafone's Germany, Italy, Spain, and Netherlands units, with far larger regional shares, score between 1.1 and 1.4.
  • Google Dependency Risk: Trustpilot's visibility depends on Google, which agreed with the U.K. government in January 2025 to strengthen penalties on businesses benefiting from fake or misleading reviews under its Reputation Abuse Policy; Google holds roughly 90% of global search market share.
  • Growth Tied to the Model: Revenue grew 18.4% in 2023 and 19.5% in 2024 under CEO Adrian Blair, growth the report alleges depends on the disputed subscription and review-management practices rather than a trustworthy product.

Catalysts

  • Potential Google Reputation Abuse Policy action or search-ranking penalty against Trustpilot: No date given, pending Google enforcement decision; would directly threaten the traffic Trustpilot draws from Google's roughly 90% search share.
  • Expanded U.K. regulatory enforcement following Google's January 2025 agreement with the U.K. government on fake-review penalties: Ongoing, could tighten scrutiny of businesses and platforms benefiting from manipulated reviews.
  • Further disclosure of alleged review spam, review gating, or selective removal practices: Ongoing, would reinforce or undercut the report's core claim that Trustpilot scores track subscription status rather than satisfaction.
  • Public or media scrutiny of the specific comparisons cited (opticians, U.K. broadband, Vodafone regional units, washing machines): Ongoing, could pressure Trustpilot to explain the rating disparities or prompt independent verification.

Company Response

The report does not indicate that Grizzly Research sought comment from Trustpilot before publication. The excerpt contains no response from Trustpilot, and no response is recorded from Google, Vodafone, or Trade Algo, the other companies named in the report.


Notable Details

  • Among U.K. broadband providers, Vodafone UK, the only company flagged as a paid subscriber, scored 4.6 stars while BT, Sky Broadband, Virgin Media O2, and EE clustered between 1.3 and 1.4 despite comparable or larger market share.
  • In the U.K. washing-machine market, Beko and Hotpoint, both flagged as paid subscribers, scored 4.2 and 4.4 stars; Bosch, with the same reported 15% market share, scored 1.5.
  • Warby Parker, with reported annual revenue of $771 million, scored 1.8 stars from 195 reviews, while SmartBuyGlasses, reported at $14 million in revenue, scored 4.7 stars from 17,886 reviews.
  • The report says independent comparisons on broadband.co.uk and reviews.io showed U.K. internet providers rated much more closely together than they are on Trustpilot, a gap it says other sites don't replicate at the same scale.

"They are just indicators for who pays Trustpilot and who refuses to pay."

The report uses this line after comparing Trustpilot ratings across optician brands, summarizing its allegation that scores reflect subscription status rather than customer satisfaction.


FAQs

What does Trustpilot (TRST.L) do, and why is it facing this allegation?

Trustpilot is a London-listed online review platform whose main revenue source is paid business subscriptions that offer review-management, analytics, and marketing tools. The report examines whether those subscriptions are tied to differences in how businesses' ratings appear on the platform.

What is Trustpilot Group PLC accused of doing with its subscription model?

The report alleges Trustpilot's paid subscriptions function as an extortion-like system in which non-paying businesses accumulate damaging or misleading reviews while paying businesses get access to tools that improve their displayed scores. It says this pattern undermines the reliability of Trustpilot's ratings as a satisfaction measure.

Who is Grizzly Research, and what is its position on Trustpilot?

Grizzly Research is the firm that authored the report, published December 4, 2025. Grizzly Research holds a direct or indirect short position in Trustpilot securities and related derivatives as of publication and says it may continue trading those securities.

What is the "Trustpilot Mafia" allegation mentioned in the report?

It's a term the report says industry experts and interviewed business owners used to describe the alleged pattern: unexpected negative Trustpilot profiles, refusal to remove misleading reviews unless a business subscribes, and pressure to pay to manage reputational damage. The report characterizes this as "bullying tactics" tied to the subscription model.

Why does Vodafone UK's Trustpilot score stand out in the report?

Vodafone UK holds a 4.6-star rating from 108,052 reviews despite only a 6% U.K. market share, and it is the only Vodafone unit the report flags as a paid subscriber. Its German, Italian, Spanish, and Dutch operations, with far larger regional market shares, score between 1.1 and 1.4 stars.

Is Trustpilot's content-integrity team really smaller than claimed?

An unnamed former Trustpilot insider told the report's authors that founder Peter Holten Mühlmann described the content-integrity team as "50 people strong," but the insider believed it had "6 people at most." The insider said staff lacked access to a detailed team list due to internal "Chinese Wall" restrictions, so the discrepancy is unverified beyond that account.

What could happen if Google acts on Trustpilot's review practices?

The report notes Google holds about 90% of global search market share and displays Trustpilot scores prominently in results, and that Google agreed with the U.K. government in January 2025 to strengthen penalties against businesses benefiting from fake or misleading reviews. A Reputation Abuse Policy action or ranking penalty against Trustpilot could sharply cut the search visibility its business model depends on.

Did Trustpilot respond to Grizzly Research's allegations?

The report contains no response from Trustpilot, and it does not indicate that Grizzly Research sought comment from the company before publishing.


Disclaimer: This summary is not primary research and does not constitute investment advice. It is a brief overview of a detailed equity research report authored by the firm, organization, or source referenced in this article or at https://grizzlyreports.com/media-and-third-party-coverage-on-grizzly-researchs-investigation-into-trustpilot-group-plc/, which contains extensive evidence, regulatory filings, and analysis; readers are encouraged to review the full report there for a comprehensive understanding. The content provided in this publication is not authored or originated by us — we act solely as a distributor and do not endorse, verify, or take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the information presented. This publication is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal, business, investment, or tax advice. Always conduct independent due diligence and consult qualified professionals before making any decisions based on the information contained herein. We disclaim all liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on third-party content, and the views expressed are solely those of the respective source and do not necessarily reflect our own.