Why loyalty deserves its own niche page
Loyalty programs sit awkwardly inside a single-row review summary because they're a system, not a transaction. A welcome bonus is one event. A redemption mechanic is one path. A loyalty program is a continuous economy: points in, tier movement, perk unlock, status decay, and reset cycles, all running concurrently. Reviewing it as a row inside a wider rubric forces compression that hides the mechanic. RewardlyClub is the niche page that doesn't compress.
What we publish
For each operator inside the category's working set, we publish four things: the points-earning velocity (normalized to a common unit), the tier ladder with documented entry thresholds, the perk roster mapped to its tier, and the decay or maintenance rule that governs how status is held or lost. Each is sourced to the published loyalty terms and dated to the last refresh.
What we don't do
We don't rank loyalty programs against each other on a single number. The reason is structural: a fast-velocity ladder with steep decay is a different proposition than a slow-velocity ladder with maintenance grace. They aren't comparable on one axis, and any "Best Loyalty Program" verdict that pretends otherwise is a marketing artifact. We publish the mechanics; the right program for a player depends on activity profile.
How this connects to the flagship
Loyalty is one of ten axes on the JoinRewardly rubric. The flagship review weighs loyalty against bonus economics, redemption math, table ceilings, and the rest. RewardlyClub is where loyalty gets dissected on its own terms — useful when loyalty is the deciding axis, less useful when other axes dominate. Both pages cite the same underlying testing-log entries.