private search company / steward-owned structure
Ecosia
Industry Platforms
A steward-owned search company and certified B Corp using search revenue for climate work, with privacy commitments and dependence on larger search partners. Ecosia scores well because ownership is comparatively aligned and the model leaves more value with stakeholders, though ideological disavowal still limits the evaluation.
Why this matters: Alternative search infrastructure can be materially good while still needing governance evidence.
Letter grade A Good High confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1
Final Score
50* A - Good
A* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.
Represent this organization?
Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.
Evaluation Overview
A - Good
The score turns mainly on Ownership, with the largest penalty coming from Ideological Disavowal.
Strengths
- Ownership8/10
- Extraction8/10
- Governance7/10
Penalties
- Ideological Disavowal-2
Evidence state
- ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
- ThoroughnessPartial (AI)
- Linked claims11
- Direct axis claims10
- Coverage10/10
Scoring Axes
| Axis | Score | Why this score |
|---|---|---|
Ownership
?
Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control
at 10.
|
8 / 10 |
Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company. Linked evidence
|
Governance
?
Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic
stakeholder control at 10.
|
7 / 10 |
Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company. Linked evidence
|
Extraction
?
Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured
extraction judgment.
|
8 / 10 |
Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company. Linked evidence
|
Labor Sovereignty
?
Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at
7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence
shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling,
retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of
worker voice, or extreme turnover.
|
5 / 7 |
Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company. Linked evidence |
Solidarity with the
Unemployed
?
Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment,
and non-competes.
|
5 / 7 |
Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company. Linked evidence |
Loss-Bearing Fidelity
?
Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and
public obligations.
|
6 / 7 |
Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company. |
Market Conduct
?
Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.
|
4 / 5 |
Ecosia publishes privacy commitments for its search product. |
Product Integrity
?
Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.
|
4 / 5 |
Ecosia publishes privacy commitments for its search product. Linked evidence
|
Scale Integrity
?
Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.
|
5 / 5 |
Ecosia publishes privacy commitments for its search product. |
Penalties
| Penalty | Applied | Why this penalty |
|---|---|---|
Ideological Disavowal
?
Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional
necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or
non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.
|
-2 |
Ecosia's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Ecosia exercises meaningful institutional or cultural power while strongly presenting contested choices as… Linked evidence
|
Bonus Credits
No bonus credits applied in this version.
Confidence Basis
Confidence Basis
Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.
High 85/100
11 verified linked claims 10 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 10/10 components covered
This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.
Claim confidence 18/20
11 verified linked claims
Source quality 15/18
Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability
Direct axis-specific claims 14/18
10 direct claims across 10 active components
Dispute load 12/12
0 disputed claims on this entity
Recency 10/10
Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026
Reviewer status 7/12
Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding
Component coverage 10/10
10/10 evidence-bearing components have direct support
Evidence State
Evidence State
Profile stateAI draft / human-pending
VerificationUnverified
ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessPartial (AI)
Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for
factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation
mistakes.
Company responseCompany representatives can
submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or
reviewer authority.
Claims and Sources
Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.
* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.1Ecosia states that it is steward-owned, cannot be sold for profit, and profits cannot be taken out of the company.
- Ecosia ownershipOfficial self-description · 68%
2Ecosia states that steward ownership prevents sale for profit and prevents profits from being taken out of the company, creating mission constraints without direct user or worker democracy.
- Ecosia ownershipOfficial self-description · 68%
3Ecosia publishes financial reports showing search revenue allocated to climate and tree-planting work, redirecting part of advertising-search surplus away from ordinary owner extraction.
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
4Ecosia's steward ownership constrains sale and profit extraction, but the reviewed materials do not establish worker ownership or democratic labor control.
- Ecosia ownershipOfficial self-description · 68%
5Ecosia publishes financial and tree-planting reports that route search revenue toward climate and restoration work benefiting people beyond current employees and users.
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
6Ecosia's ownership lock and financial reports show profits tied to mission spending rather than distributable private owner gains.
- Ecosia ownershipOfficial self-description · 68%
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
7Ecosia publishes privacy commitments for its search product.
- Ecosia privacyGeneral web source · 58%
8Ecosia publishes privacy commitments for search while operating through search-ad revenue and partner infrastructure rather than owning a fully independent public search commons.
- Ecosia privacyGeneral web source · 58%
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
9Ecosia's steward-owned search model scales climate funding through user searches, while dependence on search partners limits full infrastructure independence.
- Ecosia ownershipOfficial self-description · 68%
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
10Ecosia publishes financial and tree-planting reports describing how search revenue is allocated to climate and restoration work.
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
11Ecosia's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Ecosia exercises meaningful institutional or cultural power while strongly presenting contested choices as neutral expertise, safety, objectivity, professionalism, administrative necessity, or public service.
- Ecosia official siteGeneral web source · 58%
- Ecosia ownershipOfficial self-description · 68%
- Ecosia financial reportsPrimary institutional record · 90%
Help Improve This Profile
Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.
How This Page Is Maintained
Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.
Civic Note
Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.
Submit evidence for Ecosia Add one source-backed fact for review.
Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.
Audit Log
Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.
Added tentative AI-generated Toxic Products penalty 0 and directory value for current toxic, addictive, pesticide, livestock, chemical, or consumer-safety product exposure.
Added tentative AI-generated claim-backed score components for a previously listed under-review company or group.