<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: Alan Buxton</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by Alan Buxton (@alanbuxton).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/alanbuxton</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/alanbuxton"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>How do you benchmark a product you built yourself?</title>
      <dc:creator>Alan Buxton</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2026 18:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/alanbuxton/how-do-you-benchmark-a-product-you-built-yourself-1cnp</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/alanbuxton/how-do-you-benchmark-a-product-you-built-yourself-1cnp</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I built a company-news API and I wanted to know whether it was better than the alternatives. The problem: I'm the author, so I'm biased. Also I wanted to use an LLM as the judge, which makes it &lt;em&gt;worse&lt;/em&gt;, because a model that recognises my product (and works out it's being scored on behalf of its creator) has every incentive to soften the blow. A benchmark I run on my own thing is worth almost nothing unless I can show I made it hard to cheat.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;So the design is built around three defences.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Anonymise before judging.&lt;/strong&gt; The five providers (Exa, Tavily, Linkup, Perplexity and my own, Syracuse) have their names shuffled and replaced with the letters A–E &lt;em&gt;before&lt;/em&gt; any data reaches the model. The decode key is written to a local file only after scoring, and it's re-randomised every run, so A in one run isn't A in the next. The judge literally cannot defer to "mine" because it doesn't know which letter is mine.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Force a verdict, ban the hedge.&lt;/strong&gt; The judge is told explicitly that "different providers suit different needs" is not an acceptable conclusion. It has to produce a strict 1-to-5 rank order, back every negative claim with a specific example article, and describe exactly what each lower-ranked provider would need to fix to reach first place. That last instruction makes it articulate concrete gaps instead of waving vaguely at quality.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hold every provider to the same bar.&lt;/strong&gt; The same criteria apply to all five: precision (wrong-entity false positives), coverage of obscure companies, date accuracy, whether the summary is usable without clicking through, source quality, paywall accessibility, and hallucination risk. A provider with lots of undated or stale results can't rank first no matter what else it does, because undated news is non-actionable.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Did it work? Well enough that the benchmark cheerfully tells me where I lose. My product wins on company news and comes mid-table on industry/region news, and the write-ups for the runs where I rank last are as unsparing as the rest. That seems a decent signal that the anti-bias machinery is doing its job.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It's all open source if you want to poke holes in it or point it at your own provider: &lt;a href="https://github.com/alanbuxton/news-comparison" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://github.com/alanbuxton/news-comparison&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The product itself is &lt;a href="https://syracuse.1145.am" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;Syracuse Company News&lt;/a&gt;. I'm looking for a few people building agents that need reliable company news. Happy to open up free API access for anyone who'll test it on a real workload and tell me where it breaks.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>ai</category>
      <category>opensource</category>
      <category>benchmarking</category>
      <category>mcp</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
