Skip to main content

At a glance

  • CJ.com scores 3.7/5 and Stay22 scores 3.8/5 in Benchmark Grid's independent affiliate networks benchmark, both assessed on the same 10 criteria.
  • The widest gaps are disclosure & compliance tools (CJ.com 4.0, Stay22 1.8) and reporting & api (CJ.com 4.2, Stay22 2.4); they are within 0.3 on 3 of 10 criteria.
  • CJ.com is built for mid-market and enterprise publishers; Stay22 for small and mid-market.
  • On total cost of ownership CJ.com scores 3.6 and Stay22 4.6 (higher means better value, not a lower price).
  • In our tracking 1 publishers use CJ.com and 12 use Stay22.
  • Scores last verified 19 Oct 2026. Vendors cannot pay for a score or a position.

Where they differ

CJ.com is stronger on disclosure & compliance tools (4.0 vs 1.8), reporting & API (4.2 vs 2.4), tracking accuracy & attribution (4.6 vs 3.2) and merchant & programme coverage (4.8 vs 3.8).

Which one fits

Choose CJ.com if…

  • You publish at mid-market and enterprise scale.
  • You weight disclosure & compliance tools, reporting & API and tracking accuracy & attribution heavily — CJ.com leads on those in this benchmark.

Choose Stay22 if…

  • You publish at small and mid-market scale.
  • You weight link automation & commerce content tools, integration and payment reliability & thresholds heavily — Stay22 leads on those in this benchmark.

Also weighing these

The nearest-scored tools to CJ.com and Stay22 in this benchmark, listed A to Z.

All 12 scored tools are in Best Affiliate Networks for Publishers.

Who uses them

Publishers we have detected running each tool, from ads.txt, site code and published case studies. Agencies, brands and vendors are excluded.

Head to head

CriterionCJ.comStay22
Commission rates & payout terms14% of capability3.23.4
Merchant & programme coverage14% of capability4.83.8
Tracking accuracy & attribution14% of capability4.63.2
Link automation & commerce content tools12% of capability3.84.6
Payment reliability & thresholds10% of capability3.53.9
Reporting & API10% of capability4.22.4
Product feeds & price comparison8% of capability3.53.5
Disclosure & compliance tools6% of capability4.01.8
Integration6% of capability3.03.5
Publisher approval & programme access6% of capability3.03.0
Capability45% of composite3.93.4
Publisher fit40% of composite3.54.0
Total cost of ownership15% of composite3.64.6

Cost of ownership

Sub-scoreCJ.comStay22
Pricing transparency3.04.5
Entry cost4.84.8
Implementation cost3.14.6
Hidden-fee risk3.04.7
Ongoing cost4.04.6

CJ.com pricing

Free for publishers to join (subject to inactivity fees/deactivation); advertisers pay custom setup fees plus a network fee (typically 20-30% of paid commissions).

Stay22 pricing

Free to use for publishers; operates on a performance-based revenue-share model where creators earn a commission on completed bookings.

What users say

CJ.com

12 positive · 14 neutral · 9 negative

Stay22

20 positive · 8 neutral · 5 negative

Mentions we could not tie to a real user, and those flagged as promotional, are excluded. Sentiment is opinion, and is independent of the verified publisher adoptions above.

CJ.com scores 3.7 and Stay22 scores 3.8 in Benchmark Grid's independent Best Affiliate Networks for Publishers benchmark (benchmarkgrid.com/vs/cj-com/stay22, verified Oct 19, 2026)

Common questions

How do CJ.com and Stay22 differ?

CJ.com is stronger on disclosure & compliance tools (4.0 vs 1.8), reporting & API (4.2 vs 2.4), tracking accuracy & attribution (4.6 vs 3.2) and merchant & programme coverage (4.8 vs 3.8). Neither is better in the abstract — which one suits you depends on which of those dimensions carries the most weight in your operation.

Which is cheaper, CJ.com or Stay22?

On total cost of ownership — pricing transparency, entry cost, implementation, hidden-fee risk and ongoing cost — CJ.com scores 3.6/5 and Stay22 scores 4.6/5. A higher score means better value, not a lower sticker price.

How are these scores calculated?

Each tool is assessed against its category's published criteria (10 in this benchmark), which make up Capability (45% of the composite), Publisher fit (40%) and Total cost of ownership (15%). Assessment is carried out by SODP's editorial team against a published methodology. Vendors cannot pay for inclusion, scores or positions.

Share:

Both tools are scored in Best Affiliate Networks for Publishers. See alternatives to CJ.com or alternatives to Stay22.

Weighing a third option? Add a tool to this comparison.

Related comparisons

Other head-to-heads publishers look at in Best Affiliate Networks for Publishers.

Best for PublishersWhich affiliate network is better for small publishers?