Best sentiment analytics in 2026

Sentiment Analytics evaluated across published predictive evidence, published price and free-tier substance, documented bot filtering, and source and asset coverage.

LunarCrush

#1 of 8 · published ranking

LunarCrush

80ChainChoice Score

Why it leads

Best in the pool on published predictive evidence and manipulation filtering documented

Cost

Not priced · No comparable price is published

8 compared Ranking-blind · 392 modules checked 2026-09-18Evidence read 2026-08-07Scored under methodology v2026.09.15 (2026-09-16)32 receipts quoted

Filter sentiment analytics8 in the published ranking

Filters change eligibility, not methodology. A requirement can rule a provider out; nothing here changes the order the published criteria produce.

Your setup

Your location

Pick a country to see which sentiment analytics serve it. Nothing is hidden — any that does not is listed with that reason.

Cost

Published price and what free survives

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Funding & access

Source and asset coverage

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Trust & control

Published predictive evidence

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Manipulation filtering documented

No requirement — nothing is ruled out on this.

Whatever misses a requirement is listed under Excluded with the reason — nothing is hidden.

8 results

8sentiment analytics · sorted by chainchoice score

ranked before any payout data is seen

#1 overallcomputed before any payout data is seenOverall

LunarCrush

Social feed aggregation across six platforms sold as Galaxy Score and AltRank composites plus an API and MCP server.

Leads the pool on Published predictive evidence

80ChainChoice Score · first of 8

Catalog strengths

Published predictive evidenceSource and asset coverage

Why it leads

Best in the pool on published predictive evidence and manipulation filtering documented
1 point ahead of Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI): +5.6 pts published predictive evidence, +3.1 pts manipulation filtering documented
Provider states broad availability

Evidence

4/4

criteria scored · 4 receipts quoted

Margin

+1

over Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI), ranked #02

Rank stability

One-point

a ±1 reread of "Published predictive evidence" would crown Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI)

Tradeoff

−5

Published price and free-tier substance — behind this pool's best

Jurisdiction

Global

no restricted market on record

Score breakdowntick = pool best

Published predictive evidence8/10

Published price and what free survives5/10

Manipulation filtering documented7/10

Source and asset coverage8/10

Ranking-blind · a guided run tailors this to your size, custody & jurisdiction

#ProviderScoreEvidenceKey strengths

2−1

Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI)

Published price and free-tier substanceSource and asset coverage

3−18

The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)

Documented bot filteringSource and asset coverage

4−1

Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me)

Published price and free-tier substancePublished predictive evidence

5−1

StockGeist Crypto Sentiment API

Published price and free-tier substanceSource and asset coverage

6−1

cookie.fun (Cookie DAO)

Published price and free-tier substanceDocumented bot filtering

7−2

Kaito Pro

Documented bot filteringPublished price and free-tier substance

8−3

Augmento

Source and asset coveragePublished predictive evidence

Ranking-blind — order computed before any payout data is joined

Below the table

How this ranking works

Everything the table draws on continues here: how firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and the full guide to choosing.

Direct answer

What is the best sentiment analytics in 2026?

LunarCrush ranks #1 overall for sentiment analytics on ChainChoice. Social feed aggregation across six platforms sold as Galaxy Score and AltRank composites plus an API and MCP server. It holds that rank under an affiliate-blind methodology scored across 4 published, weighted criteria — the code that ranks providers physically cannot read affiliate payouts (CI-enforced), so a payout can't move a rank. The verdict re-computes on every fee change, incident, or regulatory action; full reasoning and the audit receipt are below.

Best picks

Best sentiment analytics in 2026

Weighted on published predictive evidence (30), published price and free-tier substance (25), documented bot filtering (25), and source and asset coverage (20). Across eight vendors, exactly one publishes a predictive test a buyer can check - and it is about US equities, not crypto. LunarCrush's Earnings Social Atlas covers 2,898 earnings prints with an event-level CSV downloadable without registration; recomputing it returns a decile spread of 1.186x, against the vendor's own companion note saying "The decile spread is modest by design" and "If you find a 5x effect, you have a bug, not alpha." The web page headlines a 1.2 to 1.4x range using an internal liquidity cut not included in the public file. That gap - between the checkable number and the advertised one - exists at the most rigorous vendor in the category.

Best overall

LunarCrush

Social feed aggregation across six platforms sold as Galaxy Score and AltRank composites plus an API and MCP server.

Data checked Sep 2026

Social feed aggregation across six platforms sold as Galaxy Score and AltRank composites plus an API and MCP server. Strongest on published predictive evidence (8/10): LunarCrush publishes a free 2,898-row event-level CSV of earnings events with a methodology guide; its four published anchors, including 28.4% of events with pre-print social z above 1 and a 1.19x top-to-bottom decile move ratio, reproduce from the file, though page headlines use a liquidity cut the file omits. Weakest on published price and free-tier substance (5/10): The pricing page lists Individual at $90/month or $72/month billed annually, Builder at $300 or $240 and Scale at $900 or $720, Enterprise custom. Shipped site copy still quotes Individual at $24/month, and two conflicting free-tier definitions ship, one with no social analytics. Published price: Fetched 2026-09-27 from https://lunarcrush.com/pricing, which now publishes every paid plan with its billing period: the plan cards are prerendered into the HTML for non-browser clients and drawn by script in a browser, and the page's embedded offer data…

Best for: Published predictive evidence — 8/10

Why this score4 published criteria · leads 2 of 4

Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap/10Pts

Published predictive evidence7.2·87.7

Published price and free-tier substance6−554.0

Documented bot filtering6·75.6

Source and asset coverage4.8−185.1

Σ methodology points22.4/32

Each bar is the score on that criterion’s own 0–10 scale, never rescaled to the pool. The dark line is the best any product here reached on that axis. Wt is the most the criterion can add to the 86-point weighted total. Pts is weight × score × 32; the sum is the methodology score, and each weighted point behind the leader costs 2.6 on the displayed score. how these are weighted

Why it ranks first

Why LunarCrush leads this category right now

Best for

Published predictive evidence — 8/10

Main tradeoff

The one reproducible test in this pool is on 2,898 US equity earnings prints in 2026 H1, not on crypto, and the effect that actually reproduces from the public file is about 1.19x top-versus-bottom decile. Corrected during verification: the vendor's own companion file discloses that the louder figures on the Atlas web page - "~1.2–1.4×", "+1.79σ print-day average", "1,665 liquid prints", "29.7% of liquid prints build more than 1σ of attention before the number is public" - are computed on an internal panel using a dollar-volume liquidity cut "which is not included in this public file", and warns to "Expect directionally identical but numerically different results". So the headline a buyer sees is not the number he can check; the number he can check is smaller. The page also routes the tradeable version - hourly feed, point-in-time constituent membership, 5+ years of history - to a two-week institutional trial arranged with the CEO by email. A crypto buyer is extrapolating an equities result across an asset class, a frequency and a price tier none of which were tested in public.

Verify before signup

Fetched 2026-09-27 from https://lunarcrush.com/pricing, which now publishes every paid plan with its billing period: the plan cards are prerendered into the HTML for non-browser clients and drawn by script in a browser, and the page's embedded offer data carries the same figures (on 2026-08-07 the page carried no price and the figures existed only inside a JavaScript bundle). Individual "$90/month" or "$72/month billed annually"; Builder "$300/month" or "$240/month billed annually"; Scale "$900/month" or "$720/month billed annually"; Enterprise "Custom Pricing". The page title reads "LunarCrush Pricing — Individual $90/mo, Builder $300/mo, Scale $900/mo". The page also sells day passes: its embedded offer data lists "Individual Daily", "Builder Daily" and "Scale Daily" offers with "billingDuration":"P1D" (Individual "price":"5"), and in a browser the plan cards open on a Daily/Monthly/Annual toggle. FAQ on the same page: "Payments are final and non-refundable." No free plan card is rendered on the pricing page; the vendor's support answer at https://lunarcrush.com/support/how-much-does-lunarcrush-cost says plans start with a free Discover tier. Worked example (ChainChoice arithmetic, not a page figure): Individual billed annually is 72 x 12 = 864 dollars a year, against 90 x 12 = 1,080 dollars billed monthly, a 20 percent annual discount.

Recommendation summary

What should decide this category

Has this vendor published any test of whether its signal predicts anything?

What fraction of ingested posts does the bot filter actually remove?

Can you read the price, and does the free tier survive contact with real use?

Quick picks

Strong options in this category

Start with the lead choice first, then use the shortlist only if you still need a challenger or stronger fit for a specific setup.

Best overall

LunarCrush

Social feed aggregation across six platforms sold as Galaxy Score and AltRank composites plus an API and MCP server.

Best for: Published predictive evidence — 8/10

Published predictive evidence · 30%

8/10

Published price and free-tier substance · 25%

5/10

Documented bot filtering · 25%

7/10

Source and asset coverage · 20%

8/10

Quick pick

Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI)

Social, on-chain and development metrics over seven enumerated text sources, sold as a dashboard plus API.

Social, on-chain and development metrics over seven enumerated text sources, sold as a dashboard plus API. Strongest on published price and free-tier substance (9/10): Santiment prices every individual plan on one page: Free at $0 with a 30-day lag in Sanbase, Pro at $49/month and Max at $249/month, 10% less billed annually. Pro keeps the free plan's 30-day API lag on restricted metrics; Max is the minimum plan for real-time API data. Weakest on published predictive evidence (5/10): Santiment names its sentiment models, a classifier trained on 1.6 million labelled tweets and the ElKulako/cryptobert model, and publishes the search terms behind Social Volume, but makes no predictive claim and publishes no backtest. Published price: Fetched 2026-09-27 from https://santiment.net/pricing (redirects to https://app.santiment.net/pricing).

Best for: Published price and free-tier substance — 9/10

Published predictive evidence · 30%

5/10

Published price and free-tier substance · 25%

9/10

Documented bot filtering · 25%

5/10

Source and asset coverage · 20%

9/10

Quick pick

The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)

Institutional terminal and quant API whose sentiment product is derived entirely from Twitter, sold only through sales.

Institutional terminal and quant API whose sentiment product is derived entirely from Twitter, sold only through sales. Strongest on documented bot filtering (6/10): The Tie exposes two account-concentration metrics, the share of tweets from unique accounts and the count of unique accounts mentioning an asset over 24 hours, so a buyer can gauge spam load; its bot and spam detection is asserted in one line with no method, threshold or removal rate. Weakest on published price and free-tier substance (1/10): The Tie publishes no price on its product, API or documentation pages: the Terminal offers a demo booking, API keys come from an account manager, and no free tier or trial is offered. Published price: No price is published on any The Tie page loaded on 2026-09-27 (home, /solutions/terminal, /solutions/api, /legal/disclosure, /insights, and the docs.thetie.io introduction and sentiment-metrics reference); https://www.thetie.io/pricing returns HTTP 404.

Best for: Documented bot filtering — 6/10

Published predictive evidence · 30%

4/10

Published price and free-tier substance · 25%

1/10

Documented bot filtering · 25%

6/10

Source and asset coverage · 20%

5/10

Quick pick

Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me)

A free single 0-100 Bitcoin sentiment number with published component weights and an unauthenticated API.

A free single 0-100 Bitcoin sentiment number with published component weights and an unauthenticated API. Strongest on published price and free-tier substance (10/10): The alternative.me Fear & Greed Index is free with no tier, key or registration; its public API serves current and historical values, and commercial use is allowed with attribution next to the data. Weakest on documented bot filtering (1/10): The index's social component counts posts on coin hashtags and how fast they gather interactions; the index page mentions no filtering of bots or manufactured engagement, the most easily inflated construction. Published price: Fetched 2026-09-27. No price appears anywhere on the page; the stated terms under "Fear and Greed Index API" are usage rules, not a price: "You may not use our data to impersonate us or to create a service that could be confused with our offering." "You must…

Best for: Published price and free-tier substance — 10/10

Published predictive evidence · 30%

3/10

Published price and free-tier substance · 25%

10/10

Documented bot filtering · 25%

1/10

Source and asset coverage · 20%

1/10

Frequently asked

Questions people ask before choosing sentiment

Does any sentiment vendor prove its signal predicts price?

One, partially, and not for crypto. This was tested by looking rather than assumed: The Tie's /research and /resources return HTTP 404 and its live insights index carries roughly a hundred items - funding briefs, acquisitions, event recaps, webinars - none reporting a correlation, hit rate or accuracy figure. Santiment makes no predictive claim at all. Kaito publishes a one-sentence definition of mindshare and no methodology page. alternative.me states two assumptions and validates neither. cookie.fun documents features only, and Augmento's current site contains no instance of "research", "correlation", "Spearman" or "study". That leaves LunarCrush's Earnings Social Atlas, which is real, checkable, and about US equity earnings prints. StockGeist is the near-miss: its evidence page promises "evidence that StockGeist has correctly forecast market fluctuations", and its AYTU case study describes social activity that "followed this announcement immediately" after a company press release - the signal trailing the news, offered as forecasting, with no sample, no counterfactual and no accuracy figure.

How much of the feed is bots?

No vendor here says. Five assert filtering - LunarCrush "removes automated posts, duplicate-network activity, and low-quality content", Kaito "extensively leverages LLM to exclude low-effort content including spams", The Tie offers "Bot and spam detection to ensure clean signal", Santiment applies a score threshold, and cookie.fun flags "signs of botted likes or views" - and not one states what fraction of ingested posts the filter removes, what it catches, or what it misses. Searching LunarCrush's entire shipped JavaScript bundle for a removal percentage, a removed count or a filtered-out figure returned none. Two vendors do ship a proxy you can compute yourself: LunarCrush exposes spam as a queryable time-series metric to "gauge manipulation risk", and The Tie exposes tweet_unique_sources_percent. A proxy you compute is not a disclosed removal rate, but it beats an assertion.

Is there a conflict of interest to watch for?

At one vendor, yes, and it is disclosed rather than hidden. The Tie scores sentiment on tokens while The Tie Capital LLC - per its own disclosure dated 28 May 2026 - "is a broker-dealer registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission" and a "member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority", providing "private capital raises, mergers and acquisitions advisory" to clients in the digital asset industry. The disclosure covers banking risks and does not address information barriers between the bank and the sentiment feed. That is not an accusation; it is a question a buyer should ask before treating the feed as neutral.

Free advisorNo signup needed

Still unsure? Get your best sentiment pick

Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — then review the evidence before deciding.

No signupFree first pass · PrivateNo spam · No account

Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research

Browse this network

How this ranking is built

Reviewed on published predictive evidence, published price and free-tier substance, documented bot filtering, and source and asset coverage.

Data checked Sep 2026 · Independent rankings · We show our work

Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research