Crypto Subscriptions
Recurring payment rails evaluated on whether the merchant is told when a mandate is revoked, what happens when a renewal fails, whether payments survive the provider, and the exact scope of the permission the customer granted.
23providers tracked
9ranked (methodology v2026.11.1)
12 November 2026Ranking snapshot
28 September 2026oldest read · due 12 NovIndependent. Evidence-based.We rank with a published method and sourced evidence. No one can pay to rank.How it works
Set your country and amount to see your costs ·
Your setup
What your country changes
Pick a country to see which crypto subscription platforms serve it. Nothing is hidden — any that does not is listed with that reason.- 🇺🇸 United States
- 🇨🇦 Canada
- 🇲🇽 Mexico
- 🇬🇧 United Kingdom
- 🇩🇪 Germany
- 🇫🇷 France
- 🇮🇹 Italy
- 🇪🇸 Spain
- 🇳🇱 Netherlands
- 🇨🇭 Switzerland
- 🇸🇪 Sweden
- 🇳🇴 Norway
This affects provider availability.
Requirements (0)
Preferences (0)
Preferences re-weight Fit for you, which needs your country.
More filters
Funding & access
9 providers match your requirements
Out of 9 ranked providers. 0 excluded.
What this ranks
Ranked here: crypto subscription rails that let a merchant charge a customer again under a standing mandate, where the risk is the second charge rather than the first.Not ranked here: rails for a single completed payment, prepaid memberships with nothing to revoke, products where money flows the other way, such as bill pay or payouts to workers, and dead or pivoted products.9 of the 23 assessed are ranked; 14 were turned away by name. Who, and whyRequirements narrow the list; they never change a published ChainChoice Score. How the ranking works
Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program
How Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program was chosen
Leads this ranking on My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run?The chain-native mandate primitive
80 / 100 out of 100published score, #1 of all 9 worldwide
Evidence
High
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.Mandate survives the providerRevocation visibilityWhat the mandate permits
Why it leads
- Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program is 6 points ahead of Superfluid Money Streaming, mainly because it scores higher on its mandate survives the provider and what the mandate permits.
- Best in this ranking on revocation visibility and mandate survives the provider
- Ahead of Superfluid Money Streaming on mandate survives the provider (+3.0 points) and what the mandate permits (+2.7 points)
Tradeoff
Renewal failure path: 7 points below the best in this ranking
Share
#ProviderTransaction feeCompare
2
A non-custodial per-second money-streaming...
74 / 100 out of 100
3
The pool's tightest authorisation object
73 / 100 out of 100
0.9%
4
BA
Coinbase's recurring-USDC rail on Base
72 / 100 out of 100
0%
5
An onchain debt-streaming primitive
71 / 100 out of 100
6
A card-and-ACH recurring biller
65 / 100 out of 100
7
Same score, not joint · ordered by weighted total (39.70 against 39.60)RA
Cook Islands-incorporated crypto billing...
65 / 100 out of 100
0.5%
8
A permissionless EVM membership-NFT protocol
64 / 100 out of 100
1%
9
A reminder-and-charge-link subscription...
52 / 100 out of 100
2%
Compare providers (0)
See key differences in features, fees, security and more.
Renewal failure path
The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?
26% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Renewal failure path (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Radom Subscriptions | 9 | 65 |
| Request Network Recurring Payments | 7 | 73 |
| Coinflow Subscriptions | 6 | 65 |
| MoonPay Commerce Subscriptions (formerly Helio) | 6 | 52 |
| Superfluid Money Streaming | 3 | 74 |
| Sablier Flow | 3 | 71 |
| Unlock Protocol Recurring Memberships | 3 | 64 |
| Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program | 2 | 80 |
| Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions) | 2 | 72 |
Revocation visibility
My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run?
28% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Revocation visibility (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program | 9 | 80 |
| Superfluid Money Streaming | 8 | 74 |
| Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions) | 7 | 72 |
| Sablier Flow | 7 | 71 |
| Coinflow Subscriptions | 5 | 65 |
| Radom Subscriptions | 5 | 65 |
| Request Network Recurring Payments | 4 | 73 |
| Unlock Protocol Recurring Memberships | 2 | 64 |
| MoonPay Commerce Subscriptions (formerly Helio) | 1 | 52 |
Mandate survives the provider
If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?
24% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Mandate survives the provider (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program | 10 | 80 |
| Unlock Protocol Recurring Memberships | 9 | 64 |
| Superfluid Money Streaming | 8 | 74 |
| Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions) | 8 | 72 |
| Sablier Flow | 6 | 71 |
| Request Network Recurring Payments | 5 | 73 |
| Radom Subscriptions | 4 | 65 |
| Coinflow Subscriptions | 3 | 65 |
| MoonPay Commerce Subscriptions (formerly Helio) | 3 | 52 |
What the mandate permits
What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that?
22% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | What the mandate permits (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Request Network Recurring Payments | 9 | 73 |
| Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program | 8 | 80 |
| Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions) | 7 | 72 |
| Sablier Flow | 7 | 71 |
| Superfluid Money Streaming | 6 | 74 |
| Coinflow Subscriptions | 5 | 65 |
| Unlock Protocol Recurring Memberships | 5 | 64 |
| Radom Subscriptions | 4 | 65 |
| MoonPay Commerce Subscriptions (formerly Helio) | 1 | 52 |
All 4 published criteria
Every ranked row’s score on each criterion, in the published order. Choose a column to order by it.
| Provider | ChainChoice Score | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program | 9 | 2 | 10 | 8 | 80 |
| 2 | Superfluid Money Streaming | 8 | 3 | 8 | 6 | 74 |
| 3 | Request Network Recurring Payments | 4 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 73 |
| 4 | Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions) | 7 | 2 | 8 | 7 | 72 |
| 5 | Sablier Flow | 7 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 71 |
| 6 | Coinflow Subscriptions | 5 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 65 |
| 7 | Radom Subscriptions | 5 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 65 |
| 8 | Unlock Protocol Recurring Memberships | 2 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 64 |
| 9 | MoonPay Commerce Subscriptions (formerly Helio) | 1 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 52 |
How this ranking works
How firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and which crypto subscriptions were assessed and left out.
FirmThis verdict holds under every one-point re-read
See the arithmetic
Every published criterion was moved up and down by one point and the ranking re-run. The same product came first each time. The published rankings file
Why this score4 published criteria · leads 2 of 4
Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap/10 out of 10Pts
My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run?6.7·98.1
The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?6.2−721.7
If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?5.8·107.7
What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that?5.3−185.6
Σ methodology points23.0/32
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 Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program leads this category right now
The chain-native mandate primitive: one onchain program (De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44, verified executable and transacting on mainnet-beta on 2026-08-17) that turns an unlimited (u64::MAX) SPL Token delegate approval into three bounded, program-enforced standing authorisations, with lifecycle events emitted onchain via self-CPI — and no dunning, no retries and an expressly disclaimed spend-time grace period, which is the correct answer for a rail rather than a failure of one. Upgrades are governed by a Squads multisig; the upgrade authority is an off-curve PDA, verified independently. Strongest on “If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?” (10/10): Solana publishes the program at De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44 and states that the Subscription Authority cannot move funds by itself; a transfer only succeeds when it matches one of the user's active authorizations. The merchant or a listed puller collects with no vendor server in the path. Weakest on “The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?” (2/10): Solana documents rejection, not recovery: the program rejects transfers that exceed the current period's remaining allowance, and expiryTs is a hard stop with no spend-time grace period. No retry, overdue state or failure event is published. Published price: No price is published, and that absence is the finding. The Overview (https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/overview, fetched 2026-09-28) still runs Purpose / Program ID / Delegation Models / Supported Tokens / On-Chain Events / Versioning /…
Best for
Mandate survives the provider — 10/10
Main tradeoff
THE THING THAT WILL ANNOY THE BUYER WHO CHOSE THIS: there is no product here — only a mandate. Everything a recurring-billing operator actually staffs is absent by design, and the program does not merely omit dunning, it publishes the omission: 'There is no spend-time grace period.' No retry, no grace window, no failure event, no overdue state, no reminder, no HTTP webhook, no dashboard, no failureReason enum. A short balance on the second charge is a reverted transaction that the merchant must notice by running its own indexer over self-CPI events. And the notification asymmetry will catch people: the SubscriptionCancelledEvent that makes this the category reference exists ONLY in the subscription-plan model. Revoke a fixed or recurring delegation — 'The delegator can revoke the recurring delegation at any time. Revoking closes the delegation PDA and returns its rent to the signer.' — and the published event list emits nothing at all. The docs site discloses the close-does-not-revoke leak but not the reverse — though the REPOSITORY README does, and a buyer should read it: a subscriber who calls the SPL Token program's Revoke directly on their own token account silently kills the Subscription Authority's approval for EVERY delegation and subscription on that mint simultaneously, while the subscription PDA keeps reading as live. That is the exact silent-revocation failure this category exists to price, and it sits one layer below the layer the vendor documents. [Three further traps the vendor itself discloses, all in its repository README: (i) The SPL-layer approval the Subscription Authority holds is `u64::MAX` — unlimited; every cap you are buying is enforced by program logic, not by the token program. (ii) Revocation is not necessarily final: 'A held init+subscribe bundle survives `revokeSubscriptionAuthority` ... restoring a spendable permission with no new signature.' (iii) A held resume can erase a cancellation within the same billing period. The vendor publishes all three plainly, which is to its credit — but they are in the README, not on the docs pages a buyer is likely to read.]
Verify before signup
No price is published, and that absence is the finding. The Overview (https://
Recommendation summary
What should decide this category
If a customer revokes at midnight, are you told, or do you find out when the charge fails?
When the second charge fails, is there a published retry policy or best-effort language?
If the provider is gone next quarter, does the mandate still pay you?
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
Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program
The chain-native mandate primitive: one onchain program (De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44, verified executable and transacting on mainnet-beta on 2026-08-17) that turns an unlimited (u64::MAX) SPL Token delegate approval into three bounded, program-enforced standing authorisations, with lifecycle events emitted onchain via self-CPI — and no dunning, no retries and an expressly disclaimed spend-time grace period, which is the correct answer for a rail rather than a failure of one. Upgrades are governed by a Squads multisig; the upgrade authority is an off-curve PDA, verified independently.
The chain-native mandate primitive: one onchain program (De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44, verified executable and transacting on mainnet-beta on 2026-08-17) that turns an unlimited (u64::MAX) SPL Token delegate approval into three bounded, program-enforced standing authorisations, with lifecycle events emitted onchain via self-CPI — and no dunning, no retries and an expressly disclaimed spend-time grace period, which is the correct answer for a rail rather than a failure of one. Upgrades are governed by a Squads multisig; the upgrade authority is an off-curve PDA, verified independently. Strongest on “If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?” (10/10): Solana publishes the program at De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44 and states that the Subscription Authority cannot move funds by itself; a transfer only succeeds when it matches one of the user's active authorizations. The merchant or a listed puller collects with no vendor server in the path. Weakest on “The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?” (2/10): Solana documents rejection, not recovery: the program rejects transfers that exceed the current period's remaining allowance, and expiryTs is a hard stop with no spend-time grace period. No retry, overdue state or failure event is published. Published price: No price is published, and that absence is the finding. The Overview (https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/overview, fetched 2026-09-28) still runs Purpose / Program ID / Delegation Models / Supported Tokens / On-Chain Events / Versioning /…
Best for: Mandate survives the provider — 10/10
My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run? · weight 28%9/10The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it? · weight 26%2/10If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today? · weight 24%10/10What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that? · weight 22%8/10
Quick pick
Superfluid Money Streaming
A non-custodial per-second money-streaming protocol on 11 mainnets whose standing mandate is a rate-capped onchain delegation (setFlowPermissions / flowRateAllowance / revokeFlowPermissions) with an immutable forwarder at one address on every chain — and whose answer to a payer running short is not dunning but public liquidation inside a published 4-hour buffer and 30-minute patrician window.
A non-custodial per-second money-streaming protocol on 11 mainnets whose standing mandate is a rate-capped onchain delegation (setFlowPermissions / flowRateAllowance / revokeFlowPermissions) with an immutable forwarder at one address on every chain — and whose answer to a payer running short is not dunning but public liquidation inside a published 4-hour buffer and 30-minute patrician window. Strongest on “My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run?” (8/10): Superfluid fires beforeAgreementTerminated and afterAgreementTerminated callbacks onchain when a stream to a Super App is deleted. The push reaches only a deployed, registered Super App; a plain receiving wallet is told nothing, and the docs carry no webhook or alert surface. Weakest on “The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?” (3/10): Superfluid has no dunning: once the sender's balance reaches zero, anyone may close the stream, and the deposit is consumed through the Patrician, Plebs and Pirate phases. Its published parameters, a 4 hour deposit and a 30 minute patrician period, cover only a few networks. Published price: No price is published; that absence is the finding. https://superfluid.org/pricing does not exist (HTTP 307 to https://superfluid.org/, checked 2026-09-28) and the site navigation (fetched 2026-09-28) now reads "Technology Builders Ecosystem Adoptions…
Best for: Revocation visibility — 8/10
My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run? · weight 28%8/10The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it? · weight 26%3/10If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today? · weight 24%8/10What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that? · weight 22%6/10
Quick pick
Request Network Recurring Payments
The pool's tightest authorisation object — recipient, amount, total count, ordering and expiry all fixed in one EIP-712 permit and enforced by a non-custodial contract — collected by Request's own backend scheduler, which publishes no cancellation or revocation event at all.
The pool's tightest authorisation object — recipient, amount, total count, ordering and expiry all fixed in one EIP-712 permit and enforced by a non-custodial contract — collected by Request's own backend scheduler, which publishes no cancellation or revocation event at all. Strongest on “What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that?” (9/10): Request fixes the recipient, the per-payment amount, the total number of payments, strict ordering and a signature deadline in one EIP-712 permit, and says the smart contract enforces each bound. The feature page does not publish the recurring payment contract's address. Weakest on “My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run?” (4/10): Request's current webhook list has no cancellation or revocation event, and it says wallet cancellation does not emit payment.failed. Cancelling is an API action that can return a transaction to decrease the allowance; a status call shows remaining executions and the next payment date. Published price: Read on https://request.network/pricing/ (fetched 2026-09-28): "Send and accept crypto for a flat 0.9% per transaction" — headline; the pricing card reads "0.9%" / "Flat fee on transaction volume, capped at $500 per transaction", with "No monthly fees", "No…
Best for: What the mandate permits — 9/10
My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run? · weight 28%4/10The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it? · weight 26%7/10If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today? · weight 24%5/10What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that? · weight 22%9/10
Quick pick
BA
Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions)
Coinbase's recurring-USDC rail on Base: a per-period spend allowance enforced by the audited SpendPermissionManager singleton at a published address, with a pull-only getStatus the merchant must poll — and zero published dunning, because Base assigns 'Retry logic for failed charges' to the merchant's own backend.
Coinbase's recurring-USDC rail on Base: a per-period spend allowance enforced by the audited SpendPermissionManager singleton at a published address, with a pull-only getStatus the merchant must poll — and zero published dunning, because Base assigns 'Retry logic for failed charges' to the merchant's own backend. Strongest on “If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?” (8/10): Base subscriptions run through the SpendPermissionManager at 0xf85210B21cC50302F477BA56686d2019dC9b67Ad, and prepareCharge supplies call data to charge without CDP wallets. By default charged USDC sits in a CDP wallet, and no subscription page states a non-custodial position. Weakest on “The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?” (2/10): Base lists 'Retry logic for failed charges' among the things the merchant's own backend must supply, alongside scheduled jobs and a subscription database. It publishes no retry count, grace period or failure reason of its own. Published price: "No transaction fees or platform cuts" (bullet under "Enterprise-Ready Features", https://docs.cdp.coinbase.com/coinbase-wallet/guides/accept-recurring-payments, fetched 2026-09-28); the same guide's opening says Base Subscriptions "provide a seamless…
Best for: Mandate survives the provider — 8/10
My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run? · weight 28%7/10The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it? · weight 26%2/10If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today? · weight 24%8/10What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that? · weight 22%7/10
Considered and not ranked
14 products we looked at and left out
A shortlist is only honest if it says who it turned away. Each of these was assessed against the same published criteria as the ranked table and excluded for a stated reason — not overlooked.
We assessed 23 products here and rank 9 — 39% of what we looked at. That share is of the products we assessed, not of the category: how many exist is not something we can count, so we do not claim a number for it.
Loop Crypto / LoopCrypto· No longer operatingPay.shHypersub (Fabric Subscription Token Protocol)Coinbase Commerce recurring· Ranked elsewhereSpritz / Spritz Finance· Ranked elsewhereRotki· Ranked elsewhereStreamflow and LlamaPay· Ranked elsewhereSablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups)· Ranked elsewhereZebec· No longer operatingSphere PaySubscryptDialectNOWPayments, BitPay, CoinGate, BTCPay Server, OpenNode, Triple-A, Plisio, Crypto.com Pay, StrikeBridge, BVNK, Circle, Conduit, dLocal, Rain, Zerohash
What this ranking does not assess
- Liveness failure: the operator stops, censors you or loses data.
These can still cost you money here; the ranking does not measure them, so a high place says nothing about them. Which criterion scores each family, and why the others do not apply, is in /data/risk-coverage.json.
How this ranking is built
Ranked on four questions
- My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run? · 28%
- The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it? · 26%
- If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today? · 24%
- What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that? · 22%
Data checked Sep 2026 · Independent rankings · We show our work
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means every product ranked on this page was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
Direct answer
What is the best crypto subscription platform in 2026?
Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program ranks #1 overall for crypto subscriptions on ChainChoice. The chain-native mandate primitive: one onchain program (De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44, verified executable and transacting on mainnet-beta on 2026-08-17) that turns an unlimited (u64::MAX) SPL Token delegate approval into three bounded, program-enforced standing authorisations, with lifecycle events emitted onchain via self-CPI — and no dunning, no retries and an expressly disclaimed spend-time grace period, which is the correct answer for a rail rather than a failure of one. Upgrades are governed by a Squads multisig; the upgrade authority is an off-curve PDA, verified independently. 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; the full reasoning and the audit receipt are under Methodology.
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Custody failure: whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by What exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that? · 22% (Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program 8/10, Superfluid Money Streaming 6/10, Request Network Recurring Payments 9/10)
- Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it? · 26% (Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program 2/10, Superfluid Money Streaming 3/10, Request Network Recurring Payments 7/10)
- Exit failure: you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today? · 24% (Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program 10/10, Superfluid Money Streaming 8/10, Request Network Recurring Payments 5/10)
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by My customer kills the allowance at midnight. Am I told, or do I find out at the next billing run? · 28% (Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program 9/10, Superfluid Money Streaming 8/10, Request Network Recurring Payments 4/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
FAQs
3 questions readers ask before choosing crypto subscriptions.
Frequently asked
Questions people ask before choosing subscriptions
Is this not covered by the payment gateway category?
No, and the gap is the reason this page exists. All five criteria in payment_gateway describe ONE COMPLETED PAYMENT — settlement, custody of the float, the price, the integration. Nothing there scores what happens on the second charge, when a renewal fails, or when a customer revokes an allowance without telling anyone. For a subscription business the first payment is the easy one. Everything that decides whether the revenue is real happens afterwards, and it was scored nowhere across the live catalog.
Which is safer, a protocol or a commercial biller?
Neither, and that is the most useful thing this ranking shows. The pool splits into two shapes that are each strong exactly where the other is weak: the protocols that keep working without their operator average 8.75 on survival and 2.5 on recovering a failed charge, while the commercial billers average 7.0 on recovery and 3.75 on survival. NOT ONE of the nine scores 7 or above on both. So the honest answer is that you are choosing which failure you would rather have, and the quiz is built to make you pick that deliberately rather than by accident.
How can nobody handle revocation well? It seems basic.
It is basic, and the ceiling in this pool is 8 out of 10 with nobody in the top band. The reason is structural: an onchain recurring payment is usually a token approval or a delegated permission, and a customer can withdraw it in one transaction that involves your provider not at all. Detecting that requires watching chain state rather than receiving a message, so most rails simply learn about it when the next charge fails. Only one of the nine publishes a committed retry number, which compounds the same problem from the other end.
Free advisor·No signup needed
Still unsure? Get your best subscriptions 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 signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Best picks
Best crypto subscriptions in 2026
Weighted on whether you are told when a mandate is revoked (28), what happens when a renewal fails (26), whether the mandate survives the provider (24), and what the customer actually authorised (22). Everything a payment gateway scores describes ONE COMPLETED PAYMENT; nothing there covers the second charge, a failed renewal, or an allowance revoked without telling you. The revocation ceiling here is 8 and nobody reaches the top band. The pool also splits cleanly and unhelpfully: the protocols that survive their operator are weak at recovering a failed charge, the commercial billers are the reverse, and NOT ONE scores 7 or above on both.
Best overall
Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program
The chain-native mandate primitive: one onchain program (De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44, verified executable and transacting on mainnet-beta on 2026-08-17) that turns an unlimited (u64::MAX) SPL Token delegate approval into three bounded, program-enforced standing authorisations, with lifecycle events emitted onchain via self-CPI — and no dunning, no retries and an expressly disclaimed spend-time grace period, which is the correct answer for a rail rather than a failure of one. Upgrades are governed by a Squads multisig; the upgrade authority is an off-curve PDA, verified independently.
Data checked Sep 2026
The chain-native mandate primitive: one onchain program (De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44, verified executable and transacting on mainnet-beta on 2026-08-17) that turns an unlimited (u64::MAX) SPL Token delegate approval into three bounded, program-enforced standing authorisations, with lifecycle events emitted onchain via self-CPI — and no dunning, no retries and an expressly disclaimed spend-time grace period, which is the correct answer for a rail rather than a failure of one. Upgrades are governed by a Squads multisig; the upgrade authority is an off-curve PDA, verified independently. Strongest on “If this provider is gone next quarter, do I still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?” (10/10): Solana publishes the program at De1egAFMkMWZSN5rYXRj9CAdheBamobVNubTsi9avR44 and states that the Subscription Authority cannot move funds by itself; a transfer only succeeds when it matches one of the user's active authorizations. The merchant or a listed puller collects with no vendor server in the path. Weakest on “The second charge fails. What does the provider actually do next, and when do I hear about it?” (2/10): Solana documents rejection, not recovery: the program rejects transfers that exceed the current period's remaining allowance, and expiryTs is a hard stop with no spend-time grace period. No retry, overdue state or failure event is published. Published price: No price is published, and that absence is the finding. The Overview (https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/overview, fetched 2026-09-28) still runs Purpose / Program ID / Delegation Models / Supported Tokens / On-Chain Events / Versioning /…
Best for: Mandate survives the provider — 10/10
Browse this network
MS
Written and reviewed by Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research