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
4199
Why it leads
Best in the pool on published predictive evidence and manipulation filtering documented
Cost
Not priced· No comparable price is published
No provider can pay for a position in this table. The code that computes this order cannot read which links earn us a commission, and every build proves it. Every score below rebuilds from the published criteria.Ranking 2026.08 · 4 criteria · 8 products · same inputs, same order
Personal comparison
Sentiment Analytics ranked comparison
No comparable price is published; ranking still uses verified product evidence.
RankProviderBest fitScore
1
LunarCrushLunarCrushSocial feed aggregation across six plat...Top ranked
Published predictive evidence — 8/10Trade-off: The one reproducible test in this pool is on 2,898 US equity earnings prints in 2026...
Ranked on 4 published criteria weighted 30/25/25/20, which set goal alignment — 30 of the 86 points. The rest: regional access 20, evidence depth 18, ease of use 10, institutional trust 8. Profile match is shown in breakdowns but carries no weight.
Audit
Infrastructure
Methodology
2026.09.15
published 2026-09-16
Providers tracked
980+
across 119 categories
Last verified
2026-09-27
newest dated pricing or sentiment read
Named on the roster
2 people
managing directors · 6 automated processes
Decision guide
What matters most before choosing in this category
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.
What matters most before choosing in this category
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.
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?
Current editor lead
Expert review and scoring weights
LunarCrush
LunarCrushData checked Sep 2026
Social feed aggregation across six platforms sold as Galaxy Score and AltRank composites plus an API and MCP server.
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 forPublished predictive evidence — 8/10
Main tradeoffThe 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 signupFetched 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.
Methodology
How this category is reviewed
Reviewed on published predictive evidence, published price and free-tier substance, documented bot filtering, and source and asset coverage.
The order on this page is the published ranking for this category. Every criterion, weight and source behind it is on the methodology page.
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.
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
//Analytics consent·GDPR · ePrivacy · TTDSG
ChainChoice measures page views and conversions with two cookieless, EU-hosted services: Plausible and Cloudflare Web Analytics. Nothing loads until you accept, and rankings are identical either way.ChainChoice measures how the engine is used — page views, conversions, referrer — through two cookieless, EU-hosted services: Plausible and Cloudflare Web Analytics. No advertising cookies, no cross-site profile, no data resale. Neither script loads until you accept, and rankings are identical whether you accept or decline.
