Skip to main content
Leading options · 9 ranked from 23 screened

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.

#1 of 9 · published ranking
Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program
80ChainChoice Score
Why it leads
Best in the pool on mandate survives the provider (10/10; next 9/10)
Cost
Not priced · No published rate on this basis
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 · 9 products · same inputs, same order
Personal comparison

What crypto subscriptions cost you

Your inputs update the cost column. The independent ranking stays fixed.

Percentage and fixed legs on each payment, for a year. Excludes chargebacks, FX markup and settlement fees priced separately.

RankProviderBest fitScoreYour cost
1
Solana Subscriptions Delegation ProgramThe chain-native mandate primitive: one...Top ranked
Mandate survives the provider — 10/10Trade-off: THE THING THAT WILL ANNOY THE BUYER WHO CHOSE THIS: there is no product here — only a...
80score
-Not published
Check availability for your countryVisit Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program · solana.com

Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure

Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.

2
Superfluid Money StreamingA non-custodial per-second money-stream...
Revocation visibility — 8/10Trade-off: A temporary shortfall does not delay your revenue — it permanently deletes the subscr...
76score
-Not published
Check availability for your countryVisit Superfluid Money Streaming · docs.superfluid.org

Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure

Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.

3
Request Network Recurring PaymentsThe pool's tightest authorisation objec...
What the mandate permits — 9/10Trade-off: The mandate's rigidity is the product, and it is also the thing that will hurt. Every...
75score
Lowest at your inputs
Check availability for your countryVisit Request Network Recurring Payments · docs.request.network

Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure

Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.

4
Sablier FlowAn onchain debt-streaming primitive whe...
Revocation visibility — 7/10Trade-off: You cannot originate one in the official app any more, and the price of collecting fr...
74score
your cost/yr
Check availability for your countryVisit Sablier Flow · docs.sablier.com

Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure

Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.

Joint #4 · ordered by unrounded weighted total (42.47 against 42.42)
5
Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions)Coinbase's non-custodial recurring-USDC...
Mandate survives the provider — 8/10Trade-off: You are not buying a billing system, you are buying a mandate and a read. Base gives...
74score
your cost/yr
Check availability for your countryVisit Base Pay Subscriptions (Spend Permissions) · docs.base.org

Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure

Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.

6
Coinflow SubscriptionsCoinflow SubscriptionsA card-and-ACH recurring biller with a...
Renewal failure path — 6/10Trade-off: You are buying a card biller with a stablecoin payout leg, not an onchain recurring m...
68score
-Not published
Check availability for your countryVisit Coinflow Subscriptions · docs.coinflow.cash

Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure

Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.

3 more assessed and ranked below — none of them hidden for commercial reasons.
Ranking blindCommercial terms excludedDated primary sources

Ranked on 4 published criteria weighted 28/26/24/22, 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
2026-08-17
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 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.

What matters most before choosing in this category

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.

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?
Strong starting point

Expert review and scoring weights

Solana Subscriptions Delegation ProgramData checked Aug 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.

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): BOTH REQUIRED HALVES ARE MET IN PUBLISHED TEXT, AND I VERIFIED THE THIRD-PARTY HALF MYSELF ON MAINNET, 2026-08-17. (a) NOBODY STANDS BETWEEN THE TWO WALLETS. https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/overview: 'The Subscription Authority cannot move funds by itself. Weakest on the second charge fails. what does the provider actually do next, and when do i hear about it? (2/10): BOTTOM BAND, AND THE RUBRIC SAYS SO EXPLICITLY: 'A bare primitive that documents rejection but no recovery also scores 0-2 — the Solana program simply rejects a transfer exceeding the period allowance — and that is the correct answer for a rail, not a penalty for being one.' The docs confirm it precisely, read… Published price: NOT PUBLISHED AS A PRICE, AND THAT IS A FINDING, NOT A GAP IN MY SEARCH.

Best forMandate survives the provider — 10/10
Main tradeoffTHE 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. [VERIFIER ADDENDUM 2026-08-17: three further vendor-disclosed traps, all from the repo README the draft could not load. (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 signupNOT PUBLISHED AS A PRICE, AND THAT IS A FINDING, NOT A GAP IN MY SEARCH. No page under solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/* states a protocol fee, take rate, subscription price or basis-point charge, and the repository README's fee section is absent (checked github.com/solana-program/subscriptions, 2026-08-17). The page that would carry pricing — the Overview — runs Purpose / Program ID / Delegation Models / Supported Tokens / On-Chain Events / Versioning / Contributors / Audit Status / Demo Application and has no pricing section at all. The only costs the documentation quantifies are Solana account rent, and rent is REFUNDABLE, not a fee: 'Closing returns the account's rent to its funder (the user, or whichever payer funded it).' (https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/close-subscription-authority, read 2026-08-17) and 'expiryTs is a hard stop: once it passes, transfers fail and the sponsor can recover rent.' (https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/recurring-delegation). The repository publishes a rent table whose first row reads 'Enable authority for a mint | SubscriptionAuthority | 0.00162864' SOL — see structuralFacts, and see `unresolved` for the confidence caveat on how that table was read. WARNING FOR THE BUILD, a trap I nearly walked into: 'price_usd: 9.99' and 'requires a user to make recurring payments of 9.99 USDC to it every 30 days' appear on https://solana.com/docs/payments/subscriptions/pay-sh. That is the MERCHANT'S OWN demo subscription price inside a Pay.sh YAML example — it is emphatically NOT the price of this program and must never be quoted as one.
Methodology

How this category is reviewed

Reviewed on my customer kills the allowance at midnight. am i told, or do i find out at the next billing run?, the second charge fails. what does the provider actually do next, and when do i hear about it?, if this provider is gone next quarter, do i still get paid — and whose licence is the money moving under today?, and what exactly did my customer sign away, and what stops it from quietly becoming more than that?.

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 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.
REVIEWEDAugust 17, 2026METHOD4 criteriaCATEGORYsubscriptions
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
ChainChoice
Compare onchain. A brighter future.
© 2026 ChainChoice. All rights reserved.
System statusFeeds last refreshed 9 days ago
Built from commit ba0993b · rankings.json sha256 e1eb24980abb
ChainChoice · The decision layer for crypto · Not financial adviceEducational analysis, not investment advice. Affiliate links may contribute to operations but never alter rankings.

ChainChoice provides informational content only. Nothing on this site constitutes financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Always do your own research and consult a qualified professional before making financial decisions.