{ "_note": "Generated by scripts/generate-refusal-index.ts from the methodology specs and data/observations/universe.jsonl; do not edit by hand.", "license": "CC-BY-4.0", "licenseUrl": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/", "attribution": "ChainChoice (https://chainchoice.io)", "url": "https://chainchoice.io/data/refusals.json", "generatedAt": "2026-11-12", "what": "Every product a ChainChoice category assessed and did not rank, with the reason its category page publishes. Scope rules that govern a category without naming a product are not listed.", "reconciles": "count equals coverage.excludedWithReason in /data/rankings.json, and byCategory equals each category's coverage.excludedWithReason there and the list its page prints under \"Considered and not ranked\". The build fails when any of them differ (check-universe-reconciles, clause 11).", "ledger": "https://chainchoice.io/data/observations/universe.jsonl", "count": 771, "byCategory": { "account_abstraction_infra": 1, "attestations": 2, "automation_keepers": 12, "bill_pay": 8, "block_explorers": 6, "bridges": 23, "bug_bounties": 2, "business_banking": 10, "cdp_stablecoins": 8, "creator_mint_platforms": 10, "cross_chain_messaging": 3, "cross_chain_swaps": 14, "crypto_backed_loans": 8, "crypto_card": 21, "crypto_neobanks": 9, "crypto_payroll": 8, "decentralised_storage": 8, "defi_dashboards": 9, "defi_insurance": 1, "depin_networks": 7, "dex": 16, "dex_aggregator": 7, "enterprise_accounting": 11, "exchange": 26, "flash_loans": 2, "gift_cards": 8, "governance_tools": 2, "hardware_wallet": 20, "incentive_distribution": 9, "institutional_custody": 7, "institutional_execution": 10, "intents": 5, "key_recovery": 7, "l2_chains": 11, "layer1_chains": 5, "lightning_payment_infrastructure": 10, "lightning_wallets": 9, "liquid_staking": 11, "market_data_apis": 1, "mev_protection": 8, "mining_pools": 8, "mpc_wallets": 7, "naming_services": 8, "nft_lending": 7, "nft_marketplace": 17, "offramps": 15, "onchain_analytics": 8, "onramp": 14, "oracles": 16, "otc_desks": 3, "paid_research_seats": 11, "payment_gateway": 7, "perp_dex": 6, "perp_house_vaults": 10, "portfolio_tracking": 11, "prediction_markets": 16, "privacy_tools": 16, "relayers": 1, "retail_staking": 1, "rpc_nodes": 8, "savings_plans": 3, "sentiment_analytics": 1, "shared_sequencers": 9, "sidechains": 4, "simple_buy": 14, "smart_accounts": 8, "smart_contract_audits": 9, "socialfi": 8, "stablecoin_issuance": 7, "stablecoin_yield": 8, "stablecoins": 6, "staking": 1, "subscriptions": 14, "tax_software": 17, "token_launch_platforms": 2, "token_standards": 12, "tokenised_bonds": 10, "tokenised_equities": 11, "tokenised_funds": 8, "tokenised_tbills": 9, "trading_bots": 11, "trading_tools": 15, "transaction_simulation": 15, "travel_rule_compliance": 11, "wallet": 1, "wallet_screening": 4, "web3_apps": 6, "wrapped_assets": 1, "yield_vaults": 1 }, "byKind": { "dead_or_discontinued": 86, "deferred_or_not_live_yet": 5, "duplicate_of_ranked_record": 141, "no_primary_record_reread_pending": 8, "operator_changed_reread_pending": 1, "other": 2, "out_of_scope": 25, "read_not_ranked_too_few_products": 26, "region_or_audience_locked": 5, "source_paused_reread_pending": 46, "source_unavailable_reread_pending": 16, "source_walled_reread_pending": 15, "terms_bar_agents_reread_pending": 28, "unclassified": 344, "unverifiable_evidence": 23 }, "withSource": 510, "withCheckedOn": 771, "withExpiresIf": 771, "fields": { "name": "The product, as the category page prints it.", "category": "The category that assessed it and did not rank it (the key in /data/rankings.json and in /best/).", "kind": "Why, as one of seven machine-readable kinds, where exactly one fits; null means read the reason, not that there is none.", "reason": "The published reason, word for word as the category page prints it.", "source": "The record's own source address, or else the first web address its reason cites; null when it cites none.", "sourceFrom": "\"record\" when the source is the record's own, \"reason\" when it is the first address the reason cites, null when there is none.", "checkedOn": "The day the refusal was last checked against the world. Every refusal carries one (check-refusals-carry-review).", "checkedFrom": "\"record\" when the refusal's own record dates it, \"reason\" when its published reason dates the read, \"research\" when the verified research payload does, \"recorded\" when none does and the day is when the refusal entered the record (an upper bound on the read).", "onRecordSince": "The first day the public universe ledger records this refusal (under ledgerKey, or under the key it was renamed from). The ledger began on 2026-09-08, so a refusal made before then carries that day.", "ledgerKey": "The refusal's key on the universe ledger, https://chainchoice.io/data/observations/universe.jsonl, where every change to it is appended.", "pointer": "Where the buyer is served instead, where the record names it: a category key or a ranked product id.", "aliases": "Other names a reader types for the same product; search resolves them to this refusal, and they are not counted as refusals.", "expiresIf": "The condition under which the refusal is to be looked at again. Every refusal carries one (check-refusals-carry-review).", "expiresFrom": "\"record\" when the refusal's own record states it, \"research\" when the verified research payload does (word for word), \"review\" when it was written from the published reason on 2026-10-15." }, "refusals": [ {"name":"Stackup","category":"account_abstraction_infra","kind":null,"reason":"EXCLUDED as discontinued, not scored. The stackup-wallet/stackup-bundler repository returns archived=true with its last push on 2024-08-12 (api.github.com/repos/stackup-wallet/stackup-bundler), and the company has repurposed the brand entirely: stackup.fi now presents as \"Stackup: Digital Asset Management Platform for Crypto Companies\" selling \"crypto finance infrastructure\" for invoicing and treasury, and docs.stackup.sh redirects to docs.stackup.fi, which is now \"Stackup Documentation - Digital Asset Management Platform for Crypto Operations\" with no bundler documentation at all. Listing it as a live bundler option would be the single most misleading thing this category could do, since it still ranks in search results and still appears in BundleBear's historical table with 662,438 UserOps.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"account_abstraction_infra/stackup/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The Stackup bundler repository is unarchived, or Stackup ships a live bundler product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Optimism Attestation Station","category":"attestations","kind":null,"reason":"excluded as superseded. The OP Stack now ships EAS itself as a Bedrock predeploy at 0x4200000000000000000000000000000000000021, so the Attestation Station is not an independent product to compare.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"attestations/optimism-attestation-station/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Attestation Station is offered again as a product independent of the EAS predeploy.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"World ID / Worldcoin","category":"attestations","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"excluded on primitive mismatch, not on quality. It proves unique personhood by nullifier rather than by issuing a per-subject attestation record, so it has no schema registry, no attester field and no revocation semantics to score against three of the four criteria. Its own reference page for smart contracts is additionally labelled 'Contracts 3.0 deprecated' pending World ID 4.0 (docs.world.org/world-id/reference/contracts), which would make any deployment scoring stale on arrival.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"attestations/world-id-worldcoin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"World ID issues per-subject attestation records with a schema registry, an attester field and revocation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Autonomy Network","category":"automation_keepers","kind":null,"reason":"COULD NOT BE READ; recorded as inconclusive, not as dead. autonomynetwork.io returned no HTTP response on 2026-08-14 and no positive liveness signal was found to weigh against that, so it is neither ranked nor declared dead. Re-check before launch.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-14","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/autonomy-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"autonomynetwork.io answers and shows a positive liveness signal.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Brahma (Console / Automation Accounts)","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"SUNSET, per the vendor's own pages. console.brahma.fi now serves only 'Discontinued - April 17, 2026 — Brahma Accounts has been discontinued. Following Brahma's acquisition by Polymarket, the Brahma Accounts interface has been sunset. Your funds remain safe and can continue to be managed via Safe.' docs.brahma.fi is now a migration guide to app.safe.global that still refers to converting 'your Sub-Account or Automation Account into a standalone Safe'. brahma.fi markets 'The Orchestration Layer for Internet Finance' with no automation product in view.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/brahma-console-automation-accounts/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Brahma relaunches Console or Automation Accounts.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Clockwork (Solana)","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD, on positive code evidence rather than on a failed fetch: clockwork-xyz/clockwork last pushed 2024-03-17, /docs 2024-01-26, /sdk 2023-09-18, /app 2023-06-08. www.clockwork.xyz does not resolve, which is recorded as inconclusive and is NOT the basis of the exclusion. Its functional successor on Solana, TukTuk, is in the pool.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/clockwork-solana/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The Clockwork repository resumes development and the product is deployed again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ditto Network","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"LIVENESS NOT ESTABLISHED, held out despite a convincing site and despite one model run ranking it. dittonetwork.io markets 'Smart Contract Automation' with counters reading 'Simulations Executed 317,000+' and 'Active Executors 20+', and the GitHub org looks busy (ditto-workflow-sdk 2026-06-19, ditto-runner-node 2026-06-12). Against that: the docs introduction is stamped 'Last updated 12 months ago'; the newest blog post is dated Aug 19, 2025; npm @ditto-network/core is still 0.1.0, registry-modified 2025-04-24; and the only mainnet deployments the docs publish — the Ditto USD Meta Lending vault 0xa1d1f4233dc8c792f5baea954e2f236bee6dd965 and its Rebalancer 0xf3ef2a5d993cd958d1e6072d2612504124e28848 — last transacted 2026-01-26 and 2026-01-23. Ditto publishes no contract address for the automation network itself, so there is nothing to verify positively. Under criterion 2 a claimed executor count scores zero; the same rule applies to admission. Re-check onchain before launch rather than ship an unverifiable entry.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/ditto-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ditto's executors show sustained onchain activity a reader can check.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Gelato Web3 Functions / Gelato Automate","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"EXCLUDED TWICE OVER. Gelato is ranked in Relayers as 'gelato_relay' and in Rollup-as-a-Service as 'gelato_raas'; a third product line from the same vendor is exactly the residue signature this exercise exists to catch. Independently, it is the cleanest demonstration on this run that HTTP 200 is not proof of life: the docs still read 'Automated Transaction ensures that a specific function on the target smart contract gets reliably triggered' and llms.txt still lists Web3 Functions under Core Products rather than Legacy, but the Automate.sol entry point published on Gelato's own supported-networks page, 0x2A6C106ae13B558BB9E2Ec64Bd2f1f7BEFF3A5E0, shows last meaningful activity clustered on 2026-03-31 across Ethereum, Polygon and Base — all from the same sender 0x7c820f9ebf, minutes apart — then near-silence, with one Base transaction on 2026-04-07 that reverted. gelato.cloud's own product nav now lists only Paymaster & Bundler, Turbo and Rollups. A competitor (KeeperHub) asserts a 31 March 2026 end-of-life; that is a rival's page and is recorded, not relied on — the exclusion rests on the chain data and Gelato's own homepage.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-14","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/gelato-web3-functions-gelato-automate/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gelato sells Web3 Functions as a product separate from the Relay and RaaS records already ranked.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Halliday","category":"automation_keepers","kind":null,"reason":"PIVOTED OUT. halliday.xyz now reads 'Halliday is the end-to-end deposit platform' with rails coverage, KYC thresholds and on/off-ramp toggles by country. That is the buyer served by the existing Onramp category, not this one.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/halliday/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Halliday returns to selling contract automation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Olas / Autonolas","category":"automation_keepers","kind":null,"reason":"EXCLUDED ON BUYER, not on liveness: it is emphatically alive (valory-xyz/open-autonomy pushed 2026-08-13, homepage counters showing 3,694 agents deployed and 598 daily active). But olas.network sells co-ownership of AI through Pearl (an 'Agent App-Store'), the Mech Marketplace and OLAS staking. Its customer is an agent operator or token holder seeking yield, not a protocol engineer who needs one named function called before a position liquidates. Assembling this pool by FUNCTION would have swept Olas in; assembling by BUYER does not. Autonolas appears on this site only as evidence text inside the launchpads pool, not as a ranked provider, so there is no id conflict.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/olas-autonolas/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Olas sells a keeper or automation product to a protocol buying contract automation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"OpenZeppelin Defender (Actions / Autotasks)","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD SIX WEEKS AGO, on the vendor's own page: 'New sign-ups were disabled on June 30, 2025. Until the final shutdown on July 1, 2026, Defender will remain fully operational while we focus on the open source versions of tools like Relayers and Monitor.' The two halves OpenZeppelin kept are already on this site: OpenZeppelin Relayer is ranked in Relayers as 'openzeppelin_relayer', and OpenZeppelin itself is ranked in Smart Contract Audits as 'openzeppelin'. Worth publishing as evidence: the surviving open-source Monitor notifies via 'Slack, Discord, Email, Telegram, Webhooks, or custom scripts' — it notices, it does not call. OpenZeppelin shipped a thing that decides and a thing that submits and nothing in between; that gap is this category. Note also that openzeppelin.com markets the Relayer with 'schedule jobs', but docs.openzeppelin.com/relayer contains zero occurrences of 'schedule' or 'cron' — a marketing sentence with no documented surface.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-14","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/openzeppelin-defender-actions-autotasks/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"OpenZeppelin relaunches a hosted Defender service.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Otim","category":"automation_keepers","kind":null,"reason":"PIVOTED OUT. otim.xyz now redirects to otim.com, 'the orchestration layer for modern finance platforms', letting customers 'hold funds, earn yield, and move money globally, by API', behind a Book-a-Demo gate with no published chains, pricing or audits. Its FAQ still carries 'What is EIP-7702?' and 'How does Otim differ from other on-chain automation solutions?', so the heritage is real, but the product it sells today belongs nearer Stablecoin Settlement and Crypto Neobanks than here.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/otim/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Otim publishes chains, pricing and audits for an automation product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"PowerPool / Power Agent v2","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD ONCHAIN behind a fully maintained marketing surface, the most instructive false positive of the run. docs.powerpool.finance serves current-sounding copy ('DePIN layer powering AI Agents and DeFi automation in multichain universe', 'Vision 2027') and claims deployment on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Gnosis, Polygon and Sepolia. But the vendor's own contracts page publishes exactly three deployments — two testnets and one mainnet Agent, 0xc9ce4CdA5897707546F3904C0FfCC6e429bC4546, whose subgraph is named 'ppav2-rd-maintest-ui' and whose last transaction was 2025-09-19. Eleven months idle. Repo powerpool-agent-v2 last pushed 2024-08-12. Painful to drop, since it would have added variance on the bonded-keeper end of criterion 2, but a network is not certified as operating on a marketing page alone.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/powerpool-power-agent-v2/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"PowerPool's contracts show live keeper activity onchain again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Pyth Express Relay","category":"automation_keepers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"WOUND DOWN by governance, and it would also have been a second Pyth product line: Pyth is ranked in Oracles as 'pyth'. Character-exact from docs.pyth.network/express-relay: 'Express Relay has been wound down following Pyth governance decision OP-PIP-124.' and 'In July 2026, Pyth governance passed OP-PIP-124: Express Relay Wind-Down. Express Relay is no longer an actively supported Pyth product; the auction service, SDKs (@pythnetwork/express-relay-js, express_relay Python), and on-chain ExpressRelay contracts are being retired.' It was the closest thing to an outsourced-liquidation product and its death is a fact this page should carry as dated evidence.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/pyth-express-relay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pyth governance reverses OP-PIP-124 and Express Relay is restored.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Tenderly Web3 Actions","category":"automation_keepers","kind":null,"reason":"EXCLUDED ON OVERLAP, and this corrects a false claim made by one of the scoping model runs, which wrote that Tenderly is not ranked in any sibling category. Tenderly is ranked FOUR times on this site: as 'tenderly' in Block Explorers, as 'tenderly-sim' in Transaction Simulation, as 'tenderly_node' in RPC Nodes, and as 'tenderly_monitor_alerts' in Onchain Monitoring — whose published tagline already reads 'Developer observability with custom alert rules and triggered transactions', i.e. the trigger-to-transaction path is scored there under 'What it can actually DO' (25). Web3 Actions is genuinely live (docs carry dates 2026-06-24 and 2026-07-30 with no deprecation notice), so this is purely an overlap exclusion — and admitting it would have been the single clearest way to turn this page into a duplicate.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-14","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"automation_keepers/tenderly-web3-actions/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Tenderly sells Web3 Actions as a product separate from its four ranked records.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitnob and Yellow Card","category":"bill_pay","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Bitnob is ranked in Remittances (as bitnob_remit) and its consumer bill surface is gone: bitnob.com now presents Global Payouts, a multi-currency wallet and corporate card issuing, with no consumer utility bill payment on the page checked. Yellow Card has pivoted to B2B infrastructure — \"The Infrastructure for Modern Money Movement\" for banks and corporates — and the word \"bill\" occurs zero times on its homepage. Scoring either from historical airtime or utility features would be scoring from memory. Neither earns a suffixed entry.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/bitnob-and-yellow-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitnob or Yellow Card restores a consumer bill-payment surface on its own site.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BitPay Bill Pay","category":"bill_pay","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Live page, paused product. On 2026-08-14 https://bitpay.com/bill-pay/ answered (HTTP 200) with a full marketing page for paying mortgages, rent and credit cards, whose own banner reads \"Bill Pay service will be temporarily paused beginning December 26th, 2025 at 12:00 PM EST. At this time, we're unable to provide a confirmed timeline for when the Bill Pay service will resume.\" Eight months paused with no restart date is not a product a buyer can use in August 2026. BitPay is ranked in Payment Gateways, and it stays there.","source":"https://bitpay.com/bill-pay/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-14","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/bitpay-bill-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BitPay resumes the Bill Pay service, lifting the pause on its own page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitrefill Bill Pay","category":"bill_pay","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"EXCLUDED ON POSITIVE EVIDENCE, reversing one model run's recommendation. https://www.bitrefill.com/us-bills returned HTTP 403 (5,645-byte Cloudflare interstitial) to me on a browser UA, so I established the product's status positively instead: the vendor's CURRENT App Store listing (v7.9.0, released 2026-08-12) is titled \"Bitrefill: eSIMs & Gift Cards\" and enumerates gift cards from 5,000+ brands, eSIMs for 190+ countries, mobile recharge in 170+ countries and the Bitrefill Card — the only occurrence of the word \"bill\" in 1,651 characters is \"no roaming bill\". A vendor that has stopped listing a product among its products, whose bill page still reads \"Join Bill Pay Beta (U.S.)\", and whose page cannot be opened, does not get a row. Bitrefill is ranked in Crypto Gift Cards. If the US bill product leaves beta and becomes readable, it enters here as `bitrefill_bills` and is scored on these four criteria only — a Bitrefill entry ranked on spread and code-redemption would BE the Gift Cards page under a second URL. Also excluded: Bitrefill's programmatically generated non-US /bills/ pages, which return 200 for country-and-biller combinations that do not exist, including a working-looking form for SYLDAVIA, a fictional country from Tintin.","source":"https://www.bitrefill.com/us-bills","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-15","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/bitrefill-bill-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitrefill's App Store listing or its own bills page shows a live bill-payment product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bylls","category":"bill_pay","kind":null,"reason":"NOT A SEPARATE PRODUCT. I followed the chain myself: bylls.com returns HTTP 301 to bullbitcoin.com, which 301s to www.bullbitcoin.com and returns 200. Canada's best-known independent bill-pay brand was absorbed; ranking it separately would ship two rows for one product. Represented in this pool by bull_bitcoin. The id `bylls` stays free.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-15","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/bylls/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"bylls.com stops redirecting to Bull Bitcoin and serves its own product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Paid By Coins","category":"bill_pay","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD, established positively rather than inferred from a block. The TLS handshake completes but presents a certificate covering only *.azurewebsites.net whose subjectAltName does not match paidbycoins.com; fetching with verification disabled returns HTTP 404 serving Microsoft's own default page: \"Microsoft Azure Web App - Error 404 ... Web Site not found. ... Custom domain has not been configured inside Azure.\" The origin itself is answering that no site is deployed. This was Australia's second BPAY-rail competitor, and its death is why the AU slot has one entry rather than two.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/paid-by-coins/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"paidbycoins.com serves a live bill-payment product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Paybis","category":"bill_pay","kind":null,"reason":"NO BILL PRODUCT. paybis.com is an onramp, offramp and swap venue: 'Buy Crypto', 'Sell Crypto', 'Swap Crypto', 'Crypto Wallets', with zero occurrences of 'bill' on the homepage. The brief listed `paybis` as a free id and it stays free, because there is nothing here to rank. Cointree was tested as a second Australian BPAY candidate and failed the same way — buying, selling, trading and account types, with no reference to BPAY or bill payment anywhere.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/paybis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Paybis or Cointree adds a bill-payment product to its own site.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Piixpay","category":"bill_pay","kind":null,"reason":"SAME CONSOLIDATION TRAP, verified the same way. piixpay.com returns HTTP 301 to https://www.swapin.com/?ref=piixpay; the referral parameter shows a deliberate brand migration rather than a domain hijack. The euro-area crypto-to-IBAN invoice payer is now Swapin's SwapinPay. Represented in this pool by swapin.","source":"https://www.swapin.com/?ref=piixpay","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/piixpay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"piixpay.com stops redirecting to Swapin and serves its own product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zypto and Coca","category":"bill_pay","kind":null,"reason":"NOT ADMITTED ON THIS PASS. Every zypto.com path returned HTTP 403 or curl 000 and served only a Cloudflare challenge, so nothing was read and nothing is claimed; a search summary naming Zypto a leading bill-pay service is not a source. Coca (coca.xyz) surfaced in search only via an article hosted on its own blog — its own marketing — and its actual product page describes a non-custodial crypto debit card for \"over 100 million merchants across 200+ countries\" with no billers, no settlement statement and no bill-pay feature. A card is a general spending instrument, which is the Crypto Cards buyer, not this one. Both need a readable vendor page before they can be scored.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bill_pay/zypto-and-coca/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"zypto.com loads for a reader, or Coca publishes its own bill-payment product page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BTC.com Explorer","category":"block_explorers","kind":null,"reason":"BTC.com no longer runs a Bitcoin explorer. Its homepage today markets 'AI Computing Futures' (GPU resource locking) and 'Explore the AI Ecosystem', with no blockchain explorer among the products or links shown, and the explorer subdomain explorer.btc.com returns NXDOMAIN — no DNS record at all.","source":"https://btc.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"block_explorers/btc-com-explorer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"btc.com or explorer.btc.com serves a working Bitcoin block explorer again.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Etherchain","category":"block_explorers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"One of the oldest Ethereum explorers, but it no longer exists as a product to compare: etherchain.org itself returns HTTP 301 Moved Permanently with a Location header pointing to beaconcha.in, and no Etherchain explorer interface is served at the domain.","source":"https://etherchain.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"block_explorers/etherchain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"etherchain.org stops redirecting and serves an Etherchain explorer interface again.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ethernow (Blocknative Mempool Explorer)","category":"block_explorers","kind":null,"reason":"The mempool explorer a mempool.space reader would look for next is gone. Blocknative's own homepage carries the notice: 'The Blocknative API services will be winding down. Services will continue to operate through June 19, 2026.' followed by 'After that date, the APIs will stop responding.' That date has passed, and the homepage no longer lists a Mempool Explorer among its products. ethernow.xyz returns no DNS answer (SERVFAIL), explorer.blocknative.com resolves to a parked address that refuses HTTPS connections, and blocknative.com/explorer redirects to www.blocknative.com/mpex, which returns HTTP 404.","source":"https://www.blocknative.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"block_explorers/ethernow-blocknative-mempool-explorer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Blocknative withdraws the API-sunset notice and Ethernow or the Mempool Explorer is reachable again at a working URL.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"OKLink","category":"block_explorers","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 9 (score 54) until 5 November 2026. Its data-quality score asks for index completeness, lag and an incident history; no OKLink page states any of them, so the score could not be re-read (3 and 4 November 2026). Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking.","source":"https://www.oklink.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"block_explorers/oklink/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"OKLink publishes a completeness, lag or incident record, or the owner rules how a confirmed absence is scored: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Polkascan","category":"block_explorers","kind":null,"reason":"The Substrate explorer readers remember alongside Subscan has no instance to open. polkascan.io returns no DNS answer (SERVFAIL), and the Polkascan Open-Source repository carries GitHub's notice 'This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 3, 2022. It is now read-only.' The successor repository, polkascan/explorer, ships only self-hostable software (local install or docker-compose) with no hosted instance. Substrate coverage in this pool is Subscan's.","source":"https://github.com/polkascan/polkascan-os","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"block_explorers/polkascan/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A hosted Polkascan explorer becomes reachable at polkascan.io or another public URL.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Tenderly","category":"block_explorers","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 9 (score 68) until 5 November 2026. Its pricing, free-tier and independence cells rest on tenderly.co/pricing and tenderly.co/terms, which answered HTTP 429 behind a Vercel security checkpoint on 3 and 4 November 2026; we never get around one. It leaves the ranking until those pages are read again.","source":"https://tenderly.co/pricing","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"block_explorers/tenderly/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"tenderly.co/pricing and /terms answer a plain read, or are read by hand: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Across","category":"bridges","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 18 (score 79) until 11 November 2026. At 2:05 p.m. ET (19:05 UTC) on 10 November 2026 Across posted on its own X account that users should not visit its app, connect wallets or sign transactions while it investigates a possible security incident affecting its domain, as reported the same day by Cointelegraph (cointelegraph.com/news/across-protocol-warns-avoid-app-drained-wallets) and The Defiant (thedefiant.io/news/security/across-urges-users-to-avoid-app-over-domain-issue), both read on 10 November 2026. Users said on X that their wallets were drained after using the app; neither Across nor those reports say whether its contracts were affected. By 22:05 UTC across.to, app.across.to and docs.across.to no longer resolved to an address (checked again at 22:12 UTC), so the row cannot be re-read on Across’s own pages, and a link to that domain could take a reader to a site Across may not control. On 11 November 2026 Across said the domain had been taken over through its registrar and was back under its control (Cointelegraph, cointelegraph.com/news/across-protocol-restores-website-after-hackers-hijack-domain, read 11 November 2026); it has published no post-mortem yet. Across leaves the ranking, is listed as not confirmed, and no page links to its domain. This is not a score or a finding on Across; it returns to the table, re-scored, once Across publishes its post-mortem, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it, and the row is read live on its own pages. An archived copy is not used: an old copy is not a read of today’s pages.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"bridges/across/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site (root cause, hijack window, contracts unaffected), the domain stays clean for 7 days after it, and the row is re-read live on Across's own pages: then restore and re-rank it.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Axelar","category":"bridges","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but as the message layer, not the bridge. A reader who wants to move funds over Axelar already has that route in this pool: Squid Router is ranked here and this repo describes it as an “Axelar-powered cross-chain swap and bridge aggregator” that “Combines bridging and DEX swaps in a single transaction across 80+ chains using Axelar as the messaging layer”. Listing Axelar separately would rank the same route twice, once as the front end and once as the plumbing beneath it. Axelar itself is scored on the axes that actually apply to a validator set — who must be honest, and how many — in cross_chain_messaging, where it is ranked as “Axelar (General Message Passing)”. Note on sourcing: https://docs.axelar.dev/ answered on 2026-08-19 but is a documentation index; no sentence is quoted from it here — the evidence is the repo's own Squid entry plus the category scope line.","source":"https://docs.axelar.dev/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/axelar/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Axelar launches a first-party consumer bridge interface distinct from Squid, or Squid drops Axelar as a settlement path and leaves the network with no ranked front end here.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bungee","category":"bridges","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"On 10 November 2026 Bungee's terms address redirected to its home page and the site linked no terms, so the rules for using its bridge could not be read; the site now leads with funded and leveraged perpetuals trading, with token swaps further down. Until its terms are read and its bridge re-checked, Bungee is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.bungee.exchange/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/bungee/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bungee publishes terms for its swap and bridge service and the product is re-read: then the row returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Chainflip","category":"bridges","kind":null,"reason":"Same boundary as THORChain, for the same documented reason. Chainflip's own protocol overview describes a design that gives “rise to a fully decentralised general cross-chain swapping protocol”, built on “aggregate keys held by a permissionless network of 150 Validators” controlling “simple smart contracts/wallets called Vaults”, and it calls the result a “Cross-Chain Liquidity Network” (https://docs.chainflip.io/protocol/protocol-overview, read 2026-08-19). It prices a swap; it does not quote a route for the asset you already hold. Its natural comparison is against the swap routers in cross_chain_swaps rather than against the bridges here — but be clear about what that means today: this platform does NOT currently rank Chainflip in that category either. Cross-chain swaps is not ranked right now (four products remain), and Chainflip is not among them. So this is a scope boundary and not a hand-off, and it is recorded as an open coverage gap rather than dressed up as one.","source":"https://docs.chainflip.io/protocol/protocol-overview","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/chainflip/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Chainflip is added to the cross_chain_swaps pool, at which point this reason should be rewritten to point there; or Chainflip ships a same-asset bridge product.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Circle CCTP (Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol)","category":"bridges","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded because it moves exactly one asset and Circle does not sell it to a reader as a bridge. Circle's own developer documentation defines it as “a permissionless onchain utility that facilitates native USDC transfers across blockchains” that “burns USDC on the source blockchain and mints it on the destination blockchain”, and the thing Circle offers you to use it with is an SDK: “Bridge Kit is a lightweight SDK that uses CCTP as its protocol provider” (https://developers.circle.com/cctp, read 2026-08-19). No ranked entry here is single-asset. The narrowest asset scopes on the board are the rollup gateways at “ETH and registered ERC-20s”, and every general bridge ranked moves arbitrary tokens across chain families, so a USDC-only rail cannot be placed on a 28-weight route-coverage axis against them without the number being meaningless in both directions. This is not a refusal of the technology — for a reader moving USDC, CCTP is already the settlement path underneath several of the ranked entries, and you reach it by clicking one of them.","source":"https://developers.circle.com/cctp","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/circle-cctp-cross-chain-transfer-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle publishes a consumer bridge front end of its own, or CCTP is extended beyond USDC to arbitrary tokens.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Everclear (formerly Connext)","category":"bridges","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"On 10 November 2026 Everclear's website failed to open (the secure connection failed) and its documentation links no terms, so where it may be used could not be read. Until its site can be read, Everclear is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://docs.everclear.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/everclear-formerly-connext/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Everclear's website opens and its terms can be read: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Harmony Horizon Bridge","category":"bridges","kind":null,"reason":"Retired after the June 2022 drain, and Harmony has since replaced it rather than restored it. The decisive check is Harmony's own documentation index: across the 345 documentation entries listed in https://docs.harmony.one/llms.txt (read 2026-08-19) the string “Horizon” appears exactly once, and it is a hackathon page called “Hack the Horizon”. There is no Horizon bridge page left. What Harmony documents instead, in the only supported-bridge section of that index — six consecutive entries under the nav heading “LayerZero Bridge” — is “an interface that facilitates use of a third-party cross-chain communication system” that is “available on an “as is” basis without warranties of any kind” (https://docs.harmony.one/home/general/layerzero-bridge/important-notice.md). A route to Harmony still exists; the Horizon bridge that a reader would search for does not. The chain itself is still ranked here, as “Harmony” in Sidechains.","source":"https://docs.harmony.one/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/harmony-horizon-bridge/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Harmony restores Horizon as a documented, supported bridge with its own page in the official docs.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hop Protocol","category":"bridges","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Not operating. On 10 November 2026 hop.exchange served an unrelated online slot-gambling page in Indonesian, the app at app.hop.exchange answered only with an error, and its route service answered only with an error page, as on 30 September and 23 October 2026. No Hop page announces a shutdown: its documentation still describes the old fees and its code repository is still online, but neither moves funds. A bridge with no front end and no route service cannot be used, so it is no longer ranked. Its domain is not linked from this site.","source":"https://github.com/hop-protocol/hop","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/hop-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A Hop front end and its route API answer again and quote routes, and hop.exchange stops serving unrelated content.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hyperlane","category":"bridges","kind":null,"reason":"Same boundary as LayerZero and Axelar: Hyperlane is permissionless interchain messaging that a chain or an application deploys, not a bridge a reader picks between two chains. Its own documentation front page is a deployment surface, not a route picker — the quickstart entries are “Deploy to a New Chain”, “Bridge Tokens with Hyperlane Warp Routes” and “Run a Validator” (https://docs.hyperlane.xyz/, read 2026-08-19). Read that second entry honestly: Hyperlane does describe token bridging, but a Warp Route is a lane an application team deploys and operates, not a page where a reader chooses between chains, which is why Hyperlane is compared on verifier design instead. That is where it is ranked — cross_chain_messaging, whose tie-break note in this repo reads: “both multisigs are 3-of-5 over the same five validator addresses. Three signatures from one set of five keys is the true default.”, measured at block 25,709,399 on 2026-08-08. A verifier configuration means nothing on this category's route-clarity or execution-speed axes and everything on that one.","source":"https://docs.hyperlane.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/hyperlane/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hyperlane's own front end becomes a general-purpose consumer bridge with published routes and fees rather than a deployment surface for chains and apps.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Jumper Exchange","category":"bridges","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Jumper's route comparison, which its clarity score rests on, appears only after an amount is typed into its quote screen, which this site does not do, so it could not be read on 10 November 2026; Jumper publishes no terms page and no fee rate of its own. Until its route screen can be read, Jumper is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://jumper.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/jumper-exchange/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Jumper publishes its route comparison or fee terms on a page that can be read: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"LayerZero","category":"bridges","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but as an interoperability layer rather than a bridge. LayerZero does not hold your funds or hand you a route — it carries the message that another product's bridge acts on. The clearest proof is in this very pool: Stargate, which is ranked here, is LayerZero's own asset bridge, and Harmony's official documentation presents its only supported bridge under the nav heading “LayerZero Bridge” as “an interface that facilitates use of a third-party cross-chain communication system (“Bridge”)” that is “available on an “as is” basis without warranties of any kind” (https://docs.harmony.one/home/general/layerzero-bridge/important-notice.md, read 2026-08-19). Scoring a message layer on route clarity and execution speed would score the pipe and not the product a reader clicks. It is compared against its real peers — Wormhole, Axelar, Hyperlane, Chainlink CCIP, deBridge Messaging, Union — in cross_chain_messaging, where it is ranked as “LayerZero V2”.","source":"https://docs.harmony.one/home/general/layerzero-bridge/important-notice.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/layerzero/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"LayerZero ships a first-party consumer bridge front end under its own brand that a reader can use without going through Stargate or another integrator.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Multichain","category":"bridges","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead, and dated. On 6 July 2023 the protocol's own account posted: “The lockup assets on the Multichain MPC address have been moved to an unknown address abnormally.” The next day it posted: “The Multichain service stopped currently, and all bridge transactions will be stuck on the source chains. There is no confirmed resume time. Please don’t use the Multichain bridging service now.” On 14 July 2023 it explained why: “On May 21, 2023, Multichain CEO Zhaojun was taken away by the Chinese police from his home and has been out of contact with the global Multichain team ever since.” That 14 July 2023 post is the newest item on the account's timeline (https://x.com/MultichainOrg — timeline read 2026-08-19; posted dates Jul 6, Jul 7 and Jul 14 2023 as shown). The trap for a reader is that the documentation is still up and still reads normally — docs.multichain.org returned HTTP 200 on 2026-08-19 with a full nav (Introduction, Supported Chains, How it works, Road Map) and no shutdown notice anywhere on it — while the bridge API behind it, bridgeapi.multichain.org, returned HTTP 522 (origin unreachable) on the same day. A bridge whose own team told you to stop using it three years ago and never spoke again cannot be scored on trust posture at any weight.","source":"https://x.com/MultichainOrg","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/multichain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The Multichain team resumes operations publicly and the bridge API answers again.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Nomad","category":"bridges","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead, and its own documentation says so without meaning to. The first page of docs.nomad.xyz is not an introduction — it is titled “Funds Recovery” and reads “Attention: White Hat Hacker Friends”, “Please return ETH or ERC-20 tokens to this wallet address: 0x94a84433101a10aeda762968f6995c574d1bf154”, and it is stamped “Last updated 4 years ago” (https://docs.nomad.xyz/, read 2026-08-19). The marketing site still leads with the same recovery banner, placed above the “Launch Bridge” button in the page's own reading order (https://www.nomad.xyz/, read 2026-08-19). The August 2022 exploit was never recovered from and the protocol never restarted. Trust posture carries 26 of the 100 points in this category; a bridge still soliciting the return of its users' money four years on cannot be placed on that scale next to a live one.","source":"https://docs.nomad.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/nomad/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nomad relaunches a live bridge and its documentation front page stops being a funds-recovery notice.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Polygon PoS Bridge (Polygon Portal)","category":"bridges","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Excluded on the scope line that admits the five native gateways already ranked here. Those five — Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Scroll, zkSync — are rollup gateways: the escrow is defended by the destination chain's own proof system, which is what earns them a slot despite serving one route each. The Polygon PoS bridge is not that. Read Polygon's own page carefully, because its first line is a marketing claim this refusal has to answer rather than ignore: it calls the Polygon Portal “the official trustless two-way bridge between Polygon Chain and Ethereum”. The mechanism described two paragraphs later is not trustless in the rollup sense — “tokens that leave the Ethereum network are locked and the same number of tokens are minted on Polygon Chain as a pegged token (1:1)” (https://docs.polygon.technology/pos/how-to/bridging/ethereum-polygon/portal-ui.md, read 2026-08-19). That is a lock-and-mint escrow released on the word of Polygon's own Bor/Heimdall validator set, not on a validity proof or a fraud window, which is a different trust posture on a 26-weight axis and would be scored as if it were the same thing. This platform's own verified sidechain research adds the specific reason that matters to a reader: the escrow “is owned by an OpenZeppelin TimelockController at 0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf whose getMinDelay() returns 0. A timelock with zero delay is a multisig with extra steps.”. That finding is published where it belongs: Polygon Chain is ranked as “Polygon PoS” in sidechains, with the bridge escrow scored as part of the chain.","source":"https://docs.polygon.technology/pos/how-to/bridging/ethereum-polygon/portal-ui.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/polygon-pos-bridge-polygon-portal/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The PoS escrow's timelock is given a non-zero delay, or the route is migrated to the Agglayer unified bridge with a validity-proof security model, at which point it belongs on the same axis as the rollup gateways.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Rango Exchange","category":"bridges","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked next door, not here. Rango's own documentation defines the product as a swap router: “Rango is a cutting-edge routing and aggregation protocol for all cross-chain and on-chain swaps, aggregating bridges and DEXs in crypto world”, and “Rango is a new layer on top of all Bridges and DEXs, aggregating all of them to enable seamless on-chain and cross-chain swaps, finding the most efficient, safe, cheap and fast route for swapping from any token on any blockchain to any other token to any blockchain” (https://docs.rango.exchange/, read 2026-08-19). That is what Cross-Chain Swaps compares, where it is listed as “Rango Exchange”; that category is not ranked right now (four products remain), and Rango is held there as not confirmed until its route endpoint can be read. Rango's placement there rather than here is a judgement about where its own documentation puts the emphasis — on arriving in a different token — rather than a finding that it fails anything.","source":"https://docs.rango.exchange/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/rango-exchange/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rango publishes a same-asset bridge mode with its own route and fee disclosure, or this platform ranks it in both bridges and cross-chain swaps, as it did Squid, Bungee, Across, Relay and deBridge before cross-chain swaps stopped being ranked (11 November 2026).","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ronin Bridge","category":"bridges","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Excluded because it is not a rollup gateway, which is the only thing that earns a single-route native bridge a slot in this pool — the same line that excludes the Polygon PoS bridge. The five gateways ranked here escrow funds behind the destination rollup's own proof system; Ronin's does not. This site's research on the chain records that “There is no settlement layer to force a transaction to and no published forced-exit path; leaving Ronin means the bridge operators relaying a withdrawal out of MainchainGateway 0x64192819Ac13Ef72bF6b5AE239AC672B43a9AF08 on Ethereum, which held 1,902.38 ETH at Ethereum block 25,705,475 on 2026-08-07”, and warns that “The docs call Ronin an Ethereum L2 and no neutral scaling tracker lists it as one”. A gateway whose withdrawal depends on named operators relaying it is a different instrument from one whose withdrawal is enforced by a proof on Ethereum, and putting them on the same 26-weight trust axis would flatten exactly the trade this pool exists to show. The destination is also a games chain by its own description — “Ronin is the blockchain for fun and practical blockchain applications”, “Built by gamers. Open to all.” (https://www.roninchain.com/, read 2026-08-19) — but that is context, not the reason; the reason is the missing proof system. The chain itself is ranked here, as Ronin in Appchains / L3s.","source":"https://www.roninchain.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/ronin-bridge/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ronin's gateway becomes a rollup gateway — a published forced-exit path and a proof system on Ethereum that enforces withdrawals without operator cooperation — at which point it belongs beside Arbitrum and Base on the same axis.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Scroll bridge","category":"bridges","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Scroll's terms bar \"data mining, robots, scraping, or similar data gathering or extraction methods\", so its bridge pages and terms could not be read in the way this site reads a provider, and the withdrawal time its speed score rests on is not published in its documentation. Until a person reads them, the Scroll bridge is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://docs.scroll.io/en/developers/l1-and-l2-bridging/eth-and-erc20-token-bridge","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/scroll-bridge/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Scroll's bridge pages and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Squid Router","category":"bridges","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Squid Router's terms bar reading its services with \"spiders, robots, crawlers, data mining tools or the like\", so its pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Squid Router is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.squidrouter.com/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/squid-router/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Squid Router's pages and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Stargate","category":"bridges","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Stargate's terms bar using \"any robot, spider, crawlers, or other automatic device, process, software, or queries\" that mines or scrapes its website, so its pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Stargate is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://stargate.finance/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/stargate/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Stargate's pages and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Symbiosis","category":"bridges","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Symbiosis's native Bitcoin bridge was paused after an exploit on 11 September 2026, and no Symbiosis page read on 10 November 2026 says whether it has reopened, so the chains it can actually move funds between could not be confirmed. Until they can be, Symbiosis is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://symbiosis.finance/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/symbiosis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A Symbiosis page states whether its Bitcoin bridge is open: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Synapse","category":"bridges","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"On 10 November 2026 Synapse's own quote service answered a request for USDC from Ethereum to Arbitrum with \"No bridge routes found\", its newer quote service answered with an error, and its terms page returned a not-found page, so no route, fee or transfer time could be read. Until they can be, Synapse is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://api.synapseprotocol.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/synapse/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Synapse's quote service returns a route between two of the chains it lists: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"THORChain","category":"bridges","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded because it never produces the thing this category compares: a bridged claim on the other chain. THORChain's own documentation states it plainly — “THORChain is an independent, cross-chain liquidity protocol that operates as a Layer 1 decentralised exchange (DEX)”, whose purpose is “to allow users to swap native assets across multiple chains with zero reliance on centralised third parties”, and “THORChain’s design renders no need for wrapped or pegged assets” (https://docs.thorchain.org/, read 2026-08-19). You send BTC and receive ETH; you do not send an asset and receive the same asset elsewhere. Two of this category's four axes — route coverage across chain families and trust posture over an escrowed claim — have no meaning against a swap that settles in native assets, so a composite score would be arithmetic without content.","source":"https://docs.thorchain.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"bridges/thorchain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"THORChain ships a same-asset transfer product where the reader receives the asset they sent on a different chain.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Wormhole","category":"bridges","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Wormhole's terms bar using \"any robot, spider, crawlers or other automatic device, process, software or queries\" that mines, scrapes or otherwise accesses its services, and the documentation its clarity, speed and trust scores rest on is published on that site, so those pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Wormhole is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://wormhole.com/pages/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"bridges/wormhole/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Wormhole's documentation and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser, or its documentation is published under an open licence in its own GitHub repository: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"HackerOne","category":"bug_bounties","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 7 (score 60) until 5 November 2026. Its payout-transparency score rests on the \"Total bounties paid\" figures on HackerOne’s programme pages; on 3 and 4 November 2026 those pages served only a script shell and the data endpoint behind them answered behind a Cloudflare block, which we never get around. It leaves the ranking until the figures are read again.","source":"https://hackerone.com/crypto?type=team","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"bug_bounties/hackerone/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The programme pages show their paid totals to a plain read, or are read by hand: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Secure3","category":"bug_bounties","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 7 (score 52) until 5 November 2026. Its re-read (3 and 4 November 2026) found no terms of service at any address and no dated primary statement that Secure3 is running contests or has wound down. Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking.","source":"https://secure3.io/en","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"bug_bounties/secure3/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Secure3 publishes terms or a dated contest list: re-read and restore the row, or retire it if it has wound down.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Airwallex","category":"business_banking","kind":null,"reason":"A general cross-border EMI that surfaced here only as Meow's commercial card issuer. It publishes no crypto-business acceptance perimeter on any provider surface, so it would score bottom-band on criterion 2 for the uninteresting reason that it does not target this buyer — padding, not spread.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/airwallex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Airwallex publishes a crypto-business acceptance perimeter on its own pages.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bridge (Stripe)","category":"business_banking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Stablecoin Settlement as 'bridge-xyz' and scored there on float_custody and licence_perimeter — the same two axes this page would re-run on the same evidence base. It also sells virtual accounts and an API to platforms, not an operating account with an onboarding perimeter.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/bridge-stripe/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bridge sells an operating account with an onboarding perimeter, separate from the settlement record ranked in Stablecoin Settlement.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BVNK","category":"business_banking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Stablecoin Settlement as 'bvnk' and present in Crypto Payroll; its float custody, safeguarding wrapper and licence perimeter are scored there in detail. Its business-account surface is a wrapper on the same settlement licence stack, and bvnk.com/legal/terms-of-service 404s, so the closure-notice evidence this page needs is not reachable anyway.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/bvnk/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BVNK publishes a business-account product with its own terms, separate from its settlement licence stack, and its terms page loads.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Conduit","category":"business_banking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Stablecoin Settlement as 'conduit_settlement', where its safeguarding clause, no-rehypothecation promise and loss-allocation table are quoted at length; a separate 'conduit' exists in Rollup-as-a-Service, so a third listing would also collide on id.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/conduit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Conduit sells an operating business account separate from the settlement record ranked in Stablecoin Settlement.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Juno","category":"business_banking","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead, and killed by the exact risk this category underwrites. Crypto Neobanks already records the shutdown notice fetched 4 August 2026: 'the collapse of Synapse and the breakdown at Evolve Bank & Trust resulted in funds being frozen across more than 50+ fintech companies'. It is cited as evidence inside criterion 1's reasoning, never scored as a live product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/juno/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Juno relaunches a live business account product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Layer2 Financial","category":"business_banking","kind":null,"reason":"layer2financial.com returned HTTP 525 (Cloudflare SSL handshake failure) on 2026-08-17 on two separate reads, so liveness was not established positively and nothing can be scored. Not evidence of death: it would be admitted if the site resolves and publishes both a crypto-business perimeter and a FinCEN/FINTRAC registration number.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/layer2-financial/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"layer2financial.com resolves and publishes a crypto-business perimeter and a FinCEN or FINTRAC registration number.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Rain","category":"business_banking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Stablecoin Settlement as 'rain_settlement'. It is a card-issuing and settlement platform, not a deposit account; the question here is the operating account behind the card, which Rain does not provide.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/rain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rain begins offering a deposit or operating account to businesses.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Revolut Business","category":"business_banking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Revolut is already ranked in Crypto Neobanks, Simple Buy and P2P Exchanges; a fourth listing would re-rank the same entity on deposit protection and licence strength. Both surfaces this page would need — the business terms and the unsupported-businesses help article — returned HTTP 403 on 2026-08-17, so neither fact is checkable at reasonable cost.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/revolut-business/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Revolut's business terms and unsupported-businesses article load, and a crypto-business perimeter can be read from them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Sygnum Bank AG","category":"business_banking","kind":null,"reason":"Liveness could not be established positively. sygnum.com answered HTTP 403 to three separate reads on 2026-08-17, across six primary paths. A 403 is a bot block, not death, and this site does not assert what it could not load, so this is a recorded non-result, not a judgement on the bank. It would be admitted if sygnum.com loads for a person and matches an entry in FINMA's list of authorised institutions; it would be the second Swiss deposit-taking institution ranked here.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/sygnum-bank-ag/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"sygnum.com loads for a reader and the bank matches an entry on FINMA's list of authorised institutions.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Xapo Bank","category":"business_banking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Crypto Neobanks as 'xapo_bank', where depositProtection scores the same Gibraltar scheme, and xapobank.com sells members-only personal banking with no corporate or institutional account product. Its depositor information sheet stays in criterion 1 as a FORMAT anchor only — this repo records that the GFSC permission behind it could not be matched on any register we loaded.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"business_banking/xapo-bank/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Xapo Bank opens a corporate or institutional account product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Abracadabra Magic Internet Money (MIM)","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Not shut down — that is precisely why the refusal has to be about the coin rather than the protocol. On 2026-08-20 abracadabra.money returned HTTP 200 and docs.abracadabra.money/learn returned HTTP 200, and the cauldron documentation still describes borrowing as ordinary business: 'When a market is deprecated, users will no longer be able to borrow MIM from it. However, the cauldron remains fully operational, allowing users with open borrow positions to repay their debt at their convenience.' The software works; the dollar does not. DefiLlama's price endpoint for the canonical MIM contract (ethereum:0x99D8a9C45b2ecA8864373A26D1459e3Dff1e17F3) returned \"price\":0.057834740183695825 on 2026-08-20, and DefiLlama's stablecoin index put MIM at $0.0576 on $1,697,357 circulating. Curve's own pool API independently prices MIM at $0.05920985539731156 and shows the deepest surviving MIM venue — the MIM-3Pool metapool at 0x5a6A4D54456819380173272A5E8E9B9904BdF41B — holding $228,069 in total, against 3Crv at $1.0396 in the same pool. Two independent feeds agree on a ~94% discount. Half this category's weight sits on 'What actually backs the coin' (25%) and 'Observed peg behaviour under stress' (20%), and the ranked set trades inside 10bps of $1. Scoring a six-cent debt token on the same axis as crvUSD at $0.9994 would not be a close comparison, it would be a broken one: a borrower who minted MIM received roughly six cents of purchasing power per dollar of debt booked. Every figure and quote here was checked against its source on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://coins.llama.fi/prices/current/ethereum:0x99D8a9C45b2ecA8864373A26D1459e3Dff1e17F3","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/abracadabra-magic-internet-money-mim/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MIM trades within 1% of $1.00 on BOTH coins.llama.fi and Curve's pool API on the same day, and MIM circulating supply recovers above $50m — re-read the MIM-3Pool usdTotal for exit depth before adding it, since peg without depth would not fix the 'observed peg behaviour' score.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Alchemix alUSD","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Alchemix is live — v3 is shipped and documented, not sunset — and it is excluded on definition, not on health. This category puts 35% of its weight on 'Liquidation mechanics you actually bear', and Alchemix's design deliberately has none: its own user documentation advertises 'Borrow up to 90%, Interest Free' and states 'No interest, no price-based liquidations.', with a parameter table reading 'Borrowable asset alETH or alUSD', 'Maximum LTV 90% of collateral', 'Liquidations Strategy loss only, not price swings'. There is no minimum collateral ratio you can breach, no liquidation penalty, and no auction, stability-pool or LLAMMA mechanism to place against Sky's 13% chop or Liquity's 5% penalty — the single most decisive axis in this comparison has no counterpart, so any composite score would be manufactured rather than measured. The exposure a borrower actually carries is different in kind: it sits in the debt token's market price and in the yield strategy, and DefiLlama prices alUSD at $0.9460 on $9,843,470 circulating on 2026-08-20, meaning roughly 94.6 cents of purchasing power per dollar of debt booked. Alchemix's own docs concede the discount is structural, illustrating the Transmuter with 'If alUSD trades at 0.98 USDC with a three-month term, the annualized return is roughly 8%.' That is a fixed-income instrument's framing, not a CDP's. Every quoted string was checked against docs.alchemix.fi/user/ on 2026-08-20, and alchemix.fi answered that day, so the product is live and this refusal rests only on the definitional gap.","source":"https://docs.alchemix.fi/user/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/alchemix-alusd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Alchemix introduces price-based liquidations with a published minimum collateral ratio and liquidation penalty — at which point it becomes directly scoreable against Sky, Liquity and crvUSD and should be researched for inclusion.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Angle USDA and EURA (formerly agEUR)","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Angle was a genuine CDP — Angle Labs' own documentation repository states 'Angle Borrowing Module is one of the minting mechanisms for Angle stablecoins.' and 'It is based on a **debt mechanism**, similar to the one used by Maker with DAI. Users can deposit tokens as collateral into the protocol, and borrow Angle stablecoins from this deposit depending on specific parameters.' That module is being retired along with both coins. angle.money's own releases page carries the notice: 'Angle is entering its final chapter. The protocol remains fully collateralized, and every USDA and EURA is redeemable 1:1.' followed by 'Redeem before March 1, 2027'. The infrastructure is already half gone: on 2026-08-20 docs.angle.money and blog.angle.money both failed DNS resolution entirely (curl exit code 6, 'Could not resolve host', HTTP 000 — NXDOMAIN, not a 404), while angle.money and app.angle.money still returned 200, which is exactly the shape of a redemption-only wind-down. USDA circulating is $843,952 on DefiLlama with no quoted price. Angle Labs itself is ranked on ChainChoice, under Incentive Distribution, as Merkl (Angle Labs). A reader who finds the team ranked there and the stablecoins nowhere should read that as a deliberate split, not an oversight. The quotes and the DNS results were checked again on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://www.angle.money/releases","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/angle-usda-and-eura-formerly-ageur/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"angle.money/releases drops the 'final chapter' notice and Angle reopens Borrowing-module minting for USDA or EURA, or the 1 March 2027 redemption deadline passes and the vaults are confirmed closed — either way the entry needs rewriting rather than deleting.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Elixir deUSD","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Elixir's own documentation retires it in the plainest available language. The page titled 'deUSD - Deprecated' on docs.elixir.xyz states in bold: 'deUSD holds no value and the asset has been sunset.' followed by 'Please do not buy or make investments into deUSD, including through AMMs'. The same page describes the unwind — 'We’re effectuating 1-1 USDC claims for any deUSD or sdeUSD holders' — covering 'LPs who supplied sdeUSD/deUSD collateral on lend/borrow platforms, AMM LPs, Pendle LPs, etc.' The claims destination that page points to, elixir.xyz/deusd/claims, returned HTTP 404 when fetched on 2026-08-20, so even the redemption window appears closed. DefiLlama shows deUSD at a price of 1e-08 on $0.92 of circulating supply. Worth flagging one trap: docs.elixir.xyz's landing page still markets deUSD as 'a fully collateralized, yield-bearing synthetic dollar', so a checker who reads only the front door will conclude the product is live — the deprecation notice sits one level down. deUSD belongs in a refusal list rather than silently absent because Ethena USDe IS ranked here, which tells a reader that collateral-backed synthetic dollars are in scope for this comparison. The quotes, the landing page's wording and the claims page's 404 were checked on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://docs.elixir.xyz/deusd-deprecated","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/elixir-deusd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"docs.elixir.xyz/deusd-deprecated stops carrying the 'holds no value and the asset has been sunset' sentence and Elixir re-enables deUSD minting, or deUSD circulating supply on DefiLlama returns above $1m.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Prisma Finance mkUSD (and ULTRA)","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The largest LST-collateralised CDP of the 2023 LSDfi cycle no longer has a website. Checked 2026-08-20: prismafinance.com, www.prismafinance.com, docs.prismafinance.com and app.prismafinance.com ALL fail DNS resolution — curl returns exit code 6, 'Could not resolve host', HTTP status 000. This is NXDOMAIN, a stronger signal than a 404: the hostnames have been withdrawn, not merely emptied. The decommissioning is documented by the contributor who executed it, in a post titled 'Decommissioning Prisma Finance - A Turbulent but Ultimately Soft-Landing' (wavey, 17 January 2025), which records that 'Shutting down Prisma began with reducing the debt ceiling to zero, preventing new mkUSD and ULTRA loans', that 'Resupply was in fact originally conceived as a replacement for Prisma, which governance approved with PIP-46', and that the residual peg was handled by 'PIP-47: Operation Rainbow Pegger'. The prisma-fi GitHub organisation is consistent with a stopped protocol: six repositories, none archived, the most recent push June 2024. Roughly $245,297 of mkUSD is still outstanding per DefiLlama, trading at $1.0003 — solvent, but with a debt ceiling of zero there is no minting, no stability fee and no liquidation surface left to compare. ChainChoice's own liquid-lockers research already noted this independently, flagging a third-party page that 'still advertises cvxPrisma rewards in mkUSD from a protocol whose every domain now fails to resolve'. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: I reproduced all four NXDOMAIN results myself, fetched the wavey.info post and confirmed title, author, date and all three quotes, and checked the GitHub claim against api.github.com/orgs/prisma-fi/repos — 6 repos, archived=false on every one, latest pushed_at 2024-06-04 (layerzero-snapshot), which confirms the June 2024 figure that the rendered HTML page appears to contradict. The cvxPrisma sentence is verbatim in Liquid Lockers.","source":"https://wavey.info/posts/2025/decomissioning-prisma-finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/prisma-finance-mkusd-and-ultra/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"any prismafinance.com hostname resolves again and serves a live minting interface, or mkUSD circulating supply on DefiLlama rises above its current ~$245k — either would mean the debt ceiling was raised off zero.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Synthetix sUSD","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"sUSD is being switched off by its own governance, and the proposal has already passed. SIP-423, 'sUSD Retirement & Staking Reform' (authors Kain Warwick and Benjamin Celermajer, created 2026-06-12), carries status: Implemented in its front matter. Its Simple Summary states the first outcome as 'Sunsetting of sUSD on Ethereum mainnet and Optimism. sUSD will be wound down and converted to newly minted SNX on Ethereum Mainnet, totalling 236,464,356 SNX per the Phase 2 snapshot.' Component 2 of the Abstract reads '**sUSD retirement** - Freeze sUSD and deprecate the contract (reducing supply to zero). Before the 1 year lock completes, a receipt contract will be deployed and seeded from the snapshot, where sUSD at $1 value will be redeemed for 4 SNX on Ethereum Mainnet (1 year lock + 1 year vest from the time of freeze).' The Specification is explicit about the mechanism this category exists to compare: 'Suspend legacy sUSD transfers, minting, and burning on Ethereum mainnet (chain 1) and Optimism (chain 10).' The SIP's own Abstract concedes 'sUSD trades below peg'. A CDP whose minting is being suspended by executive action has no forward-looking stability fee, collateral ratio or liquidation surface to score, and holders are being paid in a locked, vesting governance token rather than a dollar. DefiLlama still carries $69,836,695 of sUSD with no price at all, which is what a frozen asset looks like in a price feed. Every quote was checked against the SIP-423 text, section by section, on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Synthetixio/SIPs/master/content/sips/sip-423.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/synthetix-susd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A subsequent SIP supersedes SIP-423 and sUSD minting and transfers are re-enabled on Ethereum mainnet or Optimism — check the status field of sip-423.md and any newer sUSD SIP in the same repo.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Usual USD0","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"USD0 is a large, live, well-known dollar — $550,716,105 circulating at $0.9987 on 2026-08-20 — and it is not a CDP. Usual's own documentation describes the entire mechanism as par redemption, not collateralised debt: 'Minting and redeeming USD0 (the Liquid Deposit Token, or LDT) 1:1 against eligible RWA collateral', with retail access via a matching layer — 'Retail/permissionless users access 1:1 minting via an indirect matching system powered by Collateral Providers (CPs)' — over an asset base Usual describes as 'tokenized Real-World Assets (RWAs) from leading institutional providers, including Hashnote, M0 Foundation, Superstate, and others'. The negative evidence is as load-bearing as the quotes: that page contains no occurrence of the strings 'liquidat' or 'over-collateral' anywhere in its served HTML. There is therefore no minimum collateral ratio, no liquidation penalty, no liquidation mechanism and no stability fee to place against Sky's 13% auction chop or Liquity's 5% stability-pool penalty — you never post volatile collateral and you can never be liquidated. This is the same boundary the published spec already draws around USDC, USDT, PYUSD and RLUSD as a class; USD0 is named here because its 'decentralised RWA stablecoin' positioning makes readers expect it in a CDP list specifically. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: I downloaded the raw served HTML (709KB) and grepped it directly — 'liquidat', 'over-collateral' and 'overcollateral' return zero occurrences case-insensitively, while 'collateral' alone appears 125 times, so the absence is specific rather than an artefact of a thin page. All three positive quotes are present verbatim once inline tags are removed. Sky's 13% chop and Liquity's 5% Stability Pool penalty are both recorded in our own CDP Stablecoins.","source":"https://docs.usual.money/usual-products/usd0-stablecoin/usd0/flow-and-architecture","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/usual-usd0/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Usual ships a vault where a user posts volatile collateral, mints USD0 above 100% collateralisation, and can be liquidated at a published ratio and penalty — i.e. the docs start carrying a collateral ratio and a liquidation penalty.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Venus VAI","category":"cdp_stablecoins","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Lending & Borrowing — Venus is already scored on ChainChoice as a shared-pool money market, so its absence here is a taxonomy split, not an omission. VAI is Venus's own collateral-backed stablecoin, minted against your account's total core-pool collateral within a borrow limit, and would otherwise qualify, but two facts keep it out. First, it is not open to the public: Venus's minting guide describes 'Borrowing VAI, the stablecoin of Venus Protocol, available exclusively for prime users.' Prime is an earned, non-transferable Soulbound status issued monthly by governance to users ranked on a time-weighted Prime Score, so the permissionless-mint assumption underpinning every parameter in this comparison does not hold — a reader cannot act on a stability fee they are not eligible to pay. Second, the scale is not comparable: DefiLlama shows $1,764,123 of VAI outstanding at $0.9984 on 2026-08-20, against $6.71bn for Sky USDS and $254m for crvUSD. A gated facility with under $2m outstanding cannot be scored on 'Observed peg behaviour under stress' in any way that means what the same score means for the ranked set, because there is no stress that market is large enough to register. The Venus pages were checked on 2026-08-20; the Prime description follows docs-v4.venus.io/whats-new/prime-yield (Soulbound token, monthly governance issuance, time-weighted score capped at 90 days).","source":"https://docs-v4.venus.io/guides/borrowing-vai","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cdp_stablecoins/venus-vai/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Venus removes the Prime gate so any address can mint VAI against core-pool collateral, and VAI circulating supply exceeds ~$25m — check the borrowing-vai guide for the 'exclusively for prime users' clause disappearing.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Async Art","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":null,"reason":"No way to deploy left. The product's domain, async.art, returned 200 on 2026-08-17, but its rendered page contains only 'Async Classic Art Editor', with no deploy flow, no documentation, no dated activity and no vendor repository. A 200 from a leftover page is not a live product, so it stays out.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/async-art/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Async Art restores a deploy flow and documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbase NFT","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Out of scope: Coinbase NFT was a marketplace, not a tool for a creator to deploy their own contract, and marketplaces are compared in NFT Marketplaces. Whether it still runs is not stated here: two reads disagreed, one finding nft.coinbase.com redirecting to wallet.coinbase.com and the other finding the coinbase.com pages answering 403.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/coinbase-nft/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase NFT offers a tool for a creator to deploy their own contract.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Crossmint","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":null,"reason":"ANSWERS A DIFFERENT BUYER QUESTION. Crossmint is checkout, card payments and embedded wallets; its docs commit to payment rails, not to the survivorship of a creator's contract. Demonstrably alive, which is precisely why the exclusion is a scope decision rather than a liveness one — it belongs to a merchant-rails discussion.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/crossmint/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Crossmint commits in its documentation to the survivorship of a creator's contract.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Foundation","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD, confirmed primary on 2026-08-17: foundation.app serves a letter dated April 27, 2026 reading 'After careful consideration, we have made the decision not to resume operations.' and committing only to 'Maintain our IPFS gateway through April 27, 2027 — one calendar year from the date of this letter'. Excluded from the pool but retained as the dated anchor for both 'art_still_loads' and 'abandonment_record' — it is what an exit looks like when it is done properly.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/foundation/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Foundation resumes operations.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"fxhash","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":null,"reason":"Fails the liveness check. Every route tested on 2026-08-17 at 12:47 UTC (fxhash.xyz, www.fxhash.xyz, /mint, /explore) returned HTTP/2 402 with the response header 'x-vercel-error: DEPLOYMENT_DISABLED', the host reporting a disabled deployment rather than a bot block. The signals the other way are recorded too: docs.fxhash.xyz answered 200, api.fxhash.xyz answered, and the fxhash/onchfs and fxhash/fxhash-package repositories both received commits on 2026-08-17.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/fxhash/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"fxhash.xyz serves a live deployment again, with a working mint flow.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Metaplex","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"A TOKEN STANDARD AND PROTOCOL, not a platform a creator's contract can outlive. Scoring 'has this vendor abandoned a contract line' against the substrate itself is category-incoherent. Alive and active, and out of scope.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/metaplex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Metaplex ships a hosted platform a creator deploys through, separate from the standard itself.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Rodeo","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD WITH ITS PARENT. rodeo.club 301s to foundation-labs.xyz, which describes Foundation Labs, Inc. as '2020-2026' and lists both Rodeo (2024) and Foundation (2021) as past products. A 301 is evidence of a pivot rather than automatic death, but here the destination page itself confirms the product is historical.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/rodeo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"rodeo.club serves a live product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Sound.xyz","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down, on its own page: www.sound.xyz returns 200 and reads 'Sound.xyz is now offline as of January 16, 2026'. Out of scope as well: a separate music-NFT category was considered and retired, and music NFTs are compared in NFT Marketplaces.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/sound-xyz/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Sound.xyz comes back online and serves its creator mint flow again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Web3 gaming and metaverse mint tools generally","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Out of scope: this site considered a Web3 gaming category and retired it, because more than 90% of the products it would have ranked had shut down and the flagship had fallen from 2.7 million daily users. Admitting the same products here as creator tools would rebuild that category by another door.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/web3-gaming-and-metaverse-mint-tools-generally/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This site reopens a gaming category, or a gaming mint tool shows a live deploy flow for creators.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zora Creator Contracts","category":"creator_mint_platforms","kind":null,"reason":"Not a current product: Zora has moved this contract line to legacy. The ourzora/zora-protocol README (updated 2026-08-11) lists Coins, Comments and the Coins SDK under 'Active Packages' and files 1155-contracts under 'Legacy Packages'; its documentation link redirects to nft.docs.zora.co, which does not resolve, while nft-docs.zora.co reads 'This is legacy documentation for the Zora NFT protocol.' A line its vendor labels legacy, with no current way to deploy on it, cannot pass the liveness check. It is the worked example in this category's criterion on whether a platform has walked away from a contract line creators shipped on.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"creator_mint_platforms/zora-creator-contracts/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zora moves its creator contracts back from legacy to an active package.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Across Protocol","category":"cross_chain_messaging","kind":null,"reason":"excluded as an asset bridge, not a messaging protocol. Its own documentation, loaded 2026-08-08, describes Across as \"a crosschain interoperability protocol that provides the fastest, cheapest, and most secure way to move assets across blockchains\" supporting \"crosschain swaps, bridges, and embedded actions through a single unified API\" (docs.across.to/introduction/what-is-across). Its actions ride on a deposit; nothing loaded documented arbitrary message passing without an accompanying token transfer, which is the defining requirement of this category and is already covered by the live bridges category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-08","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_messaging/across-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across ships a general message-passing interface that carries arbitrary application messages.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Circle CCTP","category":"cross_chain_messaging","kind":null,"reason":"excluded as a single-asset transfer protocol. It moves USDC via burn-and-mint attestations rather than carrying arbitrary application messages, so it does not compete for the buyer this category serves.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_messaging/circle-cctp/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CCTP carries arbitrary application messages beyond USDC transfers.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Router Protocol","category":"cross_chain_messaging","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because the messaging trust model could not be verified. Its documentation, loaded 2026-08-08, now presents a solver and settlement network — \"Instantly onboard bridges, DEXs, and solver nodes under EIP-712 authentication, with on-chain reputation scoring\" and \"Achieves exceptional settlement reliability across five live chains with fault isolation and real-time reputation scoring\" (docs.routerprotocol.com) — and names neither a validator count, nor a signing threshold, nor a chain list. A protocol whose answer to who must be honest cannot be established from its own documentation or a contract cannot be scored against the other seven on this category's primary criterion.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-08","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_messaging/router-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Router's own documentation publishes a messaging trust model a reader can verify.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"1inch Fusion+","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":null,"reason":"A partial pointer, and labelled as one rather than overstated. help.1inch.com article 9842591, fetched 2026-08-20, returned both load-bearing sentences verbatim: \"1inch Fusion+ is a powerful solution for secure and efficient intent-based atomic swaps in DeFi, using a creative architecture of Dutch auctions and automated execution, all without relying on a single centralized custodian\", and, on settlement, \"The winning resolver deposits the maker's assets into an escrow contract on the source chain, and then deposits the corresponding assets into an escrow on the destination chain.\" What this site ranks is the single-chain sibling: Intent Networks ranks \"1inch Fusion\", described as a \"Descending-price auction in which the rate falls until one identity-verified resolver accepts it and settles the order\". Fusion+ is the cross-chain extension of that same auction, so a reader searching \"1inch\" finds the mechanism ranked but not this specific product. Recorded as a coverage gap with a pointer attached, not as a clean hand-off — the honest version is that the escrow-pair design would score on this category's trust axis and has not yet been put on it.","source":"https://help.1inch.com/en/articles/9842591-what-is-1inch-fusion-and-how-does-it-work","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/1inch-fusion/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fusion+ is ranked in its own right in either cross_chain_swaps or intents, at which point this reason should point there instead of flagging a gap.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Across","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 5 (score 78) until 11 November 2026. At 2:05 p.m. ET (19:05 UTC) on 10 November 2026 Across posted on its own X account that users should not visit its app, connect wallets or sign transactions while it investigates a possible security incident affecting its domain, as reported the same day by Cointelegraph (cointelegraph.com/news/across-protocol-warns-avoid-app-drained-wallets) and The Defiant (thedefiant.io/news/security/across-urges-users-to-avoid-app-over-domain-issue), both read on 10 November 2026. Users said on X that their wallets were drained after using the app; neither Across nor those reports say whether its contracts were affected. By 22:05 UTC across.to, app.across.to and docs.across.to no longer resolved to an address (checked again at 22:12 UTC), so the row cannot be re-read on Across’s own pages, and a link to that domain could take a reader to a site Across may not control. On 11 November 2026 Across said the domain had been taken over through its registrar and was back under its control (Cointelegraph, cointelegraph.com/news/across-protocol-restores-website-after-hackers-hijack-domain, read 11 November 2026); it has published no post-mortem yet. Across leaves the ranking, is listed as not confirmed, and no page links to its domain. This is not a score or a finding on Across; it returns to the table, re-scored, once Across publishes its post-mortem, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it, and the row is read live on its own pages. An archived copy is not used: an old copy is not a read of today’s pages.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/across/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site (root cause, hijack window, contracts unaffected), the domain stays clean for 7 days after it, and the row is re-read live on Across's own pages: then restore and re-rank it.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bungee / Socket","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 7 (score 60) until 5 November 2026. Its bridge-security score is scored jointly with its exploit history, and that history (the 16 January 2024 SocketGateway route exploit) was read in September from DefiLlama, a source now paused (O-74), and rekt.news, which is not a primary source. Socket publishes no post-mortem we could find on its own sites or GitHub; on-chain, its owner disabled route 406 on 16 January 2024, but no Socket record states the loss. Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking until a primary record is read.","source":"https://www.bungee.exchange/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/bungee-socket/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Socket or Bungee publishes its own account of the January 2024 exploit (or the owner rules the on-chain record suffices): re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"deBridge","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 3 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five cross-chain swap products remain, which is no judgement on deBridge.","source":"https://debridge.com","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-03","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/debridge/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it and Across is read live on its own pages, Rango Exchange or Bungee / Socket is re-read, or a fifth cross-chain swap product can be read and scored: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"LI.FI / Jumper","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 3 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five cross-chain swap products remain, which is no judgement on LI.FI / Jumper.","source":"https://li.fi","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-03","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/li-fi-jumper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it and Across is read live on its own pages, Rango Exchange or Bungee / Socket is re-read, or a fifth cross-chain swap product can be read and scored: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Multichain","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Refused under this category's own second gate — it will not return a quote — and the reader trap is that its documentation still looks perfectly healthy. Measured on 2026-08-20: multichain.org returned HTTP 522 and bridgeapi.multichain.org returned HTTP 522 (Cloudflare's origin-unreachable status), while docs.multichain.org returned HTTP 200 and app.multichain.org returned HTTP 200. The docs page, read in full, still opens \"Multichain is the ultimate Router for web3. It is an infrastructure developed for arbitrary cross-chain interactions.\" and still carries an ordinary navigation — Introduction, The SMPC Network, The Multichain Services, (1) Bridge, (2) Router, (3) anyCall Crosschain Contract Calls, (4) Crosschain NFT Bridges and Router — with, on a case-insensitive scan of the retrieved HTML, zero occurrences of \"shut down\", \"shutdown\", \"discontinued\", \"ceased\", \"sunset\" or \"deprecated\". So the marketing surface answers and the pricing surface does not: with the bridge API dark, no itemised all-in cost can be obtained, and measured all-in cost carries 35 of the 100 points here. This category's spec already names Multichain as its cautionary case for lock-and-mint wrappers, noting that when it ceased operations in July 2023 its anyToken holders were left holding claims on a dead protocol. No shutdown announcement is asserted from the fetched page — only the measured fact that the quote endpoint does not answer.","source":"https://docs.multichain.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/multichain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"bridgeapi.multichain.org returns HTTP 200 with an itemised machine-readable quote, and multichain.org stops returning 522.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"NEAR Intents","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Intents — a real cross-chain swap product, ranked on solver-auction criteria instead of router criteria. Both pages fetched 2026-08-20 (HTTP 200): near-intents.org carries the title tag \"NEAR Intents | The Smartest Way to Trade Across Chains\", and the documentation front page offers a \"1-Click Swap API\" to \"Request quotes, execute cross-chain swaps, and track their status.\" It is ranked as \"NEAR Intents\" in Intent Networks (record verified 2026-08-11), where the entry already carries the numbers a reader of this page would want: a protocol fee of \"0.0001%\" collected on-chain by the intents.near contract versus \"0.2%\" charged on swaps routed through the near-intents.org front end, and a chain list of 30 networks spanning Bitcoin, Solana, XRP Ledger, Tron, Cardano and TON — a count checked against bridge.chaindefuser.com/rpc, whose supported_tokens call returned 212 tokens across 33 distinct chain families. The distinction that keeps it there: this category measures a quoted route from a named router, while intents measures a broadcast to an open solver population that bids for the fill. Both deliver a different asset on another chain; they are not scored on the same things.","source":"https://docs.near-intents.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/near-intents/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"NEAR Intents is added to src/lib/catalog/crossChainSwapsPool.ts, or its 1-Click API stops quoting cross-chain swaps.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Rango Exchange","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 7 (score 66) until 5 November 2026. Its route-coverage score counts the chains Rango’s own live endpoint returns; on 3 and 4 November 2026 api.rango.exchange answered HTTP 403 behind a Cloudflare block, which we never get around, so the count could not be re-read. Every other item was read on time. It leaves the ranking until the endpoint is read again.","source":"https://api.rango.exchange/basic/meta","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/rango-exchange/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"api.rango.exchange answers without a bot check, or the chain count is read by hand in a browser: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Relay","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 3 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five cross-chain swap products remain, which is no judgement on Relay.","source":"https://relay.link","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-03","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/relay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it and Across is read live on its own pages, Rango Exchange or Bungee / Socket is re-read, or a fifth cross-chain swap product can be read and scored: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ren Protocol / RenBridge","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Refused because there is no product surface left to open, evidenced by resolution failure rather than by a press release. Re-measured 2026-08-20: renproject.io does not resolve at all — three independent resolvers (the system resolver, 8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1) each returned SERVFAIL, so curl aborts with exit code 6 and no HTTP status code is ever reached. That is a stronger signal than a 404, because a 404 requires a server to answer. The team's own remaining primary surface does answer: api.github.com/orgs/renproject returned name \"Ren\" with the homepage field still set to \"https://renproject.io\" — a link to a domain that no longer exists — and updated_at 2023-03-27T09:10:47Z; the companion repos listing shows the bridge front end repository bridge-v2, described by Ren as \"An easy way to bridge cross-chain assets between blockchains.\", last pushed 2023-04-14T15:13:31Z, with the most recent push anywhere in the org being renvm-tracker on 2024-03-21. Note the deliberate limit of this claim, re-confirmed in the API response: archived is false on every one of those repositories, and no shutdown notice was located on any Ren-controlled domain, so this is a finding that the product is unreachable, not a finding that its owners announced its end.","source":"https://api.github.com/orgs/renproject","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/ren-protocol-renbridge/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"renproject.io resolves again and serves a working bridge or swap front end, or Ren publishes a live cross-chain swap product on a different domain that returns a public quote.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Squid","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 3 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five cross-chain swap products remain, which is no judgement on Squid.","source":"https://squidrouter.com","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-03","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/squid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it and Across is read live on its own pages, Rango Exchange or Bungee / Socket is re-read, or a fifth cross-chain swap product can be read and scored: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Stargate","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Bridges — because by its own documentation it transports an asset rather than exchanging it. The front page of docs.stargate.finance reads \"Stargate is a composable cross-chain liquidity transport protocol enabling seamless asset transfers between blockchains\" (read 2026-08-20, HTTP 200; the sentence is present character-for-character, with the rendered line break falling between 'transfers' and 'between'). The same fetch is what settles the point: after stripping the page's font-loading directive, the string \"swap\" occurs zero times on it, and \"exchange\" zero times. Transport of an asset and arrival in a different asset are different products, and this category's verb is the second one. It is already ranked one category over, in Bridges, where its record describes it as an \"Omnichain liquidity bridge for broader route coverage\". The stack underneath it is ranked too: the Stargate docs index their OFT primitive under the route title \"OFTs Internal Route LayerZero\", and LayerZero is ranked as \"LayerZero V2\" in Cross-Chain Messaging. This is a placement call, not a defect finding — six of the seven products ranked in this pool (all but Rango) are also ranked in Bridges, and Stargate could join them.","source":"https://docs.stargate.finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/stargate/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Stargate's consumer front end defaults to a different-asset output leg (send USDC on Ethereum, receive ETH on Arbitrum) and returns an itemised quote for it, at which point it should be dual-ranked here the way Across, Relay, deBridge, Squid and Bungee already are.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Symbiosis","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"The most debatable refusal on this list, and worth saying so outright: by its own documentation Symbiosis belongs here more obviously than the entry above. docs.symbiosis.finance, fetched 2026-08-20 (HTTP 200) and checked string-by-string, carries both \"Symbiosis is a decentralized exchange that pools together liquidity from different blockchains\" (the sentence continues \"…, whether they use EVM technology or not\") and \"Any token to any token cross-chain exchange is possible across supported blockchain networks.\" That is this category's verb, verbatim. It is nevertheless already ranked next door, in Bridges, whose record concedes the same point: it describes Symbiosis as a \"Cross-chain AMM connecting EVM, Solana, TON, Tron, and Bitcoin\" and as a \"Cross-chain DEX that bridges as a side-effect of swaps\". So this is a historical placement, not a boundary: a reader searching \"Symbiosis\" does find it scored, with a price, a trust model and a chain list, one category over. It is named here so its absence from this board reads as taxonomy rather than as an oversight, and it is flagged as the strongest dual-ranking candidate in the pool.","source":"https://docs.symbiosis.finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/symbiosis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Symbiosis is dual-ranked into src/lib/catalog/crossChainSwapsPool.ts, at which point this entry should be deleted rather than rewritten.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Wormhole (and its Portal front end)","category":"cross_chain_swaps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked twice on this platform, and neither time here — because Wormhole's own introduction describes a pipe, not a swap. Page fetched and tag-stripped on 2026-08-20 (HTTP 200), where the two sentences run consecutively: \"Wormhole addresses this problem by providing a generic message-passing protocol that enables secure and efficient communication between blockchains. By allowing data and asset transfers across various blockchain networks, Wormhole breaks down the walls that traditionally separate these ecosystems.\" Both are about carrying a message and moving an asset; neither is about receiving a different token than you sent. It is ranked as \"Wormhole\" in cross_chain_messaging alongside LayerZero V2, and again as \"Wormhole\" in bridges. One caveat stated rather than buried: this refusal rests on Wormhole's positioning of itself, not on a claim that its Portal front end is unusable — the fetched page does not discuss Portal's asset model, so no assertion is made here about wrapped-asset delivery.","source":"https://wormhole.com/docs/protocol/introduction/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"cross_chain_swaps/wormhole-and-its-portal-front-end/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Wormhole or Portal ships a first-party different-asset swap route with a public itemised quote endpoint, or this platform moves the Wormhole entry out of cross_chain_messaging.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"DeFi money markets, BY NAME: Aave, Compound, Morpho, Spark, Euler, Venus, Kamino and Fluid — every one of the eight already ranked in lending_borrowing","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":null,"reason":"All eight are ranked TODAY, verified by reading Lending & Borrowing (ids 'venus', 'spark', 'morpho', 'euler', 'kamino', 'compound', 'fluid-protocol', 'aave' at lines 20-280), on four criteria that presuppose exactly what this category denies: a named oracle contract with a deviation threshold, an interest-rate model, an isolated market and published on-chain bad debt. The inverse is equally true and is why this category is not a subset of that one. There is no title to transfer (the collateral sits in a contract nobody owns), no reuse permission to read (a smart contract has no discretion), no insolvency estate (a protocol has no bankruptcy court), no lender of record that could hold an NMLS ID, and no application to publish a price before — a DeFi borrow rate is readable from the contract by anyone in any block, so this category's cost question is trivially satisfied by construction rather than by disclosure. Scoring any of the eight here would hand them four criteria they answer by architecture, and scoring a custodial lender there would hand it four criteria it cannot answer at all: the exact defect the Lending & Borrowing methodology was written to fix when it removed Nexo and Ledn.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/defi-money-markets-by-name-aave-compound-morpho-spark-euler/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of the eight starts offering fixed-term loans from a named lender of record, rather than protocol borrowing at a utilisation rate.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Exchange- and broker-branded credit where the collateral goes into a public lending protocol, or where the borrowed amount cannot leave the venue: Coinbase Bitcoin-backed loans (cbBTC posted to a Morpho market), Binance Margin, Bybit, OKX and Kraken margin lines, and any front end over Aave, Morpho or Spark","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Two shapes, one boundary, and the test is structural rather than by brand. Where the collateral sits in a public contract whose parameters the borrower can read, the lender of record is that contract and the rate is a protocol borrow rate set by utilisation — so this category's criteria would be scoring Morpho's interest-rate model, which Lending & Borrowing already ranks, and the fee and margin criteria have no referent (no origination fee, no prepayment penalty, an on-chain liquidation threshold rather than a discretionary one). Where the credit exists to lever a position on the lender's own order book, the economics are funding rates, maintenance margin and auto-deleveraging on sub-hour cycles, which is ranked as trading infrastructure in Crypto Exchanges and Perpetual DEXs; admitting it would place a funding rate and a consumer APR in the same ranking column. One limit, stated plainly: https://www.coinbase.com/en-gb/borrow answered HTTP 403 to every read on 2026-08-19, so the Coinbase half of this exclusion rests on the published product structure, not on a page read. The standalone custodial crypto-loan products several exchanges run alongside margin (fiat or stablecoin drawn against a collateral balance the exchange holds, with no trading requirement and no public contract) fit all four criteria of this page and are candidates, not exclusions, each to be assessed against the two tests above; what is excluded is a public-contract front end or a leverage line, never a brand.","source":"https://www.coinbase.com/en-gb/borrow","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/exchange-and-broker-branded-credit-where-the-collateral-goes/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these lends from its own balance sheet with collateral held off public contracts and borrowed funds free to leave the venue.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Loans where the collateral never leaves the borrower's control, BY NAME: Firefish, Debifi, Hodl Hodl Lend, Liquidium, and every DLC-, PSBT- or 2-of-2-based bitcoin loan","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":null,"reason":"The precondition of three of this page's four criteria is that you HANDED A COMPANY YOUR BITCOIN. Where no counterparty can move the collateral under any signing path, criterion 1 has no counterparty whose insolvency matters and no permission to grant, criterion 2's forced sale is a script rather than a discretion, and the comparison collapses into a software review that this rubric is not built to run. THE BOUNDARY IS SHARED CONTROL, NOT SOLE CONTROL, and the line is drawn deliberately at the point where the vendor plus one other institutional party can move the coins without the borrower: that is why Unchained is IN despite the borrower holding a key ('Unchained and Fortis Bank each hold one key, which prevents any party from moving bitcoin unilaterally', unchained.com/loans, loaded 2026-08-19) and why a 2-of-2 requiring the borrower's signature is OUT. This is the most contestable judgement in the scope and is stated here so a reader can disagree with it explicitly; if the research pass rules a borrower key disqualifying, Unchained leaves and criterion 1's top band must be rewritten around segregated qualified custody, because Unchained is the only structure found that can currently reach 9-10.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/loans-where-the-collateral-never-leaves-the-borrower-s-contr/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A lender in this group takes custody of the collateral, so that a counterparty can move it, which brings it into this category's scope.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Loans whose primary lien is on real property or another off-chain asset: crypto-collateralised mortgages and HELOCs (Milo, Figure home-equity products)","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":null,"reason":"Where the house secures the debt and the bitcoin is a supplement, the decisive axes are mortgage-underwriting axes — appraisal, title insurance, servicing transfer, foreclosure law — and none of the four criteria here measures them, while a TRID/Reg Z Loan Estimate would dominate the cost criterion by regulation rather than by vendor choice, which is precisely the confound this page exists to avoid. The boundary is which asset the lender forecloses on FIRST. Pure BTC-collateralised term loans from the same issuers remain candidates and must be assessed product-by-product, never brand-by-brand.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/loans-whose-primary-lien-is-on-real-property-or-another-off/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A lender offers a loan where crypto is the primary collateral and the property is not.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"NFT-collateralised lending, already ranked in nft_lending","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":null,"reason":"The collateral is illiquid and non-fungible, so an LTV tier and a margin-call threshold — the two things criterion 2 asks a lender to resolve a forced sale against — are not computable from a published rate card at all, and the decisive axis is a floor-price appraisal with no analogue for BTC. Different asset, different disclosure, existing category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/nft-collateralised-lending-already-ranked-in-nft-lending/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"An NFT lender publishes LTV tiers and a margin-call threshold computable from a rate card.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"The card, not the loan: the Nexo Card, Crypto.com and Wirex card products and every crypto-backed credit or debit card line","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in crypto_card, whose verified payload (research-pending/crypto_card.json, verified 2026-08-17) scores the card question — whether a tap is a taxable disposal, whose licence issues the plastic, what the statement export contains. A card line is the same underlying credit reached through a different rail and the buyer's question there is about the point of sale, not about collateral title. Nexo's CREDIT LINE remains a candidate here on its own terms; its card does not.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/the-card-not-the-loan-the-nexo-card-crypto-com-and-wirex-car/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A card issuer offers a standalone crypto-backed loan with its own rate card, separate from the card.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"The EARN and yield side of the same brands: Nexo Earn, Ledn Growth Accounts, SALT's interest-bearing product, and every deposit product on a lender's balance sheet","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Only the BORROW side is scored here, and the deposit side is already ranked — Nexo sits in crypto_neobanks as 'nexo-neobank' and in stablecoin_yield as 'nexo_earn'. The two answer different questions with opposite risk polarity: an Earn depositor is buying a yield and a loan borrower is buying liquidity while trying not to lose collateral. The connection is NOT severed, and the research pass must carry it as EVIDENCE rather than as a row — where a lender runs an Earn book on the same balance sheet, criterion 1 deducts a band unless the loan agreement ring-fences loan collateral from it, because that commingling is how the 2022 cohort turned a yield loss into a borrower's loss.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/the-earn-and-yield-side-of-the-same-brands-nexo-earn-ledn-gr/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The deposit products are restructured into borrowing products, which only then are scored here.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Undercollateralised and underwritten institutional credit already ranked in Private Credit: Maple, Clearpool, Goldfinch, Centrifuge, Pareto, Huma Finance, Kasu Finance","category":"crypto_backed_loans","kind":null,"reason":"Directional mismatch, and both directions are written down. Private Credit scores the depositor of an unsecured loan; this category scores the borrower of a secured one. Private Credit's 'Published default and loss history' (30%) and 'Named underwriter and first-loss capital' (25%) both presuppose that a credit decision is the product, and at 50% LTV against a liquid asset there is no credit decision to disclose: Nexo advertises 'instant approval and no credit checks'. Its 'Depositor's legal claim' (25%) and this category's question on whether the collateral is still yours look alike and resolve oppositely: one asks what instrument a lender holds in a borrower's default waterfall, the other what a borrower owns in the lender's insolvency, and Ledn's set-off remedy for 'becoming an unsecured creditor of Lender' has no place among Private Credit's criteria. Private Credit's research records the same boundary from its side: 'Crypto-backed consumer and prime lending is excluded: Figure Markets Democratized Prime ($201,753,316 on 2026-08-07) lends against crypto collateral.' The two exclusions point at each other so the boundary does not drift.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_backed_loans/undercollateralised-and-underwritten-institutional-credit-al/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them lends against posted crypto collateral to a borrower, as a secured loan with a margin-call schedule.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Baanx / CL Card; Rain; Monerium","category":"crypto_card","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Not consumer cards: they supply the cards other brands sell, and a cardholder never contracts with them. Baanx is a programme manager (FCA cryptoasset registration 927401) behind MetaMask Card; Rain sells card issuing to businesses and is ranked in Stablecoin Settlement; Monerium is the e-money institution that issues EURe, the euro token some of these cards spend from.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/baanx-cl-card-rain-monerium/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Baanx, Rain or Monerium sells a card a consumer contracts for directly.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Binance Card (the 2023 Visa programme)","category":"crypto_card","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD IN THE FORM PEOPLE REMEMBER, and history rather than a pool member. The Visa programme was withdrawn from the EEA in December 2023 and the current Binance card is a different Mastercard product on different regional terms. No primary Binance shutdown notice was reachable on 2026-08-17, so the death is cited as evidence in no scored record.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/binance-card-the-2023-visa-programme/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Binance publishes a primary notice on the 2023 Visa programme, or relaunches it.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitpanda Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked already, as Bitpanda in Crypto Neobanks, Simple Buy and Off-ramps. Its card page states the category's central problem in one line, '0% FX fees For non Euro transactions (VISA mark-up fees apply)', and names its issuer: 'Transact Payments Malta Limited... Registration number C 91879'.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/bitpanda-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitpanda Card is sold as a product separate from the Bitpanda account ranked in Crypto Neobanks.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bleap Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto card products remain, which is no judgement on Bleap Card.","source":"https://www.bleap.finance/en-us/card","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/bleap-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Coinbase Card, ether.fi Cash, MetaMask Card, Nexo Card and RedotPay Card in a browser, or a fifth crypto card product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bybit Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Not ranked: whether the card is live could not be established. bybitcard.com/global redirects to bybitcard.com, which on 2026-08-17 served only the title 'Buy & Sell Bitcoin, Ether | Cryptocurrency Exchange | Bybit' and no card content, on three attempts. This is not a finding against the product; it is re-checked through bybit.eu before it can be ranked.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/bybit-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bybit's card pages, through bybitcard.com or bybit.eu, serve card terms a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbase Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Coinbase's user agreement, which says how Coinbase's sites may be used, answered our requests only behind a bot check, which this site never bypasses, so it has not been read, and Coinbase's card terms and status page are not re-read the way this site reads a provider until it is. Until a person reads it, Coinbase Card is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.coinbase.com/legal/user_agreement/united_states","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/coinbase-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads Coinbase's user agreement in a browser: if it does not bar automated reads, the card terms and status page are read again and the row returns on that read; if it does, a person reads them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Crypto.com Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto card products remain, which is no judgement on Crypto.com Card.","source":"https://crypto.com/cards","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/crypto-com-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Coinbase Card, ether.fi Cash, MetaMask Card, Nexo Card and RedotPay Card in a browser, or a fifth crypto card product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"ether.fi Cash","category":"crypto_card","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"ether.fi's terms of use say \"you must not use any robots, spiders, crawlers, scrapers, or other automated tools or interfaces that are not provided by us to access the Website and extract data\", and ether.fi publishes its card agreement and card fees on its own documentation and help sites, so they are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, ether.fi Cash is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://etherfi.gitbook.io/etherfi/legal/ether.fi-legal/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/ether-fi-cash/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ether.fi's card agreement, its help-centre fee and country pages and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Fold; Xapo Bank; N26","category":"crypto_card","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked already in Crypto Neobanks: each is an account whose card is a feature, and they are compared there on custody and deposit-guarantee questions. Fold's own FY2025 Form 10-K says 'bitcoin held on behalf of our customers could also be considered part of our own bankruptcy estate'.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/fold-xapo-bank-n26/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fold, Xapo Bank or N26 sells its card as a standalone card programme, separate from the account ranked in Crypto Neobanks.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Gnosis Pay","category":"crypto_card","kind":null,"reason":"No longer a consumer card. gnosispay.com (read 2026-08-17) markets white-label card infrastructure to businesses ('Ship stablecoin card programs in minutes', with 'Book a demo' and 'View API docs' as its only calls to action); gnosispay.com/card returns HTTP 404 and app.gnosispay.com serves only a sign-in page. Zeal, ranked here, issues its card on the same Monavate rails.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/gnosis-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gnosis Pay offers a card a consumer can order directly again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Holyheld","category":"crypto_card","kind":null,"reason":"No longer a consumer card. holyheld.com (read 2026-08-17) markets off-ramp, on-ramp and orchestration products to businesses under 'Rails for Global Card Programs', and holyheld.com/card returns HTTP 404. Its consumer fee page at /legal/fees ('Card payment (International) 2.5% + 1 EUR', 'ATM (International) 2.5% + 2 EUR') is stamped 'Last Update 19.03.2025'. The only regulatory artifacts it publishes are 'PCI DSS Level 1' and 'SRO by VQF', neither of which is a payments licence.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/holyheld/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Holyheld offers a consumer card again, with a current fee page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kraken Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":null,"reason":"Not found as a live product: kraken.com/pay and kraken.com/features/crypto-debit-card both returned HTTP 404 on 2026-08-17. Kraken is ranked as an exchange, an OTC desk and an off-ramp.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/kraken-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken publishes a live card product page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"MetaMask Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"MetaMask's terms of use, which govern its websites, bar users to \"use scraping techniques to mine or otherwise scrape data except as permitted by a Plan\", so MetaMask's card page and card help pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, MetaMask Card is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://consensys.io/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/metamask-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MetaMask's card page, its card fee and help pages and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Morpheus","category":"crypto_card","kind":null,"reason":"NOT IDENTIFIABLE AS A LIVE CONSUMER CARD PROGRAMME. Neither model run could load a primary vendor page on 2026-08-17. Excluded as unidentified rather than as a finding against a product; if the brief meant a specific programme it needs a URL before it can be scoped.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/morpheus/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A primary vendor page for a Morpheus card programme can be loaded and identified.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Nexo Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Nexo's platform terms bar users from causing or launching \"any programs or scripts for the purpose of scraping, indexing, surveying, or otherwise data mining any portion of any of our programs, systems, or products\", so Nexo's card page and card terms are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Nexo Card is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://platform.nexo.com/api/cross/account/ac/v1/tnc/content/platform/terms-of-service-mica?lang=en","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/nexo-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nexo's card page, card terms and status record are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Plutus Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto card products remain, which is no judgement on Plutus Card.","source":"https://www.plutus.it","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/plutus-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Coinbase Card, ether.fi Cash, MetaMask Card, Nexo Card and RedotPay Card in a browser, or a fifth crypto card product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ready Card and Solflare Card (issuer: Kulipa)","category":"crypto_card","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Not ranked: their current status could not be confirmed from the issuer's own pages or its regulator's on 2026-08-17, so nothing about it is stated here. They are assessed once a primary source can be read.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-10-10","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/ready-card-and-solflare-card-issuer-kulipa/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kulipa's own pages or its regulator's register confirm the current status of Ready Card and Solflare Card.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"RedotPay Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"RedotPay's card page and its general terms answered only with a block page on 10 November 2026, and its fee schedule is published as an image, so its per-payment fees could not be read as text. Until they are read, RedotPay Card is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.redotpay.com/card","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/redotpay-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"RedotPay's card page and terms can be read, and its fee table read by hand: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Revolut","category":"crypto_card","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked already, as Revolut in Crypto Neobanks and Revolut Crypto in Simple Buy: it is a bank account with a card rather than a card programme, and its crypto leg is a trading feature. Its own fee PDF's minimum-fee table makes a GBP 5 trade cost GBP 1.49 (29.8%), which Crypto Neobanks scores.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/revolut/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Revolut sells a crypto card programme separate from the account ranked in Crypto Neobanks.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Wirex Card","category":"crypto_card","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked once already, as Wirex in Crypto Neobanks, which scores the same fee evidence ('Exchange fees - Wirex taps into multiple liquidity sources... Associated fees can be viewed in the app.') and the card's ATM terms ('Free up to 200 GBP monthly, 2% thereafter'). Its card tiers run from 0.5% Cryptoback on the free plan to 8% on the EUR 29.99 a month Elite plan with 7,500,000 WXT locked for 180 days.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-10-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/wirex-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Wirex Card is sold as a product separate from the Wirex account ranked in Crypto Neobanks.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zeal","category":"crypto_card","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto card products remain, which is no judgement on Zeal.","source":"https://www.zeal.app","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"crypto_card/zeal/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Coinbase Card, ether.fi Cash, MetaMask Card, Nexo Card and RedotPay Card in a browser, or a fifth crypto card product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"AMINA Bank","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Fiat Rails & Banking for Crypto Businesses — the same bank, under the same name, in the pool it actually competes in. aminagroup.com, fetched 2026-08-20, positions itself as a \"Regulated Crypto Bank\" offering \"Banking, Trading & Custody Services\" and states \"AMINA Bank AG is a Swiss bank, welcoming clients worldwide, with an FSRA-regulated branch in the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM)\", alongside a \"Crypto Treasury as a Service\" corporate offer and separate entities for the UK, Hong Kong and Austria (\"AMINA (Austria) AG ('AMINA EU') is a MiCAR regulated provider of crypto asset services\"). The site does carry an Individuals path next to Corporates and Enterprise, but ChainChoice already scores this entity as \"AMINA Bank AG\" in the business-banking pool, against its esisuisse depositor sheet covering corporate clients to CHF 100,000 and its own General Terms and Custody Regulations. It is not absent from the site and it is not a second, unscored entry here.","source":"https://www.aminagroup.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/amina-bank/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ChainChoice moves AMINA out of the Fiat Rails & Banking for Crypto Businesses pool, or AMINA launches a distinct mass-market consumer neobank product separate from its corporate and private-banking offer.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Anchorage Digital","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Institution-only with no self-serve access — and already ranked under Institutional Custody. anchorage.com, fetched 2026-08-20, describes \"a premier institutional crypto platform\" and \"the first federally chartered digital asset bank in the United States\", operated through Anchorage Digital Bank, National Association under an OCC federal bank charter, Charter Number 25243, with Anchor Labs, Inc. as parent. The audiences the homepage names are asset managers, ETF issuers, wealth managers, protocols, RIAs, corporations, hedge funds, venture capital firms and governments; there is no consumer signup control anywhere on the page, only a \"Get in touch\" enquiry form. The strongest banking charter in the sector is irrelevant to this pool because a reader cannot open the account. ChainChoice scores it in Institutional Custody, where the buyer is the institution the product is actually sold to.","source":"https://www.anchorage.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/anchorage-digital/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Anchorage opens self-serve consumer accounts that a retail reader can apply for without a sales conversation.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Cash App","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Simple Buy as \"Cash App Bitcoin\" — and it is US-only and explicitly not a bank. Cash App's own terms of service, fetched 2026-08-20, require that \"You must be a resident of the United States, at least 18 years and the age of majority in your State of residence\", which fails this pool's requirement that a reader outside the US can actually open the account. Both the terms and cash.app itself (fetched separately the same day, so the sentence is corroborated across two pages) state \"Cash App is a financial services platform, and not an FDIC-insured bank\", and the homepage adds \"Prepaid debit cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC\" and \"Cash App Visa Debit Flex Cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC, and The Bancorp Bank, N.A.\" A platform that disclaims being a bank on its own homepage cannot be scored on a deposit-guarantee criterion; the bitcoin buy button is scored in Simple Buy instead.","source":"https://cash.app/legal/us/en-us/tos","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/cash-app/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Block obtains a bank charter under which Cash App balances are themselves deposits, or Cash App opens accounts to residents outside the United States.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Coinbase","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto Cards, Crypto Exchanges and Simple Buy. Coinbase's consumer spending product is a third-party-issued prepaid card sitting on top of a crypto account, not a Coinbase bank account. The Coinbase Card cardholder agreement, decoded from the PDF's font-subset content streams on 2026-08-20, states \"Your Card is a prepaid card, which allows you to access funds loaded to your Card account\" and, on its final page, \"Coinbase Card is issued by MetaBank, National Association, Member FDIC, pursuant to a license from Visa U.S.A. Inc.\" — with \"'Program Manager' refers to Marqeta, Inc, who performs certain services related to your Card on MetaBank's behalf\" and the document stamped \"Revised November 19, 2020\". The FDIC cover it describes attaches downstream and conditionally: \"Your Card funds will be held at or transferred to MetaBank, National Association, an FDIC-insured institution. Once there, your funds are insured up to $250,000 by the FDIC in the event MetaBank fails, if specific deposit insurance requirements are met.\" That is pass-through cover on a card float against a partner bank's failure — not a deposit guarantee on a Coinbase account, which is what this category scores.","source":"https://static-assets.coinbase.com/card/terms/v2/coinbase_card_metabank_cardholder_agreement.pdf","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/coinbase/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase offers a retail fiat account held at a Coinbase-owned licensed deposit-taker, covered by a statutory deposit guarantee scheme in its own name.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Crypto.com","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto Cards — not an oversight. Its consumer money product is a prepaid e-money card, not a fiat deposit account. crypto.com/cards, fetched 2026-08-20, states \"The Crypto.com Card is a prepaid card. They need to be topped up rather than being linked directly to your bank account like a debit card\" and \"The Crypto.com Prepaid Visa Card is issued and promoted by Foris MT Limited pursuant to its Visa Principal Member (Issuing) license\", with Foris MT (Malta, company registration number C 90348) \"duly authorised by the Malta Financial Services Authority as a Financial Institutions licenced to issue electronic money under the 3rd Schedule to the Financial Institutions Act (Electronic Money Institutions)\". E-money is safeguarded, not deposit-guaranteed, so there is nothing to score against this pool's heaviest criterion (fiat covered by a real deposit guarantee, 35%). ChainChoice scores the product as \"Crypto.com Card\" in the Crypto Cards pool, where its full published fee ladder is compared against other card programmes.","source":"https://crypto.com/cards","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/crypto-com/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Crypto.com holds a credit-institution or bank licence in a market it serves and offers retail fiat balances covered by a named statutory deposit guarantee scheme.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Juno","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down — confirmed on the product's own site, not inferred from news. juno.finance, fetched 2026-08-20, serves a wind-down notice in place of the product: \"We regret to inform you that Juno is shutting down.\" The notice states \"In May 2024, the collapse of Synapse and the breakdown at Evolve Bank & Trust resulted in funds being frozen across more than 50+ fintech companies\", that \"After more than two years of navigating the consequences of this crisis, we have concluded that there is no viable path forward for Juno as a business\", and directs users to \"follow the latest updates on the CFPB's Synapse page\" — \"Customers with a positive balance on May 17, 2024 may be eligible for restitution.\" There is no signup or login control anywhere on the page; the only surviving function is email support at hello@juno.finance for account statements and related requests. This is the exact failure this category's 35%-weighted deposit-protection criterion exists to price: the money sat behind an FDIC-insured bank the whole time and was still frozen, because the break was at the middleware layer in front of the bank. Not ranked, because a dead product must not be able to appear to win on price.","source":"https://juno.finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/juno/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"juno.finance replaces the wind-down notice with a working signup or login that opens new accounts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kraken","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto Exchanges. kraken.com, fetched 2026-08-20, presents an exchange and trading platform — \"600+ Krypto-Paare und 11.000+ Aktien und ETFs\" — plus a US-only equities brokerage whose fine print reads \"Brokerage-Dienstleistungen werden von Kraken Securities LLC ('Kraken Securities'), Mitglied der FINRA/SIPC, einer hundertprozentigen Tochtergesellschaft von Payward, Inc.\" The only banking-shaped product on the page is its money app, Krak, headlined \"Die globale Geld-App\" for spending, sending and earning APY on a balance. The page advertises no bank account and states no deposit insurance anywhere — its own risk disclaimer says users are \"möglicherweise nicht durch staatliche Entschädigungs- und/oder regulatorische Schutzprogramme geschützt\" — so there is nothing to score on this pool's deposit-protection leg or its fiat-authorisation leg. Kraken is compared in Crypto Exchanges, where trading venue quality is the thing actually being measured.","source":"https://www.kraken.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/kraken/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken markets a retail fiat account whose balances are covered by a statutory deposit guarantee scheme named on its own site.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Wirex","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 7 (score 52) until 5 November 2026. Its scheduled re-read (3 and 4 November 2026) could not confirm two cells: the only page that listed the countries Wirex does not serve (help.wirexapp.com, supported countries) now answers 404, and the FCA register record behind its licence score served only a script shell to a plain read. Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, Wirex leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on Wirex.","source":"https://help.wirexapp.com/article/supported-countries-1189","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/wirex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Wirex publishes where it does not operate and its FCA record (FRN 902025) is read: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Ziglu","category":"crypto_neobanks","kind":null,"reason":"In special administration — the UK regulator says so on its own site. The FCA news story, fetched 2026-08-20 (first published 08/07/2025, last updated 06/02/2026), states \"Ziglu Limited entered special administration on 7 July 2025. David Shambrook and Damian Webb of RSM Restructuring Advisory LLP were appointed as special administrators.\" It records that \"On 23 May 2025, the FCA took action to protect consumers, by placing restrictions on Ziglu in relation to particular products\" and that \"On 17 June, Ziglu agreed to stop carrying out both payments and cryptoasset activities while allowing customers to withdraw funds\", directing customers to the special administrators at RSM Restructuring Advisory LLP. Ziglu's own site (ziglu.io) returns HTTP 403 to non-browser clients as of 2026-08-20, so it cannot serve as the auditable citation; the regulator's page is used instead precisely because a reader can re-open it. A firm that has agreed to stop both its payments and its cryptoasset activities cannot be scored on either leg of this category.","source":"https://www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/ziglu-limited-enters-special-administration","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_neobanks/ziglu/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The FCA withdraws or supersedes the special-administration notice, or a solvent Ziglu entity reopens payments and cryptoasset activity to new UK customers.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bridge.xyz","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Stablecoin settlement. Bridge is the Stripe-side rail our Deel entry names as the third of Deel's three stablecoin routes, and readers who see \"Stripe/Bridge\" there reasonably ask why it is not scored here. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching bridge.xyz itself (HTTP 200, 148,396 bytes), not a summary of it. The page is explicit about the customer in its own title, \"Bridge | Stablecoin Infrastructure and APIs for Developers\", and repeats that line in the body. This is a developer API for businesses embedding stablecoin movement, not a payroll system: across the fetched HTML the strings \"payroll\" and \"withhold\" each appear ZERO times, so there is no employer tax or filing surface to score against the 24%-weighted taxFilings criterion. The only regulated entity the page names appears in its licensing footer — \"Money transmission services for applicable services provided to US residents are provided by Bridge Building Inc NMLS # 2450917\" — which is a payments licence, not authority to act as an employer or remit employment taxes. Scoring Bridge here would credit a payment rail with employment capability it does not claim.","source":"https://www.bridge.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/bridge-xyz/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bridge publishes an employer-facing payroll product — tax withholding, employment filings, or employer of record — on its own domain.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BVNK","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Stablecoin settlement — not withheld. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching bvnk.com (HTTP 200) and then, because its nav revealed one, bvnk.com/global-payroll (HTTP 200). The harder fact is stated first rather than buried: BVNK titles that second page \"BVNK | Stablecoin payroll platform\", so the vendor does claim the category word, and any refusal that pretended otherwise would be wrong. The refusal survives on what the page actually sells: \"Stablecoin payouts for global payroll. Pay suppliers, contractors and freelancers near-instantly.\" That is a payout leg for contractors, not an employment relationship — and on that same page the strings \"withhold\", \"tax\", \"filing\" and \"employer of record\" each appear ZERO times, so the 24%-weighted taxFilings criterion has nothing to score. The page's own customer testimonial is attributed to \"Ryan Freeman\", \"Head of Partnerships, Deel\", which confirms BVNK is the rail beneath a platform this pool already ranks; scoring both double-counts one payment path. Finally it is not sellable to this pool's buyer: the homepage FAQ states \"BVNK works with businesses and financial institutions looking to process at least $500,000 in payments a month, with a minimum of 6 months of trading/operating history.\" A company hiring its first ten overseas engineers cannot buy this. The homepage's \"130+ countries supported\", under the headline \"Stablecoin infrastructure for the builders making money flow\", is settlement reach rather than compliant employment reach, and scoring it against compliantCoverage would repeat exactly the country-count misdirection this methodology exists to defeat.","source":"https://www.bvnk.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/bvnk/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"bvnk.com/global-payroll adds employer tax withholding, employment filings or employer of record, or BVNK removes the $500,000/month and 6-month trading-history floor so a direct employer can buy it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"LiquiFi","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"There is no longer a standalone product to buy, and the redirect is the evidence. Checked 2026-08-20: https://www.liquifi.finance/ returns HTTP 302 with a Location header of https://www.coinbase.com/tokenmanager, and the bare host liquifi.finance returns the identical 302 to the identical URL. This is not a homepage-only redirect — a deep content URL, the blog post /post/introducing-liquifi-token-vesting-and-cap-table-solutions-for-web3, also returns HTTP 302 to that same Coinbase URL, so the domain now serves none of its own content at any depth. The destination is bot-walled (HTTP 403 on 2026-08-20 to both a default curl and a browser user-agent), so no claim is made here about what Coinbase's page says; the path in the server's own Location header, /tokenmanager, indicates token management rather than employment payroll. LiquiFi is named specifically because our own Toku entry documents Toku's Delaware Chancery suit against LiquiFi, so a reader meets the name inside this pool and would otherwise assume we missed it. This is not a bare acquisition argument: the refusal rests on the observed domain-wide redirect and its status codes, not on the fact of a purchase.","source":"https://www.liquifi.finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/liquifi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"liquifi.finance stops redirecting and serves its own purchasable product again, or a Coinbase-branded successor publishes employment payroll with withholding and filings — in which case it becomes a candidate under the Coinbase name, not LiquiFi.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"MoonPay","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under On-ramps and Off-ramps (two separate pools), and separately as MoonPay Commerce Subscriptions under Crypto subscriptions. MoonPay is the first of the three rails our Deel entry names, so its absence from this pool would read as an oversight rather than a taxonomy decision. Two MoonPay-owned pages were fetched 2026-08-20 to settle it. The newsroom post \"MoonPay partners with Deel to expand stablecoin salary payouts worldwide\" (HTTP 200, datePublished 2026-02-10) describes MoonPay's role in MoonPay's own words: \"Deel is integrating MoonPay's stablecoin conversion and payout infrastructure into its payroll experience.\" MoonPay supplies the conversion and payout leg; the payroll experience is Deel's. The product page for that leg, moonpay.com/business/payouts (HTTP 200, 261,955 bytes), confirms the boundary by omission: \"payroll\" appears ZERO times, \"withhold\" ZERO times and \"1099\" ZERO times. The employment obligations this category weights most heavily — compliant coverage where you employ, and tax forms and filing coverage, together 54% of the score — are absent from MoonPay's own description of what it sells.","source":"https://www.moonpay.com/business/payouts","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/moonpay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MoonPay ships an employer-facing payroll product that withholds employment taxes or files worker tax forms, rather than supplying the conversion and payout leg to platforms that do.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Rippling","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":null,"reason":"Refused on the category boundary, and named because our own Deel entry documents Rippling v. Deel at length — a reader meets Rippling inside this pool and reasonably asks why it is not scored. Rippling is a large, live global payroll platform, but it pays in fiat only, so there is no crypto payout leg for this category to score. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching Rippling's own Global Payroll page (HTTP 200, 668,663 bytes, title \"Global Payroll - Best All-In-One Global Workforce Management Software\"), which states \"Pay international employees in their local currency.\" and contains ZERO occurrences of \"crypto\", \"stablecoin\", \"USDC\", \"bitcoin\" or \"digital asset\" anywhere in the fetched HTML. The claim is deliberately scoped to Rippling's own published product surface: third-party comparison blogs contradict one another about whether Rippling supports stablecoin payouts, none of them are Rippling, and none is relied on or quoted here. Absent any crypto payout on the vendor's own page, it is a fiat payroll incumbent, not a crypto payroll platform.","source":"https://www.rippling.com/global-payroll","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/rippling/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rippling publishes a stablecoin or crypto payout option for workers on its own domain, at which point it becomes a ranking candidate rather than an exclusion.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Sablier","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto subscriptions (as Sablier Flow) and Incentive distribution (as Sablier Airdrops). This is the sharpest boundary case in the pool because Sablier's own homepage — fetched 2026-08-20, HTTP 200 — uses the word under the heading \"What do people use Sablier for?\": \"Handle your token vesting, payroll, airdrops, grants, and more with the Sablier Protocol.\" It is still refused, and the very next sentence on that page is why: \"Recipients can track and withdraw the streamed funds at any time, without your continued involvement.\" A payroll obligation is precisely a continuing duty to classify, withhold and file; a protocol whose selling point is the payer dropping out is the opposite of one. The same fetched page carries ZERO occurrences of \"tax\", \"withholding\", \"1099\" or \"employer of record\", so Sablier scores nothing on taxFilings (24%) by construction, and ZERO occurrences of \"fiat\" against 36 of \"token\" — it streams tokens the payer already holds and never takes custody of fiat payroll float, leaving the 26%-weighted floatCustody criterion not merely undisclosed but inapplicable. A buyer who uses Sablier as \"payroll\" retains 100% of the classification and reporting risk.","source":"https://sablier.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/sablier/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Sablier adds employer tax withholding or worker tax-form filing, converting its payroll claim from token streaming into an employment obligation.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Superfluid","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto subscriptions (as Superfluid Money Streaming). Superfluid is the name most readers reach for when they imagine salary streamed onchain by the second, so its absence needs naming. Checked 2026-08-20: www.superfluid.finance returns HTTP 301 with Location https://superfluid.org/, and that page (HTTP 200) carries the visible heading \"Earn Every Second\" followed by \"Welcome to Superfluid, the protocol for money streaming.\" It is a token-streaming protocol, and the distinction is worth stating precisely because the string \"crypto payroll\" DOES occur in the fetched HTML — twice, and both times inside the same keywords metadata (, once in the tag and once in the framework's JSON payload of it). Stripped of markup, the page's visible text contains the word \"payroll\" ZERO times. An SEO keyword is not a product claim, and scoring it as one would be exactly the marketing-over-substance error this methodology rejects. With no withholding, no filings and no custody of fiat payroll float, Superfluid cannot be scored on 50% of this category's weight.","source":"https://superfluid.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/superfluid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Superfluid ships an employer-facing payroll product with tax withholding or filings, described in its visible body copy rather than its meta keywords.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Utopia Labs","category":"crypto_payroll","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The crypto payroll product for DAOs and crypto startups was switched off and never came back, though the COMPANY was explicitly not declared dead — a distinction worth preserving. Unchained (fetched 2026-08-20, HTTP 200, datePublished 2023-10-04, not bot-walled) reported that \"All services will be turned off on November 6\", quoting CEO Kaito Cunningham: \"For the supporters of Utopia — we're not shutting down the company, rather, moving away from our existing product and our existing direction.\" The refusal rests on the product's own site today, not on that reporting. Checked 2026-08-20, https://www.utopialabs.com/ returns HTTP 200 — so a status code alone would have misled — but serves a 734-byte single-page-app shell whose entire visible text is \"Utopia Labs\", with no navigation, no login, no pricing and no payroll product. Because a 200-with-empty-shell can simply mean client-side rendering, the sole JavaScript bundle it loads (/assets/index-BNw4x_Ra.js, fetched at exactly 233,266 bytes) was pulled and inspected: its string literals are React internals and a WebGL shader library (\"Paper Shaders\"), the word \"payroll\" appears in it ZERO times, and there are no route names or API endpoints. The subdomain app.utopialabs.com does not resolve (NXDOMAIN on 2026-08-20). Nothing here can be bought.","source":"https://www.utopialabs.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"crypto_payroll/utopia-labs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"utopialabs.com serves a working payroll product again with signup or pricing, rather than a shader splash page.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"0G Storage","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Data Availability Layers, as \"0G DA\", so its absence here is taxonomy, not oversight. 0G Storage and 0G DA are not two vendors; they are two faces of one network, and 0G's own docs make the coupling explicit: \"As covered in 0G Storage, data within the 0G ecosystem is first erasure-coded and split into \"data chunks,\" which are then distributed across various Storage Nodes in the 0G Storage network.\" The DA layer is described as sitting on top — \"0G's infinitely scalable DAL can quickly query or confirm data as valid, whether data is held by 0G Storage, or external Web2 or Web3 databases.\" Independently, it would fail this pool's entry bar: the storage page markets \"a decentralized storage network that's as fast as AWS S3 but built for Web3\" and claims \"95% lower costs than AWS\", but attaches no rate a buyer could use — only \"The network fee is fixed. All pricing is transparent and on-chain, preventing hidden fees or sudden changes\", with no number. That is the same missing-price defect the ranked 0G DA row already records (\"no published price\"). All five quotes were checked against docs.0g.ai/concepts/da and docs.0g.ai/concepts/storage on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://docs.0g.ai/concepts/da","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/0g-storage/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"0G publishes a per-GB storage price, at which point 0G Storage becomes scoreable here as a row distinct from the 0G DA entry.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"ArDrive","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a client of a network already in this pool, not on liveness — ardrive.io is live (HTTP 200, \"Pay Once. Store Forever.\"). ArDrive is Arweave's consumer front end and fiat on-ramp, so scoring it would double-count Arweave's durability under a second brand. Its own docs domain concedes the dependency: https://docs.ardrive.io/ (fetched 2026-08-20) serves only a redirect stub — \"You are being redirected to the ArFS Documentation.\" — whose sole outbound link is https://docs.ar.io/build/advanced/arfs. That page states \"Files are stored as individual transactions on the Arweave blockchain, while folders are metadata that reference these file transactions\" and \"To start using ArFS, you'll need to familiarize yourself with the Arweave ecosystem, acquire AR tokens to cover storage costs, and choose a compatible client or library to interact with the ArFS protocol.\" The economics are Arweave-denominated too: https://payment.ardrive.io/v1/rates returned \"winc\":\"12029510964529\" priced at \"usd\":36.458671692495 per GiB on 2026-08-20 — Winston credits, Arweave's own unit. Decisively, our ranked Arweave entry already uses that exact endpoint as its fiat price source, so ArDrive is inside the comparison already, as Arweave's retail counter rather than as a rival network. The rates and the redirect were checked again on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://docs.ar.io/build/advanced/arfs","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/ardrive/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ArDrive stores customer data on any network other than Arweave, or Arweave is removed from this pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bundlr Network (now Irys)","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Ranked nowhere, because the product readers search for no longer exists as a storage vendor — and naming the succession matters, since \"Bundlr\" and \"Irys\" are the same company. Bundlr was the default way to pay for Arweave uploads. Checked 2026-08-20: https://bundlr.network/ returns HTTP 301 to https://irys.xyz/, which serves HTTP 200 and is current (\"© IRYS 2026. All rights reserved\"). Irys is now a chain, not a storage service: its page title reads \"Irys - The Data Layer | Storage, Execution, and Verification in One Chain\" and its headline claim is \"A blockchain that stores large volumes of data onchain, lets smart contracts use it directly, and proves it's still there over time.\" Its navigation is COMMUNITY / ECOSYSTEM / DEVELOPERS / LEARN / GET STARTED — there is no pricing page and no capacity offered for sale; irys.xyz/pricing returns HTTP 404. A reader comparing cost per TiB has nothing to place in the row; this is a data layer competing with DA and L1s, not a storage vendor competing with Filecoin. Because the missing rate is the reason, it was looked for rather than assumed: the docs host's pricing route serves an empty application shell with no figure, and no per-GB rate appears anywhere. That absence, not a liveness claim, is the refusal.","source":"https://irys.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/bundlr-network-now-irys/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Irys publishes a storage pricing page selling capacity per GB directly, rather than only developer and chain onboarding.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Codex (renamed Logos Storage)","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Pre-mainnet, and renamed — there is nothing a reader can buy. Checked 2026-08-20: https://codex.storage/ returns HTTP 302 to https://logos.co/tech-stack, and https://docs.codex.storage/ returns HTTP 302 to codex.storage which 302s onward to that same Logos page; the destination page does not mention Codex anywhere. The testnet block explorer host explorer.testnet.codex.storage no longer resolves (no A record). The newest post on its own blog is \"Codex August Updates\", dated Sep 1 2025, whose own excerpt reads \"Below are the major updates from Codex for August 2025.\" and then breaks off mid-headline at \"Pausing Testnet for\" — the blog is a year stale. The project was formally renamed: the GitHub issue titled \"Final renaming from Codex > Logos Storager\" was opened 2026-02-02 and is closed. This is explicitly NOT a shutdown claim — the engine is under active development, with logos-storage-nim (described as \"Decentralized Durability Engine\") last pushed 2026-08-18 and not archived. But the only shipping artefact is a testnet: the starter repo says \"Join our public testnet.\" and states \"Your participation in the Codex Testnet is subject to the Codex Testnet Terms and Conditions\". No mainnet, no published price, no durability anyone can purchase. Every quote was checked on 2026-08-20: the blog's feed dates its newest post 2025-09-01, and GitHub shows issue 1396's title, its 2026-02-02 creation, its closed state, and the repository's description and 2026-08-18 push.","source":"https://blog.codex.storage/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/codex-renamed-logos-storage/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Logos Storage (ex-Codex) opens mainnet with a published per-GB storage price, or codex.storage stops returning 302 and serves a product page of its own again.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fleek","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The best-known managed IPFS hosting front end, excluded because it currently has no product to score — not because it is dead. Checked 2026-08-20: https://fleek.xyz/ returns HTTP 301 to fleek.sh, which returns HTTP 307 to https://www.fleek.sh/ (HTTP 200). The entire visible body of that destination page is: \"Fleek What if you could start over? We've been building something new. We're excited to share more soon. Stay updated\". There is no product name, no documentation link, no pricing, and no storage or hosting claim of any kind. The company is plainly alive and teasing a relaunch, which is exactly why we state this as a scope exclusion rather than a shutdown: a comparison row requires a purchasable product and a rate, and Fleek presently publishes neither. (No claim is made about the legacy fleek.co domain, which still resolves.) The redirect chain and the teaser page were checked again on 2026-08-20.","source":"https://www.fleek.sh/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/fleek/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"fleek.sh replaces the \"start over\" teaser with a storage or hosting product page carrying a published price.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"IPFS","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"The largest name in the category, absent on scope, not on quality: IPFS is an addressing and transport protocol, not a storage service — there is no capacity to buy and no durability to underwrite. Its own documentation says so verbatim: \"While IPFS guarantees that any content on the network is discoverable, it doesn't guarantee that any content is persistently available.\" It goes further and describes the opposite of retention as normal behaviour — \"IPFS uses garbage collection to free disk space on your IPFS node by deleting data that it thinks is no longer needed.\" The same page then hands the reader to the payable layer: \"To ensure that your important data is retained, you may want to use a pinning service. These services run lots of IPFS nodes and allow users to pin data on those nodes for a fee.\" That layer is precisely what we rank — the page's own list of pinning providers names \"4EVERLAND Bucket\", \"Filebase\" and \"Pinata\", two of which are already scored in this pool. The docs even warn about the durability risk we exist to price: \"There is no guarantee that these third party companies will continue to maintain their pinning service.\" Scoring \"IPFS\" would mean putting a wire format in a table next to vendors with invoices and SLAs. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: docs.ipfs.tech/concepts/persistence/ fetched (HTTP 200) and every string above grepped against its raw HTML, including the full sentence \"To ensure that your important data is retained, you may want to use a pinning service.\" — all five quotes present; no other page is relied on.","source":"https://docs.ipfs.tech/concepts/persistence/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/ipfs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"docs.ipfs.tech/concepts/persistence/ drops the persistence disclaimer, or a single IPFS-branded entity begins selling durable storage under its own name at a published per-GB price.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"NFT.Storage","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Famous for being free, general-purpose IPFS+Filecoin storage — and that product is retired. Its own Classic site states: \"As of 30 June 2024, the the free Classic upload and pinning products are decommissioned.\" (The doubled \"the\" is in the source; quoted as published.) It adds the durability caveat a comparison reader most needs: \"All data you've uploaded will continue to be safely stored and accessible via IPFS and the Filecoin Network. Over time, latency and availability may degrade.\" This is not a shutdown claim — nft.storage is live and selling. But what survives is one narrow SKU, not a general storage network: the pricing page lists a single tier, \"NFT Long-Term Storage\", \"$4.99 / GB\", \"One-time fee\", described as \"Verifiable storage backed by an onchain endowment, powered by IPFS and the Filecoin EVM\", and the FAQ confirms \"The cost to store your digital assets on NFT.Storage is USD $4.99 per GB.\" NFT-metadata endowment is a different product from general capacity, and NFT.Storage itself now routes storage demand to vendors we cover: \"We are excited to announce our new partnerships with Pinata and Lighthouse for hot storage solutions.\" Pinata is ranked in this pool. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: both pages fetched at HTTP 200 and each quote grepped against raw HTML. The attribution split matters and was checked explicitly — the decommissioning, degradation and Pinata/Lighthouse partnership sentences are on classic.nft.storage (the sourceUrl); the tier name, \"$4.99 / GB\", the endowment description and the FAQ sentence are on nft.storage/pricing. No quote here is traceable to an unlisted page.","source":"https://classic.nft.storage/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/nft-storage/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"NFT.Storage reopens general-purpose uploads beyond NFT data, or its pricing page adds tiers beyond the single $4.99/GB one-time SKU.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"ShdwDrive / GenesysGo","category":"decentralised_storage","kind":null,"reason":"Solana's flagship storage network, excluded because we cannot verify an operating product — and we found no shutdown announcement, so none is claimed. Checked 2026-08-20 with dig: shdwdrive.com, www.shdwdrive.com, app.shdwdrive.com, docs.shdwdrive.com, shdwdrive.io, shdw.genesysgo.com, shadow.storage and www.shadow.storage all return no A record. genesysgo.com also returns no A record while still carrying Google MX records, so mail is configured but no website is served — a distinction worth stating, because the first fetcher we used reported a flat \"ENOTFOUND\" for a domain that does in fact still hold DNS records, and the claim was re-checked before being written. The decisive observation is the one host that does resolve: https://shdw-drive.genesysgo.net/ — the shdw-drive file host under GenesysGo's remaining domain — returns HTTP 200 whose entire visible body is \"This domain is for sale Re-visit the page to contact the owner.\" The codebase matches: neither SDK repo is archived, but GenesysGo/shadow-drive was last pushed 2024-07-12 and its GitHub page now reads \"No description, website, or topics provided.\", with the homepage and description fields emptied; shadow-drive-cli was last pushed 2024-07-12. A retrieval domain listed for sale is a data-durability fact a reader must not have to discover on their own. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: because this is the entry most exposed to the live-product failure mode, I searched for a surviving ShdwDrive site before accepting the refusal; the search surfaced docs.shdwdrive.com and a status page, and I dug both — docs.shdwdrive.com has no A record at all, and status.genesysgo.net resolves only to serve the identical domain-for-sale parking page. I read shdw-drive.genesysgo.net's raw body directly and confirmed the for-sale text is the whole of it, and pulled both repos from the GitHub API, where shadow-drive returns description: null and homepage: null.","source":"https://shdw-drive.genesysgo.net/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"decentralised_storage/shdwdrive-genesysgo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any GenesysGo-controlled domain serves a working ShdwDrive product page with a published price, or shdw-drive.genesysgo.net resumes serving stored files instead of a for-sale parking page.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"APY.vision","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead — evidenced by its own hosts, not by a press claim. APY.vision was the reference tool for LP position analytics and impermanent-loss accounting, the one job general dashboards still do worst, so a reader who remembers it deserves to know why it is not here. All checks performed 2026-08-20. apy.vision resolves (A records 98.84.224.111 and 18.208.88.157) but returns HTTP 404 with a body reading only \"Not Found\" followed by a per-request trace ID. www.apy.vision is a CNAME to apy.vision and returns HTTP 404. app.apy.vision is a CNAME to apy-vision-web-v2.netlify.app and also returns HTTP 404 — the Netlify origin that served the app is answering, and has nothing to serve. v2.apy.vision no longer resolves at all (DNS returns NXDOMAIN). Separately, the TLS certificate presented on apy.vision is issued to CN=*.netlify.app and no longer covers apy.vision, so an ordinary browser fetch fails on a name-mismatch error before ever reaching the 404. I found no shutdown announcement on any first-party domain and am not asserting one; a search for a relaunch or a move to a new domain turned up nothing either. The refusal rests entirely on the status codes, certificate and DNS state above, which are sufficient to establish that no usable product is being served. VERIFICATION: I ran each of these fetches and DNS lookups myself rather than relying on the candidate's transcript — and in doing so found that the body's trace ID regenerates on every request, so I removed the specific ID the original reason quoted as though it were stable text.","source":"https://apy.vision/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/apy-vision/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"any apy.vision host returns HTTP 200 with a working LP analytics dashboard, or the team announces a relaunch on a domain that resolves and serves the app.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"DeFi Saver","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Live and excellent, but it is a position-management tool, not a dashboard — refused on scope, not on health. Fetched 2026-08-20, defisaver.com is headlined \"A better tool for DeFi\" and describes itself verbatim as \"DeFi Saver is a non-custodial DeFi management tool offering advanced features and functionalities for managing your positions and crypto assets in various DeFi protocols\". The distinction that matters to a buyer: its value is in acting on positions — leveraged loops, one-transaction Boost and Repay, automated liquidation protection, Recipe Creator — not in observing them. Its coverage is correspondingly narrow and curated rather than universal: the page states \"Protocols 15\" and \"Networks 5\", the named set being Aave V4, Aave V3, MakerDAO, CurveUSD, Spark, Liquity, Compound, Morpho Blue, LlamaLend, Sky, Fluid, Euler V2 and Liquity V2 — overwhelmingly CDP and lending markets. Paste an address holding a Pendle PT, a Convex gauge deposit, a Solana LP and an unclaimed airdrop and DeFi Saver will show you none of it, because that is not what it is for. Every product ranked in this pool is judged on breadth of position resolution across arbitrary addresses; scoring DeFi Saver on that axis would misrepresent a tool that is best-in-class at a different job. This site does rank the vendor, as \"DeFi Saver Automation\" in Automation & Keepers, on its trigger catalogue, execution allowlist and published check cadence. Refusing it here is the same taxonomy split, not an exclusion.","source":"https://defisaver.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/defi-saver/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DeFi Saver adds read-only cross-protocol position resolution for arbitrary addresses beyond the lending and CDP protocols it manages — i.e. it starts competing on coverage rather than on execution.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"DefiLlama","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 8 (score 72) until 5 November 2026. DefiLlama is both this row and a source this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data: every page its scores and terms rest on (defillama.com, docs.llama.fi) is on a paused host, so its scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not use them. Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, DefiLlama leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on DefiLlama.","source":"https://defillama.com/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/defillama/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends (permission granted), or the owner rules how a paused provider is read: then re-read its terms and docs live and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Dune","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"POINTER — ranked, but under Onchain Analytics, not here. This is the most likely false-negative on the page: Dune hosts the largest public library of crypto dashboards, advertising \"200K+\" of them as a discoverable resource, so its absence from a pool literally called DeFi Dashboards reads as an oversight unless we say otherwise. It is a taxonomy split, not a judgement. Dune's own positioning is data infrastructure, not a personal position view: the homepage headline is \"The industry standard for onchain data\" under the tagline \"Normalized blockchain datasets, delivered wherever you work\", and the products it foregrounds are Datashare, MCP, Data Hub, API & Connectors and a Real-Time Feed. A Dune dashboard is a saved set of SQL queries producing protocol- and market-level charts that any visitor sees identically; the homepage surfaces no wallet-connect or personal-portfolio feature at all, and it does not take your address and resolve your LP shares, your debt, your claimables and your cost basis, which is the job every product ranked in this pool performs. VERIFICATION: I checked our own catalog rather than taking the pointer on trust — Dune is entry #1 in On-chain Analytics, scored in full including its credit pricing ladder and free-tier limits, alongside Token Terminal, Nansen, Artemis, Glassnode, Arkham and Messari, exactly as claimed. Note for re-checkers: dune.com serves HTTP 403 to non-browser clients (our own scored entry already documents the same behaviour on dune.com/pricing), so the quotes above were taken from a browser-style fetch of the rendered homepage.","source":"https://dune.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/dune/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Dune ships a first-party wallet-connect view that resolves an arbitrary address's own DeFi positions, claimable rewards and cost basis — at that point it competes directly here and should be dual-listed rather than refused.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"LlamaFolio","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":null,"reason":"The hosted product is gone and the domain has been repurposed for gambling spam. This one needs naming because readers routinely conflate it with DefiLlama, which we do rank. They were never the same thing: DefiLlama's \"portfolio\" is a saved watchlist of protocols, whereas LlamaFolio was the separate address-level tracker that did the job this category is about — so ranking DefiLlama does not cover it. Fetched 2026-08-20: llamafolio.com returns HTTP 200, but the page title and og:title are \"Judimpo: Slot Demo PG Soft Online Bet 200 Perak | MPO Play Gacor Hari Ini\" and the meta description is an Indonesian online-slots solicitation (\"Nikmati pengalaman bermain slot demo PG Soft online...\"), wrapped in a layout lifted from an unrelated retail template and still declaring rel=canonical to llamafolio.com. There is no tracker on it. www.llamafolio.com HTTP 301s to the same page. The open-source backend github.com/llamafolio/llamafolio-api is still public and — confirmed via the GitHub API the same day, which reports \"archived\": false — is NOT archived, so the code survives and could in principle be self-hosted; but there is no product a reader can go and use, and the live domain is now an active malvertising risk we will not send anyone to.","source":"https://llamafolio.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/llamafolio/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"llamafolio.com serves a working address-level DeFi position tracker again, or the team relaunches the hosted product on a domain they control.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Parsec","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":null,"reason":"Offline since 2026-02-19. Parsec was the customisable onchain terminal — build your own DeFi and NFT dashboards, plus API access — backed by Galaxy Digital, Polychain, Robot Ventures and Uniswap Ventures. FinanceFeeds (fetched 2026-08-20) carries founder Will Sheehan's \"The market zigged while we zagged a few too many times\", describes \"the end of the road for parsec\", and states \"Parsec decided to end services and return funds to paying users\". Crowdfund Insider independently quotes the company's farewell, \"After 5 years, Parsec is now offline\", and the closing line \"We are eternally grateful to those that traversed the ups and downs on-chain with us. It was quite the ride\", reporting that holders of active subscriptions were contacted directly for full refunds and cancellations with the Discord kept open through the wind-down. Crowdfund Insider answered automated reads with a Cloudflare challenge on 2026-08-20, so the quotes rest on FinanceFeeds, which loaded. parsec.fi cannot confirm it either: checked 2026-08-20 it answers HTTP 403 with cf-mitigated: challenge and the body title \"Just a moment...\", indistinguishable between a live site and a dead one; parsec.finance returns HTTP 503. The claim rests on the two reports and the refunded subscriptions, not on the 403.","source":"https://financefeeds.com/parsec-shuts-down-as-defi-demand-cools/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/parsec/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Parsec's terminal accepts new paid subscriptions again, or parsec.fi serves a working dashboard product to a browser.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SonarWatch (now Jupiter Portfolio)","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Absorbed, and the surviving product is single-chain. SonarWatch was Solana's most complete DeFi position dashboard and is the name most Solana users would look for here. It no longer exists independently: checked 2026-08-20, sonar.watch answers HTTP 301 redirecting to https://jup.ag/portfolio, and portfolio.jup.ag HTTP 301s to the same destination. PANews (fetched 2026-08-20) reports Jupiter's acquisition announcement of 2025-01-25, stating that Jupiter would release the personal portfolio page created by SonarWatch and integrate it into Jupiter's web and mobile clients. The successor is disqualified on scope rather than on health: jup.ag/portfolio is live (HTTP 200) and good, headlined verbatim \"Your entire Solana DeFi world, tracked in one dashboard\", but it is explicitly a \"Solana Portfolio Tracker\" that tracks \"holdings, positions, yield and airdrops across 190+ Solana protocols\" with no non-Solana coverage anywhere on the page — it cannot answer the question this pool exists to answer, which is what you hold across every chain at once. Recommend it to a Solana-only reader; it is not comparable against DeBank or Zerion. This site does rank a Jupiter product — \"Jupiter JLP\", under Perp House Vaults — which is the liquidity-provider vault, an entirely different product from the portfolio page refused here.","source":"https://jup.ag/portfolio","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/sonarwatch-now-jupiter-portfolio/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Jupiter Portfolio adds non-Solana chain coverage (any EVM chain), at which point it becomes a direct competitor in this pool and should be ranked rather than refused.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Step Finance","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down after a treasury compromise; the brand survives only as a validator. Step Finance was the default Solana portfolio dashboard, so its absence would otherwise read as EVM bias on our part. Confirmed on the product's own domains, checked 2026-08-20: step.finance answers HTTP 307 redirecting to www.step.finance, which returns HTTP 404; app.step.finance returns HTTP 200 but now serves only a SOL staking page headlined \"Stake and Earn Rewards\", advertising \"5.14% APY\" for \"Validator Staking\" and footed \"© 2025 Step Finance\" — no portfolio dashboard, no protocol coverage, no wallet-connect position view. The why comes from the Invezz report syndicated on TradingView (fetched 2026-08-20): an attack that \"targeted devices used by members of the executive team\", draining \"up to $40 million from its treasury and fee wallets\" on 2026-01-31 (other outlets report a lower figure, so treat the exact number as unsettled); the team could \"not secure a sustainable solution\" after exploring fundraising and acquisition, and the closure hit \"the core Step Finance dashboard as well as SolanaFloor and Remora Markets\". The report is explicit that \"the platform's smart contract infrastructure was not breached\" — this was endpoint security, which is the relevant lesson for a buyer evaluating any custodial-adjacent dashboard vendor.","source":"https://www.tradingview.com/news/invezz:427a3a1a2094b:0-solana-defi-platform-step-finance-shuts-down-after-hack/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/step-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"www.step.finance stops returning HTTP 404 and app.step.finance serves a multi-protocol Solana position dashboard again rather than the validator staking page.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Zapper","category":"defi_dashboards","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down — the single most conspicuous absence in the category, and a corpse rather than an oversight. The Crypto Times (fetched 2026-08-20) reports the wind-down was announced 2026-07-08 for a 2026-08-03 shutdown covering the main website zapper.xyz, mobile apps and API services, and carries Zapper's official X post: \"We've made the very difficult decision of winding down Zapper. Thank you for being part of this crazy journey with us\" plus co-founder/CEO Seb Audet's \"It's been an incredible honor building Zapper for all of you. The journey of a lifetime.\" Crypto Economy carries Audet's rationale: \"I evaluated a number of different options, pursued them to the greatest extent possible, and came to the conclusion that an orderly shutdown is the best course of action.\" Tangem states \"Zapper, a leading DeFi portfolio tracker and dashboard, will shut down all operations on August 3, 2026, after nearly seven years of service.\" zapper.xyz cannot confirm this either way. Checked 2026-08-20 it answers HTTP 403 with the response header cf-mitigated: challenge and the body title \"Just a moment...\" — a Cloudflare bot wall that defeated both curl and a browser-style fetch, and that proves nothing about the product. What IS on Zapper's own infrastructure and does point one way: api.zapper.xyz/v2/apps returns HTTP 525 (Cloudflare origin SSL handshake failure) on 2026-08-20, i.e. the API origin is not answering behind the proxy; and the org's integration SDK github.com/Zapper-fi/studio carries the banner \"This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 24, 2024. It is now read-only.\" The shutdown claim rests on the three independent reports, not on the 403.","source":"https://www.cryptotimes.io/2026/07/09/zapper-fi-to-shut-down-on-august-3-after-seven-year-run/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"defi_dashboards/zapper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"zapper.xyz returns HTTP 200 with a working dashboard (not a Cloudflare interstitial) AND api.zapper.xyz returns a 2xx — i.e. someone revives or acquires the product and relights the origin.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Breach Insurance","category":"defi_insurance","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Breach’s Crypto Shield cover is gone: breachinsured.com now redirects to getbreach.ai, whose /cryptoshield page answers 404, whose quote host no longer resolves, and whose new terms (updated 20 October 2026) describe an insurance agency that offers no crypto product (\"nothing on this page is an offer of insurance\"). Read 2026-11-03. Ranked #7 of 7 (score 41) until 5 November 2026; it leaves the table with no cover to compare. The BMA register still lists Breach Insurance, Ltd. as an insurer.","source":"https://getbreach.ai/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"defi_insurance/breach-insurance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Breach offers crypto cover again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bee Maps (Hivemapper)","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 7 (score 41) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Bee Maps (Hivemapper). We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/bee-maps-hivemapper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"DIMO","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 7 (score 48) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on DIMO. We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/dimo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"GEODNET","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #1 of 7 (score 80) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on GEODNET. We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/geodnet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Helium","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 7 (score 57) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Helium. We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/helium/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"WeatherXM","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 7 (score 51) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on WeatherXM. We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/weatherxm/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Wingbits","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 7 (score 53) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Wingbits. We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/wingbits/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"XNET Mobile","category":"depin_networks","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 7 (score 43) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on XNET Mobile. We compare DePIN networks on four things. The largest, whether real customers pay for the network in a way someone other than the operator can check (35% of the weight), was measured with DefiLlama's fees data. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every network again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated. Four networks' figures were DefiLlama's, and the other three were marked low because DefiLlama does not cover them. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the networks are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"depin_networks/xnet-mobile/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find an independent measure of what customers pay each network that we are allowed to use. Then we read that part again for every network and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Ambient","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Refused on the 40% decentralisation-and-trust-minimisation axis, entirely from Ambient's own governance pages, and we should say up front what Ambient says up front: code upgrades are timelocked. Its Upgrading Code page states that 'all proxy contracts have full access to the DEX contract's state and funds', that 'Only the fully privileged treasury multisig can upgrade code', and then immediately that this is so 'only after an extensive timelock, which gives all users with funds at the DEX time to carefully evaluate their comfort with the newly introduced code' (docs.ambient.finance/governance-and-policy/upgrading-code, read 2026-08-19). The refusal rests on the authority that timelock does not cover. Ambient's Emergency page documents that 'Emergency authority power is delegated to the treasury multisig and has the ability to execute with a 30 second timelock for the ability to execute near immediately', and that this authority can 'Force the DEX contract into safe mode, where all user operations (including swaps, mints, burns, deposits and withdraws) are frozen until treasury authority disables safe mode.' This category's published tie-break rule prefers immutable core contracts when trust-minimisation matters; a multisig that can freeze withdrawals inside thirty seconds sits at the opposite end of that scale from Uniswap's non-upgradeable core. Ambient discloses all of this plainly, which is to its credit — and it is still the answer to the question we score.","source":"https://docs.ambient.finance/governance-and-policy/emergency","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/ambient/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ambient renounces the emergency safe-mode authority, or removes its power to freeze withdrawals.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Astroport","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Refused on the 40% decentralisation axis, from Astroport's own developer documentation, and specifically for admin control rather than mere upgradeability — the distinction matters, because eleven of the twelve venues ranked here are upgradeable and are ranked anyway. This category's spec grades the axis as a ladder: immutable core contracts beat upgradeable, which beat admin-controlled. Astroport documents itself at the bottom rung. 'Many of the contracts on Astroport are both upgradeable (can have their code ID changed) and have an owner that can change certain parameters', and the list of upgradeable contracts opens with the pools themselves, 'XYK/Constant product pools' and 'Stableswap pools'. The factory owner separately 'Can update a pair type's configuration which includes its code_id, pair_type (stableswap, XYK or custom), total_fee_bps, maker_fee_bps and whether the pool is_disabled' and 'Can deregister a pool'. An owner who can swap the code behind a live pool, reprice its fees and switch it off is admin-controlled by this spec's own wording. For context, not as the reason: Astroport's own README places it on 'the Terra, Injective, Neutron, and Osmosis blockchains', and the IBC venue ranked here — Osmosis — runs its own sovereign chain with one disclosed 2022 incident on its record. (Read 2026-08-19.)","source":"https://docs.astroport.fi/docs/develop/smart-contracts/access-controls-and-permissions","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/astroport/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Astroport renounces pool ownership and code_id control, or publishes a governance timelock constraining it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bancor","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"The oldest AMM in DeFi, and the one whose record carries a specific dated event that a 60%-weighted track-record axis exists to weigh. Bancor's flagship promise was impermanent-loss protection. Bancor's own documentation records that 'BNT distribution was paused per the Bancor DAO's intervention policy' on June 19th, 2022; that 'BNT distribution is the mechanism that reimburses LPs for deficits from rebalancing and impermanent loss'; and that thereafter 'users who choose to withdraw from the protocol are choosing to do so knowing they are not eligible to receive BNT in the event of vault deficits'. A protection that governance can switch off in exactly the conditions it was sold for is a decentralisation finding as much as a security one, and it is why Bancor is not ranked beside venues that never made the promise. Noted for transparency: blog.bancor.network returned HTTP 403 to our reader again on 2026-08-19, so every quote above comes from support.bancor.network, which Bancor publishes itself.","source":"https://support.bancor.network/bancor-amm/bancor-3-mechanics/pause-of-bnt-distribution","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/bancor/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BNT distribution is reinstated and runs unpaused, or Bancor formally retires the impermanent-loss-protection claim.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Cetus","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Sui's largest DEX, and this pool ranks no Sui venue — a scope line we are stating rather than a name we overlooked. Cetus's own site describes it as 'Built on Sui' (cetus.zone, read 2026-08-19), and the twelve venues ranked here cover EVM, Solana and Cosmos/IBC only. Its May 2025 exploit is precisely what a 60%-weighted security-and-track-record criterion exists to assess — but the response is what settles the other 40%. Sui Foundation's own post records that 'Cetus has requested a community driven vote to recover the funds frozen following last week's hack', and then that 'Validators representing 90.9% of stake have said \"yes\" in the onchain community vote, and the vote has concluded early. With this result, the impacted funds will be moved to a multi-sig wallet and held in trust until they can be returned to users according to the plan led by Cetus.' A chain whose validators can move assets out of an address by vote is a materially different trust model from Uniswap's non-upgradeable core, the immutable benchmark this pool ranks against. Ranking Cetus low would imply we had compared like with like; we have not.","source":"https://www.sui.io/blog/cetus-incident-response-onchain-community-vote","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/cetus/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This category opens a Sui lane — at which point Cetus is ranked and scored on the exploit rather than excluded alongside it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Clipper","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"The same boundary as Hashflow, in Clipper's own words: 'Clipper computes prices off-chain using a sophisticated formula that incorporates low-latency price feeds from centralized exchanges along with a snapshot of on-chain state' (docs.clipper.exchange, read 2026-08-19). Like Hashflow it is non-custodial and settles on-chain, so this is a scope line rather than the category's literal hard exclusion — but a venue that prices from centralised-exchange feeds inherits those feeds as a trust dependency, which is exactly what the 40% decentralisation axis measures, and it is not the permissionless on-chain curve the ranked twelve are graded on. Clipper's docs also record the order size it was built for — 'Previously, Clipper focused solely on smaller trades' — so it was never competing for the trade this pool ranks.","source":"https://docs.clipper.exchange/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/clipper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Clipper moves price formation on-chain, or this category opens an oracle-priced market-maker lane.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"DeepBook","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Two reasons, both scope. First, it is infrastructure rather than a venue: 'DeepBook is Sui's native liquidity layer, providing a central limit order book for spot trading, margin trading, and prediction markets' (docs.sui.io/standards/deepbook, read 2026-08-19), and it is documented for developers deciding 'how your code calls DeepBook', not for a buyer choosing where to swap. Second, it is on Sui, where this pool deliberately ranks nothing — the same boundary drawn for Cetus above. A reader looking for a Sui order book is better served by that sentence than by a rank we would have had to invent.","source":"https://docs.sui.io/standards/deepbook","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/deepbook/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This category opens a Sui lane, or DeepBook ships a first-party consumer trading front end.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ekubo","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"A dated track-record line, and it expires. Ekubo originated on Starknet, where this pool ranks nothing, and its EVM deployment is genuinely new: Ekubo's own EVM contracts repository was created on 2024-11-19 and its Starknet contracts on 2023-05-30 (github.com/EkuboProtocol, read 2026-08-19), against a ranked set whose newest members, Aerodrome and Maverick, both date from 2023 and whose oldest, Uniswap, from 2018. On a 60%-weighted security-and-track-record axis, under two years of EVM mainnet is not enough to place Ekubo against those. Note that its EVM footprint is no longer marginal — Ekubo documents V3 on Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Robinhood Chain and more, at 'the same contract addresses on every chain' — which is why this is a wait rather than a verdict. Its core contracts on both chains also carry no standard open-source licence; Ekubo's docs describe them as 'open source under the Ekubo DAO Shared Revenue License', and GitHub resolves both repositories' licences to NOASSERTION.","source":"https://docs.ekubo.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/ekubo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ekubo V3 reaches roughly three years of EVM mainnet without a core incident, or the pool opens a Starknet lane.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fluid","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, not refused — under lending_borrowing, because the decision Fluid actually presents is a money-market one. Fluid does run a DEX Protocol, described in its own docs as 'An innovative protocol built on top of the Liquidity Layer'; the point is that it exists to let collateral and debt sit inside a Fluid DEX position, so what a buyer is really choosing is a lender's oracle, its LTV and liquidation thresholds, and its bad-debt record. Verified in this repo: Lending & Borrowing, id 'fluid-protocol', name 'Fluid (Instadapp)' — including the ~$21M shortfall from the 22 March 2026 Resolv incident that Fluid disclosed on its own governance forum. Listing Fluid here as a plain spot venue would quietly drop the risk the sibling page publishes in full.","source":"https://docs.fluid.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/fluid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fluid's DEX becomes a venue a buyer chooses independently of its money market.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hashflow","category":"dex","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A scope boundary, and one we should state precisely: Hashflow is non-custodial and settles on-chain, so it does not trip this category's literal hard exclusion ('Not a non-custodial, on-chain exchange'). What sits outside the pool is where the price comes from. Hashflow's own docs describe the model: 'Hashflow uses DeFi-native RFQs to fetch quotes from market makers', and 'Instead of a constant-product pricing function commonly used by AMMs, Hashflow allows market makers to source liquidity from anywhere and price assets using off-chain pricing functions', with 'Market makers are required to cryptographically sign quotes that remain unchanged for the duration of the trade.' The price you get is made off-chain by a professional counterparty rather than by a permissionless on-chain curve, and the counterparty set is a trust dependency the 40% decentralisation axis is built to measure. That is a real product with real advantages against sandwiching — it is simply a different thing from what the twelve venues here are compared on. Request-for-quote and intent-based execution is compared in DEX Aggregators, where CoW Swap, Bebop and UniswapX are ranked; Hashflow itself is ranked in no category on this site today, and this entry exists so a reader can see that was a decision. (Read 2026-08-19.)","source":"https://docs.hashflow.com/hashflow/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/hashflow/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This category opens an RFQ lane, or Hashflow ships permissionless on-chain pools a buyer can supply.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hyperliquid","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, not refused — under perp_dex, as the same venue. Hyperliquid's own documentation places both books on one L1: HyperCore carries 'fully onchain perpetual futures and spot order books', where 'Every order, cancel, trade, and liquidation happens transparently with one-block finality'. Carrying it here as well would score the same product twice on two pages and let a reader think they were two findings. Verified in this repo: the catalog, perp_dex, id 'hyperliquid' — where its record already carries the March 2025 JELLY event, in which validators voted within minutes to delist and force-settle a manipulated market. That is a decentralisation fact this category would have scored, and the sibling page publishes it.","source":"https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/hyperliquid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hyperliquid's spot book is offered as a venue separate from the perp_dex record.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Katana","category":"dex","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Katana is a chain, not a venue — and its own documentation names the DEX that serves it. 'Katana is a chain designed specifically for DeFi', with 'one spot DEX (Sushi), which are the core applications on Katana' (docs.katana.network, read 2026-08-19). SushiSwap is ranked in this very pool by name (id 'sushiswap-dex'), so a buyer arriving on a Katana search lands on the venue that actually executes the swap, with Sushi's 2023 RouteProcessor2 approval bug on its record where it belongs.","source":"https://docs.katana.network/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/katana/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Katana ships a first-party AMM independent of Sushi that a buyer would choose between.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Lifinity","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on a scope boundary its own docs make unambiguous: 'All liquidity in the DEX is protocol-owned and backs the LFNTY token', and 'All pools are closed for deposits' (docs.lifinity.io/dex/liquidity, read 2026-08-19). Half of what this category compares — whether you can supply liquidity, and on what terms — does not exist here. The other half is oracle-priced rather than curve-priced: on its Oracle page Lifinity states that 'Lifinity uses its own custom oracle to ensure the highest accuracy with the lowest latency. We only trade when the oracle has successfully updated in the current slot and the confidence interval is sufficiently narrow' (docs.lifinity.io/dex/oracle, read 2026-08-19). A protocol-owned, oracle-priced market maker is a legitimate design. It is not the decision a Solana buyer lands on this page to make, which is Raydium against Orca.","source":"https://docs.lifinity.io/dex/liquidity","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/lifinity/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lifinity reopens its pools to outside depositors.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"QuickSwap","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Refused because we could not read what we would have to score, not because we expect it to score badly. QuickSwap's live AMM is licensed third-party code by its own account — 'QuickSwap acquired a V3 license from Algebra and is currently deployed on all chains on the DEX' — and its V3 Audits page (docs.quickswap.exchange/technical-reference/smart-contracts/v3/audits.md) is an empty heading with nothing beneath it, on 2026-08-19. The Security page that does have content documents V2 only — 'Between January 8 and April 30, a team of six engineers reviewed and formally verified crucial components of the smart contracts for Quickswap V2' — and the report it invites you to read is hosted at uniswap.org/audit.html. That page is a find-replaced copy of Uniswap V2's documentation, which is why it also tells a Polygon-native DEX's users that QuickSwap is 'implemented in a system of non-upgradeable smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain'. We completed the corpus sweep on 2026-08-19: docs.quickswap.exchange/llms-full.txt returned HTTP 200 at 119,532 bytes, and the only security audit named anywhere in it is PeckShield's audit of Orbs' dTWAP — a third party's limit-order product, not QuickSwap's pools. Audit depth is 60% of this category's score, and QuickSwap publishes no audit of the Algebra V3 and V4 contracts holding liquidity across Polygon PoS, Base and six further chains today. This is a documentation gap we can re-check, not an assertion that the code is unsafe.","source":"https://docs.quickswap.exchange/technical-reference/advanced-topics/security.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/quickswap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"QuickSwap publishes, on its own docs, an audit report covering the live Algebra V3 or V4 deployments.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Solidly","category":"dex","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The ve(3,3) design Solidly introduced is not missing from this pool — it is ranked twice, through Velodrome and Aerodrome, which this site already records as 'the protocol Aerodrome was forked from' and a 'Velodrome-lineage protocol' respectively. Solidly itself we could not verify as a currently maintained venue: re-checked on 2026-08-19, docs.solidly.com returned HTTP 502, solidly.com returned HTTP 200 with a 5,680-byte Next.js application shell and no readable content, and the SolidlyLabs GitHub organisation holds exactly two repositories, Solidly-Audits and v3-analytics, whose most recent activity is 2024-06-21. None of that is proof a product is dead — a 502 is a server error, not an obituary — which is exactly why this is published as unverifiable rather than scored low. We will re-check.","source":"https://github.com/SolidlyLabs","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/solidly/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Solidly's documentation returns and a current deployment can be verified from its own pages.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SunSwap","category":"dex","kind":null,"reason":"Refused on the same scope line drawn for Sui and Starknet: SunSwap trades only on TRON, and this pool opens no TRON lane. It is worth being explicit that this is NOT a verdict on TRON's validator set, because that reason would not survive our own rankings — TRON's developer documentation states that 'The top 27 candidates by votes produce blocks, share block rewards with their voters, and govern the network through on-chain proposals', while this pool ranks PancakeSwap on BNB Chain, whose own documentation describes a daily stake-ranked election of 45 active validators from which 'each epoch selects 18 validators from the Cabinets and 3 validators from the Candidates, forming a group of 21 validators as the consensus validators set for the current epoch to produce blocks.' Twenty-one is not more decentralised than twenty-seven, and we will not publish a standard we do not apply. What SunSwap's own documentation says is on the record instead, because it reads fine and we could read it: docs.sun.io returned HTTP 200 on 2026-08-19 and states that 'SUN.io smart contracts have been audited by SlowMist', documents SunSwap V1 through V4, a Universal Router, a PSM and SUN DAO governance via veSUN and on-chain proposals. None of that is a reason to exclude it; the absence of a TRON lane is.","source":"https://docs.sun.io/get-started/risks","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex/sunswap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This category opens a TRON lane — at which point SunSwap is ranked and scored on its SlowMist audit record and V4 architecture rather than excluded.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SushiSwap","category":"dex","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 12 (score 48) until 4 November 2026. Its scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not read who SushiSwap serves: its terms page, www.sushi.com/legal/terms-of-service, loads its text from Sushi’s own content server, ghost.sushi.com, which has answered HTTP 503 since 14:12 UTC on 3 November 2026 (checked again through 4 November), so the page shows no terms. Every other DEX row was read on time. Rather than rank a row whose country note was last read on 13 September 2026, past the 45-day promise, SushiSwap leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on SushiSwap; it returns to the table, re-scored, as soon as its terms are read live again. An archived copy of the terms is not used: terms change, and an old copy is not a read of today’s page.","source":"https://www.sushi.com/legal/terms-of-service","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"dex/sushiswap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ghost.sushi.com answers and www.sushi.com/legal/terms-of-service shows its terms again: re-read the country note live, restore the row and re-rank it.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"0x Swap API (0x Protocol)","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"0x is developer infrastructure rather than a product a reader opens: its documentation leads with \"The trading API for every chain\" and pitches the Swap API to \"Embed token swaps on any EVM chain\" with \"Aggregated liquidity from 150+ sources.\" The consumer-facing front end built on that routing is Matcha, which is ranked in this pool; listing 0x alongside it would rank the engine and the car as competitors.","source":"https://docs.0x.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/0x-swap-api-0x-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"0x ships a consumer swap application under the 0x brand that is distinct from Matcha.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Axiom","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":null,"reason":"Axiom is a Solana trading terminal, not a routing venue. Coin Bureau's Solana venue guide groups it with Photon and BullX: \"Axiom, Photon and BullX are trading terminals. They help traders discover tokens, view charts, route trades and execute quickly in Solana memecoin markets... They are not core liquidity venues. A terminal may send trades through a DEX, aggregator, pool or routing engine behind the screen.\" Its edge is token discovery, charting and execution speed layered on someone else's routing, so it is judged as a trading terminal rather than in a best-execution comparison.","source":"https://coinbureau.com/analysis/top-solana-dex-platforms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/axiom/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Axiom publishes and operates its own multi-venue routing engine and competes on quoted execution price rather than on terminal features.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"LlamaSwap (DeFiLlama Swap)","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"LlamaSwap sits one layer above this pool rather than inside it: it is a meta-aggregator that gets \"the best price from 8 different aggregators, including 1inch, matcha, paraswap, cowswap\", charges no fee of its own, and takes \"its revenue share from the aggregator platform the trades are routed through.\" Ranking it here would double-count, since its quote is by construction the best of entries already ranked in this pool.","source":"https://dailycoin.com/defillama-launches-meta-dex-aggregator/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/llamaswap-defillama-swap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"LlamaSwap starts routing directly into DEX liquidity itself instead of only re-quoting other aggregators.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"MetaMask Swaps","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":null,"reason":"MetaMask Swaps is a feature inside a wallet, not a standalone router — MetaMask's own guide calls it \"a feature available on MetaMask Extension and Mobile\" and says MetaMask is \"acting as an information aggregator: we pull together quotes so you can find the most advantageous one.\" It also levies a 0.875% MetaMask fee on top of the quoted rate and network fee, which makes its swap take rate a scoring input in the Wallets category rather than a comparable best-execution router here.","source":"https://support.metamask.io/trade/swap/user-guide-swaps/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/metamask-swaps/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MetaMask ships its swap routing as a standalone web product usable without holding funds in a MetaMask wallet.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Odos","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Odos shut down: trading ended on 2026-07-27, when the trading dapp moved to read-only and recovery mode, and production API access ended on 2026-07-30. Its own shutdown site (odos.xyz, read 2026-11-03) states \"Odos trading and API services have shut down\" and \"Odos no longer provides quotes, routing, swaps, limit orders, bridges, gasless execution, or transaction submission.\" Ranked from 2022 until the shutdown; it left the table on 2026-11-03, with no row to re-read.","source":"https://odos.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-03","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-03","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/odos/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"odos.xyz or its API quotes and routes swaps again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Slingshot","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Slingshot, a DEX aggregator and trading app, began sunsetting in late January 2026 and fully closed by 28 February 2026 over low usage. Its former domain slingshot.finance now 301-redirects to slingshot.app, which serves a Namecheap expired-domain parking page rather than a swap application — the product is gone, not merely rebranded.","source":"https://news.bitcoin.com/featured/over-60-crypto-firms-and-projects-fold-in-2026-as-bankruptcies-bear-market-and-hacks-rip-industry-apart/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/slingshot/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A Slingshot-branded non-custodial swap front end returns to live quoting under any owner.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Uniswap","category":"dex_aggregator","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Uniswap is a liquidity venue rather than a router across venues: its developer docs define it as \"an automated market maker (AMM) or a set of smart contracts that let anyone swap tokens, provide liquidity, or create new markets directly onchain\", and the page describes pricing only from its own pools — no third-party venue routing appears anywhere in it. Uniswap is one of the venues the aggregators ranked here route into and belongs in the DEX category; Uniswap Labs' aggregator-shaped product, UniswapX, is already ranked in this pool.","source":"https://developers.uniswap.org/docs/get-started/concepts/how-uniswap-works","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"dex_aggregator/uniswap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The core Uniswap protocol begins sourcing fills from third-party venues outside its own pools by default, collapsing the venue/router distinction.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Breezing","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on exactly the ground the August model runs used, re-verified 2026-09-04 and unchanged. The product's own page title is \"Crypto Subledger for Xero, QuickBooks & Bexio | Breezing\". Its integrations page enumerates precisely six accounting systems — Abacus, Banana, Bexio, Odoo, QuickBooks, Xero — and case-insensitive counts of \"netsuite\", \"intacct\", \"sap\" and \"dynamics\" across both the homepage and the integrations page are zero. Breezing is a real, well-built subledger with FIFO/LIFO/HIFO/WAC and balance verification against the block explorer; it simply does not reach the ledger this buyer runs. (https://breezing.io/integrations/)","source":"https://breezing.io/integrations/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/breezing/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Breezing adds an ERP integration this category ranks against, such as NetSuite.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbooks","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead. https://www.coinbooks.io/ returns HTTP 404 with a 1,249-byte body (checked 2026-09-04). Named because it recurs in third-party listicles of crypto subledgers and would otherwise look like an omission.","source":"https://www.coinbooks.io/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/coinbooks/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"coinbooks.io serves a live product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Consola.finance","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"No longer an independent product. https://consola.finance/ 301s to https://www.request.finance/crypto-accounting, so the standalone crypto accounting product has been absorbed into Request Finance, which is itself excluded above on primitive mismatch. Named here so a later research model run does not treat Consola as a missing sixth vendor. The redirect target returned HTTP 403 to every automated fetch on 2026-09-04, so what Request Finance now ships under that path could not be read and is not scored either way.","source":"https://consola.finance/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/consola-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"consola.finance stops redirecting to Request Finance and serves its own crypto accounting product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Gilded","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Abandoned. The homepage footer reads \"Copyright © 2023 Gilded Inc.\", and every ERP claim on it is a placeholder: the links labelled \"QuickBooks\", \"Xero\", \"NetSuite\" and the feature link \"Account for digital assets in NetSuite\" all resolve to href=\"#\", while https://gilded.finance/crypto-accounting and https://gilded.finance/netsuite both return HTTP 404 and help.gilded.finance does not resolve. Same failure mode as Taxbit — an accounting product that survives only as navigation.","source":"https://gilded.finance/crypto-accounting","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/gilded/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gilded's site shows current activity and its ERP integration links resolve to real pages.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Integral","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Re-checked on 2026-09-04 and the August model runs' verdict is unchanged: https://integral.xyz/pricing still returns HTTP 404, and the 181-URL sitemap contains no pricing page, no NetSuite page and no documentation path (docs.integral.xyz and help.integral.xyz do not resolve). The site is idle by its own timestamps — the newest date anywhere on integral.xyz/blog is May 9, 2025, and the security page states \"Last updated March 17, 2023\". On its own integrations page the ERP row treats the buyer's system as an afterthought: \"Quickbooks\" and \"Xero\" each carry a description and a \"Native API\" tag, while \"Netsuite\" and \"Sage\" are bare labels with neither, under the closing line \"We're always adding new chains, custodians and ERPs.\" A controller on NetSuite has a name and nothing behind it.","source":"https://integral.xyz/pricing","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/integral/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Integral publishes a pricing page and documentation that load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Lukka","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on product existence, not on silence. Lukka is the data layer these subledgers consume — \"The Digital Asset Data Operating System\" — and its Solutions menu lists nine products (Lukka Enterprise Data SaaS, Blockchain Analytics & Compliance, Pricing & Market Data, Lukka Insights, Lukka Reference Data, Lukka Crypto Benchmarks, Index Calculation Services, Valuation Services, Quantitative Analytics), none of which is an accounting subledger. The accounting capability exists only as four bullets inside one page, under the heading \"CORE-BANKING AUGMENTATION SOLUTIONS\": \"GL integrations (SAP, Oracle, Geneva, NetSuite, etc.)\" and \"Reconciled journal entry generation\". There is no product page, no pricing, no documentation and no setup procedure behind them, and the GL list is unenumerated. Its \"Who We Serve\" taxonomy — financial institutions, auditors and accounting firms, exchanges, VASPs, regulators, asset managers and fund admins, infrastructure providers, token projects — contains no corporate holding digital assets on its own balance sheet. Recorded so the call can be reversed: Lukka's assurance is the strongest set found anywhere in this research — \"SOC 1 Type I & Type II and SOC 2 Type I & Type II reports, ISO/IEC 27001 certification\" — so if Lukka ever ships a named subledger product page, it enters the pool immediately. (https://lukka.tech/lukka-enterprise-data-saas/)","source":"https://lukka.tech/lukka-enterprise-data-saas/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/lukka/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lukka ships a subledger product of its own, rather than the data layer subledgers consume.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"NODE40 (Bedrock)","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Turned away because the only place NODE40 names an ERP route or a SOC report is inside JSON-LD that a human reader never sees, and its own rendered security page contradicts the second claim. The structured-data blob served on node40.com pages asserts \"ERP integrations (QuickBooks, Xero)\" and describes the company as \"SOC 1 Type 2 certified\". Neither survives on the rendered pages: https://node40.com/accounting/ is addressed to \"controllers, accountants, and finance teams\" for close and reconciliation but names no ERP, no posting path and no journal sync; https://node40.com/security/ makes no SOC claim for NODE40 at all, saying only \"For sub-service providers, a current SOC 2 Type II audit report is requested and reviewed annually when available.\", while the capabilities page hedges to \"Designed for SOC 1 Type 2 from day one\". NetSuite appears nowhere on the site. Metadata is not documentation; a claim the vendor will not repeat to a reader is not a claim a controller can rely on. Re-openable the moment a rendered page carries the connector.","source":"https://node40.com/accounting/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/node40-bedrock/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"NODE40 states its ERP integrations and SOC report on a rendered page, consistent with its security page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Oracle NetSuite, Sage Intacct and SAP (the general-ledger incumbents)","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded pending a retrievable first-party product page, and explicitly NOT on an assumed absence — the check was blocked and that is reported at equal weight. On 2026-09-04 https://www.oracle.com/erp/digital-assets/ returned HTTP 404, while every www.netsuite.com and www.sap.com URL attempted returned HTTP 403 to automated retrieval (financial-management.shtml, general-ledger.shtml, digital-asset.shtml, sap.com/products/financial-management/digital-currency-hub.html), including through a second fetch path, so their own marketing sites could not be read either way. The one first-party surface that did resolve is Oracle's NetSuite Help Center index, whose top-level feature taxonomy — Account Administration, Globalization, SuiteAnalytics, Country-Specific Features, Employee Management, Marketing/Sales Force Automation and Partners, Projects, Order Management, Accounting, SCM, Support Management, Commerce, SuiteCloud Platform, NetSuite for Mobile, SuiteApps, Non-Profit SuiteApps — carries no digital-asset or cryptocurrency entry. Corroborating but not first-party: every pool member documents NetSuite as a target requiring an external subledger, and Bitwave's setup guide has the buyer hand-create the accounts (\"Find the account named \"Bitwave - Digital Assets\"\"), which a native module would ship. Re-open this the moment a first-party product page can be fetched. (https://docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/netsuite/index.html)","source":"https://www.oracle.com/erp/digital-assets/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/oracle-netsuite-sage-intacct-and-sap-the-general-ledger-incu/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Oracle, Sage or SAP publishes a first-party digital-asset accounting product page a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Request Finance","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Primitive mismatch. The product is accounts-payable and accounts-receivable invoicing and payroll, not a subledger: \"The Accounts Payable and Receivable API allows you to scale your finance operations without the complexity of dealing with blockchains and smart contracts.\" Its own documentation index at https://docs.request.finance/llms.txt contains zero occurrences of subledger, cost basis, FIFO, impairment, journal entry, general ledger, NetSuite, Sage Intacct, SAP, QuickBooks or Xero (case-insensitive counts, 2026-09-04). Request Finance appears in this category the other way round — as a target Bitwave lists under \"### In Progress:\" and as a logo in Cryptio's ERP grid. Limit stated plainly: www.request.finance returned HTTP 403 to every automated fetch on 2026-09-04, including via a second fetch path, so the marketing pages could not be read and no claim is made about them.","source":"https://docs.request.finance/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/request-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Request Finance ships a crypto subledger that posts into a general ledger.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"SoftLedger","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Buyer mismatch, not quality. SoftLedger sells the replacement general ledger rather than a subledger that posts into the one the company already runs: \"SoftLedger is the first general ledger accounting software with a native module for crypto assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche, and Cardano.\" Its only mentions of NetSuite, Sage Intacct, QuickBooks or Xero anywhere on the site are the head-to-head pages \"SoftLedger vs Oracle NetSuite\", \"SoftLedger vs Sage Intacct\", \"SoftLedger vs. Xero\" and \"SoftLedger vs. QuickBooks\", and https://softledger.com/integrations returns HTTP 404. Its one subledger claim is scoped to other modules — \"Use only AR, AP, or another module as a subledger — then bring journal entries into your ERP\" — and names no ERP connector. Noted for the record: the FAQ answers on that page do not match their questions (\"Can SoftLedger handle multiple types of digital assets?\" is answered \"Absolutely. Our accounting software has the ability to create recurring invoices and journal entries.\"; \"Who benefits most from SoftLedger's Crypto Accounting Software?\" is answered \"Yes! We serve customers with operations in over 40 countries.\"). (https://softledger.com/crypto-accounting-software)","source":"https://softledger.com/integrations","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/softledger/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"SoftLedger ships a subledger that posts into an ERP the company already runs.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Taxbit","category":"enterprise_accounting","kind":null,"reason":"Counted as this category's fifth product on 2026-08-29, Taxbit failed every part of a re-check on 2026-09-04. (1) The unblocking URL is gone: https://www.taxbit.com/enterprise-accounting/ 301s to https://www.taxbit.com/products/enterprise-accounting and returns HTTP 404, serving a page whose only heading is \"Uh Oh! This is awkward!\". Taxbit's own sitemap.xml lists 366 URLs and exactly two /products/ pages — enterprise-tax and public-sector; there is no accounting product page to link. (2) The Marathon case study cited as proof of live NetSuite connectivity, https://www.taxbit.com/blogs/marathon-digital-holdings-engages-taxbit-to-support-crypto-accounting-needs, returns HTTP 404 and does not appear in the sitemap; nor does the Corporate Accounting Suite announcement. (3) On the surviving integrations page, https://www.taxbit.com/integrations, the nav item \"Enterprise Accounting\" is described twice as \"lorem ipsum dolor sit, oimn, aoimn arunv aiurevn aiournv ougnre\" and all four \"Subledger Accounting Suite\" links resolve to href=\"#\". The \"Accounting Software and ERPs\" section is a wall of 33 logo images whose alt text names Intuit QuickBooks, Oracle, Sage, Xero, MS Dynamics 365 and Workday — and no NetSuite. (4) The developer documentation at https://apidocs.taxbit.com/docs/getting-started contains zero occurrences of ERP, NetSuite, subledger, journal entry or general ledger; it documents 1099-DA, CARF/DAC8 and broker cost basis. A controller cannot buy this.","source":"https://www.taxbit.com/enterprise-accounting/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"enterprise_accounting/taxbit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Taxbit's enterprise accounting page loads again with a product a reader can assess.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Binance regional entities","category":"exchange","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Country subsidiaries such as Binance TR would count Binance twice. Which Binance entity's licence covers which country is already scored inside Binance's own row, under 'Whose licence actually covers me in my country — and can I find it on the register?'","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/binance-regional-entities/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A Binance regional entity sells an account whose licence is not already scored inside Binance's own row.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitfinex","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"No US retail access and no EU CASP — it cannot answer the account question for the portal's core buyer despite the industry's richest recovery story (2016 120k-BTC hack, users made whole via BFX tokens). FIRST RE-ADMISSION CANDIDATE if the December 2025 zero-fee claim survives primary-source verification — it would be the cost table's most extreme row.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/bitfinex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitfinex's December 2025 zero-fee claim is confirmed on its own fee page, or it gains a US retail or EU CASP route.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitget","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Copy-trading differentiation is a feature filter, not a scored axis; licence posture 'Registration' with no number or register URL. Bybit occupies the same segment with a strictly stronger evidence trail on the incident axis.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/bitget/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitget publishes a licence number and register link a reader can check.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bithumb","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Korea's number two. A second Korean row would re-rank a segment Upbit wins on the same four axes — the overlap rule's definition of residue. If research overturns Upbit's home-register or incident standing, Bithumb is the named successor candidate, researched then at full bar.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/bithumb/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Research overturns Upbit's home-register or incident standing, which makes Bithumb the named successor.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitpanda","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Four pools deep (verified: Simple Buy as bitpanda-buy with pricing from the primary PDF, Crypto Neobanks, Crypto Offramps, Exchanges). Its retail product is broker-model spread pricing — simple_buy's allInCost axis; keeping an exchange record would re-rank the same EU-retail decision. The order-book product (Fusion) alone does not displace Bitvavo in the same jurisdiction lane. Drop from exchange.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/bitpanda/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitpanda sells its order-book product as an account decision separate from the broker records already ranked.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BtcTurk and Paribu","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Turkey is a real unserved segment, but its Capital Markets Board licensing regime is still in transition and cannot yet be checked on a register at the same bar as Mexico's CNBV, Brazil's BCB or South Africa's FSCA. Deferred until it can be, rather than admitted at a discount.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/btcturk-paribu/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Turkey's Capital Markets Board licences can be checked on a public register at the bar applied to CNBV, BCB and FSCA.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CoinSwitch","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Aggregator/broker shape: the account it opens is a quote-driven buy surface — simple_buy's decision, not the recurring order-book account this category scores. Same structural reason trade_republic was orphaned in the base scope.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/coinswitch/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CoinSwitch opens an order-book account with a public fee-tier schedule.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Crypto.com Exchange","category":"exchange","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"The retail surface is already ranked in crypto_card (verified in Crypto Cards) and the app's spread-priced buy flow belongs to simple_buy's axis; the Exchange proper is US-restricted with best fees gated behind CRO staking, making its cost cells non-comparable at this buyer's volume. The January 2022 hack (initially downplayed, then admitted at ~$34M) belongs in the incident corpus regardless.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/crypto-com-exchange/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Crypto.com Exchange opens to US buyers with fee tiers not gated behind CRO staking, so its cost cells compare at this buyer's volume.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"eToro","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"A multi-asset broker whose crypto is spread-priced exposure (1% built into the price) with jurisdiction-dependent transferability; the account being opened is a brokerage, not a crypto exchange account, and scoring it here re-ranks simple_buy's axes.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/etoro/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"eToro opens a crypto exchange account with transferable holdings, separate from its brokerage.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"FTX, Celsius and Voyager (the casualties)","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Not pool members — calibration corpus. Each scores 0-2 on the licence map and the insolvency-and-account-terms criterion BEFORE its failure, which is the test the four criteria were built to pass. Their terms and bankruptcy findings are citation material for the rubric bands.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/ftx-celsius-voyager-the-casualties/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them relaunches a live exchange account, which would be assessed as a new product rather than as calibration.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Gate.io","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Gate's global platform, for readers outside the EEA. Re-read on 2026-10-28: its EEA entity, Gate Technology Ltd, has held a Maltese MiCA authorisation since 29/09/2025 (ESMA register), and on the four criteria that entity is not dominated by Binance, Bybit or OKX (its licence map scores 8 against their 5, 6 and 7), so it is ranked here as Gate EU. The global platform is a different entity serving other markets, and it still occupies the offshore-breadth lane Binance and Bybit carry; www.gate.com answered plain curl with HTTP 403 that day, and its global terms were not read.","source":"https://www.gate.com/en-eu/legal/licenses","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/gate-io/refusal","pointer":"gate_eu","aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gate's global platform publishes an entity-matched licence in the United States or the United Kingdom, or a read of its global terms finds a scored criterion on which it beats Binance, Bybit and OKX.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"HTX","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Same offshore-breadth lane with weaker evidence: November 2023 hot-wallet losses, keyholder history, and no core-market licence footprint. Material for the incident corpus, but for the portal's US/EU/UK buyer it separates on nothing Binance and Bybit do not already cover.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/htx/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"HTX gains a licence in a core market the portal's US, EU or UK buyer is served from.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"KuCoin","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"KuCoin's global platform, for readers outside the EEA. The 2025 US guilty plea and two-year US exit recorded in August concern this entity; that record was not re-read. Its EEA entity, KuCoin EU Exchange GmbH, is refused separately as KuCoin EU: it holds an Austrian MiCA authorisation (ESMA register, 27/11/2025), but its own site says trading and deposits have been suspended since 4 February 2026.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/kucoin-exchange/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"KuCoin's global platform publishes an entity-matched licence in the United States or the United Kingdom, or its US market exit ends.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"KuCoin EU","category":"exchange","kind":"deferred_or_not_live_yet","reason":"Read 2026-10-28. KuCoin EU Exchange GmbH (Vienna) has been on ESMA's MiCA register since 27/11/2025 (FMA, Austria), but an EEA reader cannot open an account or trade there. Its own site carries the banner \"KuCoin EU trading and deposit services were suspended at 14:30 (UTC+1) on February 4, 2026.\" (kucoin.com/en-eu, its fee, Convert and terms pages). Its announcement of 20 February 2026 records the \"voluntary suspension of new customer onboarding and certain new business activities as of 30 January 2026\" and says that, after an information notice from the Austrian Financial Market Authority (FMA), \"a temporary restriction on new business activities remains in place\"; its update of 30 June 2026 still answers readers \"eager to hear when KuCoin EU services will resume\". A venue that takes no deposits or trades is not ranked.","source":"https://www.kucoin.com/en-eu/announcement/en-building-trust-through-compliance-kucoin-eu-strengthens-local-compliance-in-austria","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-29","ledgerKey":"exchange/kucoin-eu/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"KuCoin EU resumes trading and deposits and reopens onboarding to new EEA customers, with the FMA's restriction on new business lifted.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Mercado Bitcoin","category":"exchange","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"STOPPED: on 2 November 2026 attackers drained Mercado Bitcoin's hot wallets and about 36,000 customer deposit addresses (about $48.6 million across 11 blockchains), and \"Deposits and withdrawals were suspended as a precaution.\" When accounts reopened on 9 and 10 November, customers could see balances but not withdraw: \"Trading, withdrawals, deposits, transfers, Pix and card services remained unavailable\", Pix withdrawals return only after account revalidation and crypto transfers in a later phase, and the exchange says it is replacing the affected assets with its own funds (rekt.news, 10 November 2026, read 11 November 2026). Do not send crypto to a Mercado Bitcoin deposit address until transfers are back. Ranked #16 of 17 (score 41) until 10 November 2026. Mercado Bitcoin could not be re-read in full on 10 November 2026. Its fee page (mercadobitcoin.com.br) answered a plain request and an ordinary signed-out browser with a Cloudflare block page (\"Sorry, you have been blocked\"): a block, not a challenge, so there was nothing to wait for and nothing we would solve. Its terms of use answered a plain request the same way; later that day the page opened once in a browser (it shows an update date of 30 October 2026), but its clauses were not read. Its cost, licence and account-terms scores and its country statement were last read in September. Rather than rank it on a read past the 45-day promise, Mercado Bitcoin leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on Mercado Bitcoin.","source":"https://www.mercadobitcoin.com.br/taxas-contas-limites","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"exchange/mercado-bitcoin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Mercado Bitcoin's withdrawals and crypto transfers have reopened, its fee page can be read from a connection it does not block, and the clauses of its terms of use are read: then re-read all four scores and its country statement and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"MEXC","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Verified: licenses:[] and complianceLevel 'minimal' in its own record — no entity-matched register entry in any core market, so two of four criteria would be structural zeros scored on silence, plus recurring user-reported withdrawal freezes without vendor acknowledgment. Evidence economics fail; keep as a fee-extreme cautionary fact, not an anchor.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/mexc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MEXC is found on a core-market register under a matched entity.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Nubank and Mercado Pago","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Crypto embedded in a banking app is a question for Crypto Neobanks (deposit guarantee, banking relationship), not an order-book exchange row, and there is no public fee-tier schedule from which to score what you would actually pay at your volume.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/nubank-mercado-pago/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nubank or Mercado Pago publishes an order-book exchange account with a public fee-tier schedule.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Rain","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"The Middle East and North Africa are outside the regions this category's regional rows were researched for (Latin America, Korea, India and Africa). Rain, licensed by the Central Bank of Bahrain, is the next candidate, to be researched to the same standard; admitting it now without that research would lower the bar.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/rain-mena/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This category researches the Middle East and North Africa to the standard of its other regional rows.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Revolut X","category":"exchange","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Revolut is already ranked twice — revolut-crypto in simple_buy (0-3% product-added spread documented from the primary PDF) and revolut in crypto_neobanks (both verified). Revolut X is a pro interface on the same e-money account, not a separate account decision; a third ranking would be the same product on a third page.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/revolut-x/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Revolut X becomes an account separate from the Revolut e-money account already ranked.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Robinhood Crypto / Binance.US","category":"exchange","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"One entity, one anchor slot: Robinhood is already ranked in simple_buy (robinhood-crypto, including the California DOJ routing-representation settlement) and now also owns pool-member Bitstamp; Binance.US is a separate, more limited entity the main Binance record must name in its licence map. Neither gets its own row.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/robinhood-crypto-binance-us/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Robinhood or Binance.US becomes an entity whose account is not already represented by a ranked record.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Scalable Capital","category":"exchange","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Sells crypto exposure without withdrawal to self-custody, so the account it opens cannot 'hold' in this category's sense, and the Simple Buy methodology refuses it on the same rule. Scalable's own help centre, read 2026-10-27, answers 'Can I withdraw cryptocurrencies to my private wallet?' with: 'Direct withdrawal of cryptocurrencies to a private wallet is not technically supported via the Scalable Broker, since your digital assets are held here as exchange-traded products (Crypto ETPs), rather than as physical coins.' A Scalable crypto buy is a listed security bought through a broker, not an account on a crypto order book.","source":"https://help.scalable.capital/en/trading-1541d52f/crypto-d0f5ddb9/can-i-withdraw-cryptocurrencies-to-my-private-wallet-d0dbaa11","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-27","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-29","ledgerKey":"exchange/scalable-capital/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Scalable's help centre stops saying that direct withdrawal of cryptocurrencies to a private wallet is not supported, or Scalable sells coins rather than crypto ETPs.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"SwissBorg","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Execution-routing retail app, not an account venue with its own order book; its axes (simple all-in cost, custody posture) are simple_buy's. The verified Kiln/SOL Earn incident note must migrate with the product wherever it is ranked, not be lost.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/swissborg/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"SwissBorg runs its own order book a buyer opens an account on.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Trade Republic","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, but in the right category. Trade Republic is a broker app, not an exchange: there is no order book and no maker or taker schedule to score. Its customer agreement (Version 07.08.01 DE-de, Stand 9/2026, Anlage 7, read 2026-10-28) says a market order is always filled 'zum vom Crypto Ausführungsplatz angebotenen, nächstbesten Preis', at the next best price the crypto execution venue offers. That is a quote-driven buy, so it is scored in Simple Buy. The reason this entry gave until 2026-10-28, that coins cannot leave the account, is wrong and has been withdrawn. The same agreement defines an outgoing crypto transfer as a transfer 'an eine Dritt-Wallet', a wallet of the customer's that Trade Republic does not manage. Its price list (v11.2025) lists 'Ausführung von Crypto Transfers' as 'kostenfrei', plus network fees.","source":"https://assets.traderepublic.com/assets/files/CA_DE-de.pdf","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/trade-republic/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Trade Republic opens an order book with a published maker and taker fee schedule to retail customers.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"WazirX","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Casualty, not winner: the July 2024 hack, prolonged withdrawal freeze and court-supervised restructuring ended its claim to the Indian segment. It is calibration material for withdrawal_incident_record's 0-2 band (as FTX is for insolvency), and its restructuring documents are citations, never a ranked row.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/wazirx/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"WazirX completes its restructuring and reopens withdrawals and trading to users.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"WhiteBIT","category":"exchange","kind":"deferred_or_not_live_yet","reason":"Re-read on 2026-10-28. WhiteBIT's EU entity, WB-Shields Innovations GmbH, has been on ESMA's MiCA register since 18/06/2026 (FMA, Austria), so \"alignment language\" no longer describes its licence. But whitebit.eu, the website that register entry names, served only \"WhiteBIT EU is Coming Soon!\" and a waitlist form that day: an EEA reader cannot open an account, so there is nothing to rank. whitebit.com answered a browser with a security check (HTTP 403); it was recorded, not bypassed.","source":"https://whitebit.eu/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/whitebit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"whitebit.eu opens accounts to EEA residents.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Yellow Card","category":"exchange","kind":null,"reason":"Pivoted to a B2B stablecoin payments and API product, no longer the retail exchange this category ranks. A pivot is positive evidence of a different product, not a death; it belongs, if anywhere, in a payments category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"exchange/yellow-card/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Yellow Card reopens a retail exchange account.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Aave V2","category":"flash_loans","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"excluded as superseded rather than absent. Its premium is still live and still nearly double v3's: FLASHLOAN_PREMIUM_TOTAL() on the Aave v2 LendingPool at 0x7d2768dE32b0b80b7a3454c06BdAc94A69DDc7A9 on Ethereum returned 9 (9 bps = 0.09%) at block 25698813 on 2026-08-06, against 5 on every v3 Pool checked the same day. 9 bps is also the figure still reproduced in a large share of third-party flash-loan tutorials. Ranking v2 alongside v3 would present a deprecated deployment as a live purchasing option at 1.8x the current price.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"flash_loans/aave-v2/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Aave V2's pool stops serving flash loans, or its premium falls to v3's level, which ends the reason it is named apart from v3.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Moonwell","category":"flash_loans","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because it does not offer this product at all, not because it scores badly. Its lending primitive is the mToken, which its own docs define as 'mTokens are ERC-20 compliant tokens that represent positions within the Moonwell protocol.' — a Compound-v2-style supply/borrow receipt with no flash-loan entry point. Verified negatively rather than assumed: docs.moonwell.fi/llms-full.txt, fetched 2026-08-06 (515,253 bytes, HTTP 200 — the complete documentation corpus the vendor publishes for machine reading), contains zero case-insensitive occurrences of the string 'flash'. Moonwell appears in flash-loan search results for the opposite reason: DefiLlama's hacks dataset records 'Moonwell Lending' twice as a VICTIM — 2026-02-15, $1,780,000, 'cbETH Collateral Exploit', Base; and 2025-11-04, $1,000,000, 'Oracle Price Feed Manipulation', Base/Optimism. Being attacked with a flash loan is the inverse of being a flash-loan venue, and listing it here would invert the category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-06","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"flash_loans/moonwell/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Moonwell ships a flash-loan function in its own contracts or documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bidali","category":"gift_cards","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto gift card products remain, which is no judgement on Bidali.","source":"https://giftcards.bidali.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/bidali/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read two more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BitGift","category":"gift_cards","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"BitGift's robots.txt tells AI agents not to read any of its pages, and its product pages now open only after signing in, so this site does not read its pages the way it reads a provider. Until a person reads them, BitGift is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://bitgift.io/robots.txt","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/bitgift/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BitGift's robots.txt allows AI agents and its card pages open without an account, or a person reads them by hand: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bitrefill","category":"gift_cards","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Bitrefill's product page and terms answered automated reads with a browser-verification page on 10 November 2026, and its terms bar \"robots, spider or other automated means\" except agents acting for a customer, so its prices and terms could not be read in the way this site reads a provider. Until they are read, Bitrefill is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.bitrefill.com/terms/?hl=en","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/bitrefill/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitrefill's product page and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Coincards","category":"gift_cards","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Every Coincards page answered with a browser-verification page on 10 November 2026, so its prices, refund terms and country rules could not be read. Until they are read, Coincards is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://coincards.com/us/product/amazon-com-online-gift-card-electronic-delivery/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/coincards/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coincards' product page and terms can be read: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"CoinGate Gift Cards","category":"gift_cards","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"CoinGate's gift-card pages answered only with a refusal on 10 November 2026, so its prices, refund terms and country rules could not be read. Until they are read, CoinGate Gift Cards is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://coingate.com/gift-cards/amazon?region=US¤cy=USD","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/coingate-gift-cards/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CoinGate's gift-card pages can be read: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Coinsbee","category":"gift_cards","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto gift card products remain, which is no judgement on Coinsbee.","source":"https://www.coinsbee.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/coinsbee/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read two more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CryptoRefills","category":"gift_cards","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto gift card products remain, which is no judgement on CryptoRefills.","source":"https://www.cryptorefills.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/cryptorefills/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read two more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"SpendCrypto","category":"gift_cards","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"SpendCrypto's terms bar users who \"scrape, crawl or harvest the site, or access the services by automated means, other than through our API\", so its pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, SpendCrypto is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://spendcrypto.com/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"gift_cards/spendcrypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"SpendCrypto's pages and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Boardroom","category":"governance_tools","kind":null,"reason":"Acquired by Agora, announced January 23, 2025, and folded in rather than kept as a separate purchase: Agora's own announcement states \"We are committed to keeping the Boardroom product as-is; no service will be interrupted\", \"Boardroom will join as a module in the Agora Ecosystem\" and \"Kevin joins Agora as advisor.\" (agora.xyz/blogs/6-boardroom-acquisition, fetched 2026-08-06). Re-tested on 2026-08-06, the exclusion holds: it cannot be bought independently of Agora, and the public evidence of it as a live product has decayed. boardroom.io serves a 4,187-byte JavaScript shell; updates.boardroom.io returns HTTP 200 but its newest post is \"Uniswap Weekly Update - June 26, 2023\" with nothing since. The API is alive but closed: api.boardroom.info answers HTTP 404 at its root and HTTP 401 {\"message\":\"Unauthorized\"} at api.boardroom.info/v1/protocols (both read 2026-08-06). It is scored inside Agora, not beside it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-06","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"governance_tools/boardroom/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Agora separates Boardroom into a product bought on its own again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Common","category":"governance_tools","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #8 of 8 (score 41) until 10 November 2026. Common's price and its country statement must be read from common.xyz, which answers a plain request with a block page. Attempt recorded: on 10 November 2026 an ordinary signed-out browser opened https://common.xyz/terms at 11:33 UTC and again at 11:43 UTC (15 seconds' wait); both times the page showed only \"Application error: Error loading application state\" and \"Please try again later\", with no terms text. Its price score was last read in August. Rather than rank it on a read past the 45-day promise, Common leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed; it stays on the list to be read again. This is not a judgement on Common.","source":"https://common.xyz/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"governance_tools/common/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"common.xyz loads its terms and pricing in a browser again: then re-read its price score and its country statement and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Arculus","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Arculus is a metal card tapped against a phone, and the phone half is not optional. Its issuer defines the product that way in its own annual report: 'Arculus combines a physical metal card with a mobile software application to enable three-factor secure authentication, high-value transaction authorization, and management of digital assets in cold storage.' It gives a reader nothing to look up or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: it names no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and it publishes no source for its own firmware or signing applet.\n\nThe card's secure element is claimed but never identified. Arculus's homepage says the card 'encrypts your private keys on a secure element embedded in the card' (Wayback copy of 2026-08-08; the live site answers automated reads with a Cloudflare challenge on 2026-10-01), and its help centre, updated 2026-10-01, says only that the card 'uses a secure element with a best-in-class CC EAL6+ Hardware Classification', with no part number or certificate identifier. 'Common Criteria', 'EAL', 'secure element', 'Infineon' and 'NXP' appear zero times in the FY2025 Form 10-K of GPGI, Inc., the registrant. So on the secure-element ladder it is a claimed element (3 of 10).\n\nThere is also nothing to rebuild. The only repository under the ArculusWallet GitHub account is empty ('This repository is empty.'; created and last pushed 2025-02-25), so no code that runs on the card is published (0 of 10 on reproducible firmware).\n\nThe tap-to-phone card form is not a ground for refusal. Tangem is ranked in the same form, and its Samsung S3D232A can be found on the Common Criteria portal under ANSSI-CC-2024/15 at EAL6+. This refusal will be reconsidered if Arculus names its chip with a listed certificate or publishes the card's applet.","source":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1823144/000162828026017266/cmpo-20251231.htm","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/arculus/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"a certification body lists the Arculus card's secure element, or its applet source is published","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Ballet","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Ballet is not a signing device: its keys leave it. This page ranks hardware that keeps the private key inside itself and hands out only signatures, and each criterion here grades exactly that: the chip that guards the key, the firmware that signs, the check that proves the unit genuine, how it makes and signs with its key, the wallets that sign with it, and the record of the model that holds it.\n\nA Ballet card carries two halves of a secret and never signs anything. Ballet's own how-it-works page lays out the mechanism under '02 · Key Assembly': 'Private Key Entropy' + 'Passphrase Entropy' → 'BIP38 Decryption' → 'Full Private Key / Generated on your device, for the first and only time. Used to sign transactions when you send crypto out.' It adds: 'The private key is never created at the factory. It only comes into existence when you open the card and combine both components yourself — on your device, for the first and only time.' The homepage confirms there is no signer in the product at all: 'No firmware / No password / No seed phrase setup'. Once assembled, the key lives on a phone, so none of this page's six criteria has a device to read.\n\nBallet is a real self-custody product and a reasonable gift ('whoever holds it controls the funds', as Ballet puts it). It belongs in a different comparison, not in a lower row of this one. The same standard refuses Coinkite's SATSCARD and Opendime.","source":"https://www.ballet.com/how-it-works/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/ballet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ballet ships a device that keeps its keys inside and hands out only signatures.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BC Vault","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"BC Vault sells one design in several housings ('Every BC Vault delivers the same powerful security and features — the only difference is the housing'), so the model graded is the cheapest: the BC Vault ONE – Basic Model (Plastic) at 156.06 €. It gives a reader nothing to look up or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: it names no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and it publishes no source for its own firmware or signing applet.\n\nIt claims no secure element at all. Its keys are 'stored in next-gen ferroelectric memory (FRAM)', and 'EAL', 'Common Criteria', 'secure element' and 'secure chip' appear zero times on its homepage, Security Features, Key Features, BC Vault ONE and Certifications pages (all read 2026-10-01). What the Certifications page does publish is real, but it is not a chip evaluation: an SIQ 'Certificate for security assessment / Security Certification: System Review, Penetration Test & Code Audit', plus two electrical-conformity certificates (EN 60950-1; EN 55032, EN 55024 and EN 61000-3-2 and -3-3).\n\nThe bc-vault GitHub account holds exactly two repositories, both companion code this page does not count: bc-js (a JavaScript API, pushed 2022-06-22) and bc-vault-wallet-provider (a web3 provider, pushed 2023-04-30). It holds no firmware (0 of 10 on reproducible firmware).\n\nIts seedless design and its standing bounty ('Each BC Vault ships with 1.0 BTC—crack the encryption, and it’s yours') are shown as facts. How a device backs up is a preference this page does not grade. This refusal will be reconsidered if BC Vault names a certified part or publishes its firmware.","source":"https://bc-vault.com/siq-certificates/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/bc-vault/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"a certification body lists a BC Vault secure element, or BC Vault publishes its device firmware","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bitkey (Block)","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, just not on this page. Bitkey sits in the key-recovery category, because what a buyer is really choosing with Bitkey is its 2-of-3 arrangement with Block and its server-run inheritance clock ('Once a claim is started, a 6-month security period begins'). That raises three questions: who is allowed to start the handover, what enforces the delay, and whether the person you named can still move the coins if the company is gone. The key-recovery category scores those questions directly and publishes what it found, including a term from Block's own Terms of Service: 'Block does not independently evaluate or validate that such events have occurred'.\n\nScoring the same device here, on its secure element, the reproducibility of its firmware, the wallets that sign with it and its record, would grade the half of the product nobody buys it for. It would also put one device on two pages. This is a placement, not a verdict on the hardware: Block publishes Bitkey's app, firmware and server code in proto-at-block/bitkey (pushed 2026-08-12). The hand-off was confirmed, not assumed: id 'bitkey' is live in the key_recovery pool and absent from the hardware_wallet pool, so there is no double listing.","source":"https://bitkey.world/features/inheritance","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/bitkey-block/refusal","pointer":"key_recovery","aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitkey is sold as a signing device without the 2-of-3 arrangement with Block that places it in key recovery.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinkite SATSCARD","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"SATSCARD is a bearer instrument, not a signing device: its keys leave it. Coinkite describes it as 'a physical bearer Bitcoin card with ten independent slots'. Coinkite's own comparison with TAPSIGNER gives the way out as 'Unseal one slot and sweep', against TAPSIGNER's 'Sign transactions through a compatible wallet'. The step that spends is the step that hands over the key: 'unsealing exposes the current slot key and permanently advances the card', and the phone that receives the key does the signing. This page ranks hardware that keeps the private key inside itself and hands out only signatures, and every criterion here grades that, so a SATSCARD gives them no signer to read. It is a well-made way to hand someone bitcoin, with an open protocol ('Coinkite publishes the NFC protocol, reference Python implementation, certificate-verification guidance, and command-line tools'). It belongs in a different comparison, on the same standard that refuses Ballet. Its sibling TAPSIGNER keeps one key and signs, so it was assessed as a signer; it is refused below for a different reason, because it names no chip and publishes no applet to check.","source":"https://satscard.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/coinkite-satscard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["SATSCARD"],"expiresIf":"Coinkite ships a SATSCARD variant that signs transactions without its keys leaving the card.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinkite SATSCHIP","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"SATSCHIP is a provenance key for physical art, not a wallet for your own funds. Coinkite sells it as an 'Embeddable NFC Bitcoin key for physical art' and gives it one job: 'The PIN holder can use its private key to sign proof of control.' Coinkite's comparison of its three cards says so directly: 'Three cards. Three different jobs.', with SATSCHIP's being to 'Embed a key in physical art' and marked 'No private-key backup'. Its key stays in the chip for good: 'The private key cannot be exported or backed up.' That is the right design for proving who holds an artwork, and it belongs in a provenance comparison, not in a lower row of this one. Its siblings SATSCARD and TAPSIGNER are listed above, each for its own reason.","source":"https://satschip.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-02","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-02","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/coinkite-satschip/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["SATSCHIP"],"expiresIf":"Coinkite sells SATSCHIP as a wallet that signs for the holder's own funds.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinkite TAPSIGNER","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Coinkite's TAPSIGNER sells for $27.99 in every current design (marked down from $49.99, read 2026-10-01), so that is the model graded. It is a real signing device: the card keeps one BIP-32 key and signs, and the phone only asks ('Your wallet builds the transaction. TAPSIGNER keeps the BIP-32 key on a separate card.'). It still gives a reader nothing to look up or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: it names no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and it publishes no source for its own signing applet.\n\nCoinkite claims a certified chip but never identifies it. Its CEO described the card on a podcast that Coinkite's own January 2022 announcement links: 'So you now have an extra device that is extremely secure, like physically speaking. It’s an EAL6 chip.' No Coinkite page, protocol document or repository read on 2026-10-01 gives a part number or a certificate identifier, and TAPSIGNER's own security page lists only the PIN against someone holding the card: 'Card alone, changed PIN unknown: Attacker faces PIN authentication and rate limiting'. On the secure-element ladder that is a claimed element (3 of 10).\n\nThere is also nothing to rebuild. The card runs a Java Card applet (cktap's constants.py: 'our Javacard applet has this APP ID'). Coinkite publishes the protocol, a Python host library, the cktap command-line tool and 'A python emulator of a single card.' The applet that derives keys and signs is in none of Coinkite's 22 public repositories, and WalletScrutiny has no build record for it (0 of 10 on rebuildable firmware).\n\nIts strengths are real and shown as facts, not scored: an open protocol that independent wallets implement themselves (Sparrow, Nunchuk, Cove and Bitcoin Keeper sign with it directly, with no Coinkite server); a factory certificate that Sparrow checks offline; and four years on sale with no device-level fund loss on record. Coinkite's July 2026 advisory says 'TAPSIGNER, OPENDIME and SATSCARD are not affected by this bug as they are different codebases'. Having no screen is the trade-off Coinkite itself states.","source":"https://store.coinkite.com/store/tapsigner","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/coinkite-tapsigner/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["TAPSIGNER"],"expiresIf":"Coinkite names the TAPSIGNER's chip with a certificate a certification body lists, or publishes the source of its signing applet","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"D'CENT","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"IoTrust's cheapest D'CENT today is the DCENT S, an NFC card sold as the 'DCENT S + R3covery Card Kit' at $59.00 (listed 2026-07-21), so that is the model graded. The Biometric Wallet ($79.00, marked down from $159.00) reads the same. It gives a reader nothing to look up or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: it names no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and it publishes no source for its own firmware or signing applet.\n\nNone of the chip claims carries a part number or a certificate identifier:\n- the card's page: 'DCENT S is built with an EAL6+ grade secure chip'\n- the Biometric Wallet's page: 'Certified secure chip CC EAL5+' and 'Secure element: Secured Firmware, EAL5+ certified'\nOn the secure-element ladder, each is a claimed element (3 of 10).\n\nThere is also nothing to rebuild. DcentWallet/biometric-firmware (pushed 2026-09-10, releases through v2.36.2) ships compiled images, not code. It holds a 108-byte README ('This repository provides \"D'CENT Biometric Firmware\" images.'), a bin/ folder of .bin files with their info.yml, a deploy workflow, and no source and no licence. The rest of the DcentWallet account is companion code (connectors, SDKs, keyrings, a desktop bridge, an HWI library), forks of other projects, and a 2020 command-protocol definition (wcp-proto). No code for the DCENT S card is published at all (0 of 10 on reproducible firmware).\n\nThe fingerprint unlock and the two-card backup are genuinely convenient; they are shown as facts and not scored. This refusal will be reconsidered if IoTrust names its chip with a listed certificate or publishes firmware source.","source":"https://store.dcentwallet.com/products/dcent-s-r3covery-card-kit","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/d-cent/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["DCENT","DCENT S"],"expiresIf":"a certification body lists D'CENT's secure element, or IoTrust publishes source for its device firmware","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"ELLIPAL Titan","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"ELLIPAL's cheapest Titan is the Titan Mini at $79.00. The Titan 2.0 sells at $169.00 and the NFC X Card at $59.00, and all three read the same. Each gives a reader nothing to look up or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and no published source for the device's own firmware or signing applet.\n\nEach spec table names a level and no part: 'Secure Chip CC EAL5+ Secure Chip' for the Titan Mini and the Titan 2.0, and 'Built on a CC EAL6+ Secure Chip.' for the X Card. None carries a part number or a certificate identifier, so on the secure-element ladder each is a claimed element (3 of 10).\n\nThere is also nothing to rebuild. 'open source' appears nowhere on the three product pages. The ELLIPAL GitHub account holds forks of other projects, a QR data-format document, an XRP key-extraction utility, a desktop tool for verifying upgrade files, an Ethereum address library 'fully portable for Windows, Linux, Mac and iOS/Android apps', and the firmware of the Joy, a separate mnemonic generator. None of it is code a Titan runs (0 of 10 on reproducible firmware).\n\nIts QR-only air gap ('ELLIPAL Titan Mini stays offline: no WiFi, no Bluetooth, no USB data.') is shown as a fact and not scored, because which connection a device uses is a preference. A reader who requires air-gapped signing is shown the ranked devices that offer it. This refusal will be reconsidered if ELLIPAL names its chip with a listed certificate or publishes Titan firmware source.","source":"https://www.ellipal.com/products/ellipal-titan-mini","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/ellipal-titan/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["ELLIPAL","ELLIPAL Titan Mini"],"expiresIf":"a certification body lists ELLIPAL's secure element, or ELLIPAL publishes its device firmware source","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"imKey","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"imKey Pro ($109.99, backed by imToken) is the cheapest hardware wallet imKey sells. The $99.99 imKey Pass S6 is 'A fingerprint security key built on the FIDO2 standard', which imKey itself positions beside its wallets: 'Use hardware wallets for asset management and the Pass S6 as the daily identity entry point.'\n\nimKey Pro gives a reader nothing to match to a certificate or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: it names no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and it publishes no source for its own firmware or signing applet.\n\nimKey does name its chip: 'The secure chip used in imKey is the Infineon SLE 78CLUFX5000PH.' It takes its EAL6+ claim from the certificate of the platform beneath that chip, BSI-DSZ-CC-0879-V4-2020 for the 'Infineon Security Controller M7893'. That certificate is real (archived since 2025-02-12; its successor is valid to 2027-10-19), but its public security target names no SLE 78 ordering code and leaves the derivatives to a 'confidential Security Target'. imKey's own FAQ also asks 'Why can't I find the full code “SLE 78CLUFX5000PH” on Infineon’s public website?' On the secure-element ladder that is a named part with no listed certificate (5 of 10). BitBox02, COLDCARD, Keystone and Passport hold that same cell, and they are ranked because their firmware can be rebuilt.\n\nimKey's cannot. ConsenLabs publishes only companion software and SDKs, which this page does not count: imkey-core inside consenlabs/token-core-monorepo (pushed 2026-07-30), described as 'Cross platform, on mobile, desktop, server side', and the desktop imkey-manager (pushed 2026-09-30). That makes it 0 of 10 on reproducible firmware. This refusal will be reconsidered if a certification body's listing names imKey's part, or imKey publishes its applet.","source":"https://support.imkey.im/hc/en-001/articles/52743275148313-imKey-Secure-Chip-Model-Certification-Explanation","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/imkey/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["imKey Pro"],"expiresIf":"a certification body's listing names imKey's chip, or imKey publishes its signing applet","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Keystone ForgeBox","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"ForgeBox is a development kit, not a wallet sold to sign with. Keystone describes it as 'an open hardware platform for developers, researchers, and educators who want to run their own code on a secure device', and its guide 'takes you from device setup to building, signing, and loading your first Hello World firmware'. The firmware that signs is the one its owner writes and loads, so there is no maker's signing firmware for this page's criteria to read. It is refused on the standard that refuses SeedSigner, Krux and Specter DIY; Keystone's signing device, the Keystone 3 Pro, is ranked on this page.","source":"https://github.com/KeystoneHQ/forgebox","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-02","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-02","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/keystone-forgebox/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["ForgeBox"],"expiresIf":"Keystone sells ForgeBox as a wallet for signing with one's own funds.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Krux","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Krux is firmware, not a device: 'Krux is an open-source firmware that transforms off-the-shelf Kendryte K210 devices, such as the Maix Amigo, M5StickV and more, into versatile bitcoin transaction signers.' The project sells and warrants no unit. Its Devices and Parts List names eight boards built by other companies: M5StickV, Maix Amigo, Maix Dock, Yahboom k210 module, Maix Cube, WonderMV, TZT and Embed Fire. Each is a general-purpose development board that the owner flashes, listed at third-party prices from 'US$ 27-35' to 'US$ 58-86' (read 2026-10-01). Every criterion on this page is graded on the model a row prices: the secure element its maker names, the firmware build its maker ships for it, the check that proves the unit genuine, how it makes and signs with its key, and that model's years and record in buyers' hands. Krux has no such model. The same firmware runs on eight boards whose makers sell development hardware, not a Krux signer, so a row would grade whichever board the reader happened to buy. That is a scope boundary, not a criticism. WalletScrutiny reproduced Krux's 26.08.0 builds for all five of its build targets on 2026-08-08, which is exactly why ranking it against priced, warrantied hardware would mislead in both directions. This is the SeedSigner standard.","source":"https://selfcustody.github.io/krux/parts/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/krux/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The Krux project sells and warrants an assembled unit of its own.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"NGRAVE ZERO","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"NGRAVE ZERO (398,00 EUR, marked 'Sold out' on NGRAVE's own store on 2026-10-01) gives a reader nothing to match to a certificate or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard: no secure-element part that a certification body lists, and no published source for the device's own firmware or signing applet.\n\nIts headline certificate is for software, not a chip. The ZERO page lists 'Certification level CC EAL7, CE, RoHS, FCC' and credits 'a custom OS that achieved EAL7 certification'. On this page's ladder, a certificate for an operating system or a whole product does not count for the part. The chip itself is named only loosely. NGRAVE's help centre describes 'a customized and upgraded version of the STSAFE A100 from ST-Electronics' and says the ZERO 'also has CC EAL5+ and EAL7 certifications', but it gives no certificate identifier, and STSAFE-A100 is on neither the Common Criteria portal's current list nor its archived one. So on the secure-element ladder it is at best a named part with no listed certificate (4 of 10; 5 only if NGRAVE says the key is held in it).\n\nNGRAVE also keeps the firmware closed by design: 'It will gradually open-source except for its secure element and the secure OS that achieved EAL7 certification.' Its GitHub organisation holds forks and QR-transport libraries. The one it says the ZERO uses, ur-registry-cpp ('C++17 library implementing the UR Registry used by NGRAVE ZERO hardware wallet', created 2025-08-18), encodes and decodes the QR messages. It is not the firmware that derives keys, shows what you approve and signs. WalletScrutiny rates the ZERO 'nosource', the firmware repository it lists for it (ngraveio/zero-firmware) does not exist, and no build record for the ZERO is on the relays this page reads.\n\nIts air gap ('There is no connection to the internet, bluetooth or anything else.') and its '4 layers of tamper protection' are real and shown as facts. This refusal will be reconsidered if a certification body's listing names the ZERO's chip, or NGRAVE publishes the ZERO's firmware source.","source":"https://ngrave.io/en/safest-operating-system","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/ngrave-zero/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["NGRAVE"],"expiresIf":"a certification body lists the ZERO's secure element, or NGRAVE publishes the ZERO's firmware source","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Opendime","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Opendime is a bearer instrument, not a signing device: its key leaves it. Coinkite calls it 'a small USB stick that holds bitcoin as a sealed physical bearer instrument'. Spending means breaking the seal to hand the key out: 'Push a pin through the marked hole to reveal the private key. This is irreversible. Sweep the full balance into a trusted wallet.' In Coinkite's own summary: 'It's like a piggy-bank. You must destroy it to spend the funds.' The device never signs a transaction; the wallet that receives the revealed key does. None of this page's criteria, which grade the chip that guards a key inside a device, the firmware that signs with it, the check that proves the device genuine, how it makes and signs with its key, the wallets that sign through it and that model's record, has a signer to read here. Opendime is a clever way to pass bitcoin hand to hand, and it belongs in a different comparison, on the same standard that refuses Ballet and SATSCARD.","source":"https://opendime.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/opendime/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinkite ships an Opendime that signs transactions without its key leaving the device.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Prokey","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"other","reason":"Prokey Optimum is cheap ('Prokey Optimum 69.00 $') and still has a working cart, but its firmware is not maintained. On this page, a device whose firmware its maker updates must show a firmware release, or a change to its published firmware source, in the 24 months before the read date to be ranked, because a flaw found in it today would have no fix to grade. Cards whose firmware cannot be updated are outside this test.\n\nProkey ships firmware as numbered releases. The newest, 'Prokey Firmware v1.10.5', is dated 2023-10-09, almost three years before this read. prokey-io/prokey-optimum-firmware was last pushed 2023-11-02, with its last commit dated 2023-02-24, and the companion hardware repository last moved 2022-04-05. The company has not vanished: prokey-webcore, its library for reaching the device over WebUSB, took a commit on 2025-03-23. But the device code has stood still.\n\nOn this page's ladders it would also sit on the bottom rung for its secure element. Its product page makes no secure-element, chip or Common Criteria claim at all (zero hits for 'EAL', 'secure element', 'Common Criteria' and 'chip', read 2026-10-01). Once the device is opened, only the PIN and passphrase stand between an attacker and the key (0 of 10). Its firmware is published with build instructions, which is to its credit. One new release, or one new change to its firmware source, reverses this refusal, so it is re-tested at every re-read.","source":"https://github.com/prokey-io/prokey-optimum-firmware/releases","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/prokey/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["Prokey Optimum"],"expiresIf":"Prokey ships a firmware release, or changes its published firmware source","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Satochip Satodime","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Satodime is a bearer card, not a signing device: its keys leave it. Satochip's FAQ answers 'How do I get funds out?' with 'First, you have to unseal the corresponding keyslot to be able to export the private key (in plaintext or WIF format).' The wallet that imports the key does the signing, so none of this page's criteria, which grade the device that keeps a key and signs with it, has a signer to read. It belongs with SATSCARD and Opendime, on the same standard. Satochip's signing card, the Satochip, is ranked on this page.","source":"https://satochip.io/faq/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-02","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-02","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/satochip-satodime/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["Satodime"],"expiresIf":"Satochip ships a Satodime that signs without exporting its keys.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Satochip Seedkeeper","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Seedkeeper stores secrets; it does not sign. Satochip sells it as a 'Seedphrases and passwords manager' and says: 'Easily export any secrets stored in your Seedkeeper.' A card that hands its secrets back out is a backup, not the signing device this page ranks, so none of its criteria applies. Satochip's signing card, the Satochip, is ranked on this page.","source":"https://satochip.io/product/seedkeeper/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-02","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-02","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/satochip-seedkeeper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["Seedkeeper"],"expiresIf":"Satochip adds transaction signing to Seedkeeper.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"SecuX Neo","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"SecuX is ranked on this page on its cheapest model, the W10 ($49). Its NeoGold ($99), Neo-X ($179) and Nifty ($199) are sold separately and differ from the W10 on two criteria, so each would earn a row of its own, but each gives a reader nothing to look up or rebuild, which is this page's refusal standard.\n\nSecuX names their secure element only as 'Infineon SLE 97', a chip family rather than a part, and no certification body lists a SecuX part. SecuX also publishes no source for their firmware: its SecuXMCU repository holds the W10, W20 and V20 line and an e-paper card branch, with no Neo or Nifty code, and no build record exists for any of them on the relays this page reads (read 2026-10-01).\n\nThe USB-C variants (W10C at $59, W20C at $99) and the W20 and V20 differ from the W10 on at most one criterion, so they share its row. The Shield BIO ($149) cannot share the W10's row whatever its firmware: it signs with independent wallets through SecuX's app and MetaMask's QR route (6 of 10 against the W10's 4) and has been on sale only since April 2024. SecuX does not say whether its published e-paper firmware branch is the Shield BIO's firmware, so on today's evidence it is refused with the Neo models; if SecuX confirms the branch, it earns a row of its own (read 2026-10-02).","source":"https://secuxtech.com/products/neo-series","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/secux-neo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["SecuX NeoGold","SecuX Neo-X","SecuX Nifty","SecuX Shield BIO","Shield BIO"],"expiresIf":"SecuX publishes Neo or Nifty firmware source, a certification body lists the Neo's secure element, or SecuX confirms which published firmware the Shield BIO runs","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"SeedSigner","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"SeedSigner is a design, not a product. You buy a Raspberry Pi Zero, a Waveshare screen and a camera and assemble them yourself: 'You can build an offline, air-gapped Bitcoin transaction signing device from off-the-shelf components for less than $50!' seedsigner.com has no cart and no unit price. Its hardware page links to general component retailers and to independent sellers of enclosures, kits and assembled signers; one of those shops is run by the project's creator. The page then says plainly: 'There are no “official” or “approved” SeedSigner vendors', and it asks every seller to 'never ship devices with preloaded software' (read 2026-10-01). Every criterion on this page is graded on the model a row prices: the secure element its maker names, the firmware build its maker ships for it, the check that proves the unit genuine, how it makes and signs with its key, the wallets that sign with it, and the years that model has been in buyers' hands without a loss. No seller is official, and the project tells every seller, the creator's own shop included, not to ship its software installed, so there is no priced model for those rules to read, and a row would end up grading whichever seller's assembly the reader happened to buy. That is a scope boundary, not a criticism. The stateless design is excellent, its firmware is public, and WalletScrutiny has reproduced its releases (0.8.7 on 2026-07-09). That is exactly why ranking it against priced, warrantied hardware would mislead in both directions. The same standard refuses Krux and Specter DIY.","source":"https://seedsigner.com/hardware/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/seedsigner/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"SeedSigner is sold as an assembled product with a cart and terms.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Specter DIY","category":"hardware_wallet","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Specter DIY is a build, not a product: 'The idea of the project is to build a hardware wallet from off-the-shelf components.' The Specter project sells no unit itself. Its vendors page lists shops in Europe and Canada that sell parts, Shields or preassembled units, each on its own terms (three are listed with a member of the Specter Association), and it closes with a warning: 'Buy at your own risk. Make sure yourself whether the shop is reputable or build the device yourself.' (read 2026-10-01). The project's own README states what that means for the buyer: 'unlike with commercial signing devices the bootloader has to be installed manually by the user and is not set in the factory of the device vendor.' Every criterion on this page is graded on the model a row prices: the secure element its maker names, the firmware build its maker ships for it, the check that proves the unit genuine, how it makes and signs with its key, and that model's years and record in buyers' hands. The project neither sells nor warrants a Specter DIY, and its secure element depends on whether the builder adds the optional Shield and smartcard, so there is no priced model for those rules to read. That is a scope boundary, not a criticism. The firmware is open and documents its own reproducible build, which is exactly why ranking it against priced, warrantied hardware would mislead in both directions. This is the SeedSigner standard.","source":"https://github.com/cryptoadvance/specter-diy","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"hardware_wallet/specter-diy/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The Specter project sells and warrants an assembled unit of its own.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Absinthe Labs","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down by its own notice. Every address on absinthe.network now serves one page, read again on 10 November 2026: \"Today, Absinthe is winding down, and our lead technical talent is joining Torque\" and \"Every active Absinthe customer has been supported through the completion or transition of its program\". The notice carries no date; this site first read it on 28 September 2026. It stayed in this table without a rank from that day and leaves it now.","source":"https://absinthe.network/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/absinthe-labs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Absinthe sells an incentive-distribution product again under its own published terms.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Disperse","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"A component, not an alternative — the same call governance_tools makes on Safe{Wallet}, whose hardExclusion reads 'a Safe is where the assets sit, not where the proposal is written or the vote counted'. disperse.app is a batch-transfer front end over an unowned, immutable contract: it computes no allocation, has no operator to hold accountable, no custody window and no filter. It would score at the floor of three of four criteria for reasons that say nothing about its quality. Show it as the do-it-yourself baseline in the category explainer instead.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/disperse/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Disperse becomes an operated product with its own allocation, budget-control and support terms.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Galxe Passport, Human Passport, World ID and other personhood providers","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"An identity check is an input to this category's sybil-defence criterion, never a competitor within it. Galxe Passport is ranked in Crypto Decentralised Identity, and Crypto Proof of Personhood ranks eight providers (World ID, Proof of Humanity, Human Passport, Self, BrightID, Billions, Humanity Protocol, Idena) on what it costs to farm an identity and whether uniqueness can be checked without trusting the issuer. This category scores only whether a distribution vendor documents such an integration and lets you configure it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/galxe-passport-human-passport-world-id-and-other-personhood/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them ships a distribution product of its own, beyond an identity check.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Rabbithole as a separate pool entry","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"Re-scoped, not excluded on overlap — this corrects proposal B, which dropped it as 'a fourth entrant with the same buyer'. rabbithole.gg read 2026-08-17 is live ('Rabbithole | The platform for on-chain growth that actually sticks') and its ONLY documentation link is https://docs.boost.xyz/v2/documentation/overview/introduction. It is Boost's consumer-facing surface under one operator, so it is carried in the Boost entry's name and used as live evidence under incident_and_operator_record, not ranked twice.","source":"https://docs.boost.xyz/v2/documentation/overview/introduction","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/rabbithole-as-a-separate-pool-entry/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rabbithole publishes its own documentation separate from the pool member its docs point to.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Royco (and its Sonar incentive-market product)","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"Moved to a different product, read 2026-08-17: royco.org redirects, and docs.royco.org/llms.txt now opens 'Royco is a non-custodial risk and liquidity tranching protocol that splits any yield source into Senior, Junior, and Senior Liquidity Provider tranches'. The whole documentation index is about tranching (Senior Tranche, Junior Tranche, srRoyUSDC, roywstETH), and no incentive-market or Sonar documentation remains. If it belongs anywhere, it is with Structured Products or Fixed-Rate Yield. Not to be confused with Echo's Sonar (echo.xyz), sale-compliance infrastructure ranked in Token Launchpads and an unrelated product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/royco-and-its-sonar-incentive-market-product/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Royco restores an incentive-market product in its documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Superfluid","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"A streaming-money primitive, not an allocation decision. Its Distribution Pools move tokens the buyer has already decided to move, so criteria 1 and 4 would score the buyer's own work rather than the vendor's. It is the rail underneath a programme. Not to be confused with Osmosis's 'superfluid staking', an unrelated term.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/superfluid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Superfluid ships an allocation product that decides who receives a programme's tokens.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TrueFi points","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"Not a vendor a budget-holder can buy — one lending protocol's own internal points programme, the analogue of scoring a DAO's treasury against treasury software. TrueFi itself is a lending venue for lending_borrowing / private_credit, neither of which this category re-ranks. Liveness is separately unresolved: proposal B recorded truefi.io, www.truefi.io and app.truefi.io all failing TLS from one host on 2026-08-17 (curl exit 35). That single-vantage failure is logged as unresolved, never published as death; the exclusion rests on the buyer test, which holds either way.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/truefi-points/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TrueFi's points become a product another protocol can buy to run its own programme.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Trusta Labs, Nansen sybil scoring and other detection-only vendors","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"Considered and rejected. They answer half of criterion 4 and none of criteria 1-3, so ranking them beside a distribution platform compares a filter against a rail. They are an input a pool member integrates, exactly as attestation issuers are inputs to decentralised_id. Their dated public sybil reports remain the best available EVIDENCE for scoring pool members on criterion 4 and should be sought during research.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/trusta-labs-nansen-sybil-scoring-and-other-detection-only-ve/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them ships a distribution rail with allocation and budget control.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Turtle","category":"incentive_distribution","kind":null,"reason":"Pivoted. turtle.club 302-redirects to turtle.xyz (checked 2026-08-17), now titled 'Turtle — Onchain Yield Management' with the description 'Aggregated, diligenced, personalized onchain yield management.' The issuer-side incentive routing survives in its docs, but what a buyer now purchases sits on yield_aggregators' and liquidity_management's axes, and the depositor half re-ranks against yield_aggregators directly. Re-test at the next review; not scoreable as a distribution engine today.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"incentive_distribution/turtle/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Turtle's site presents issuer-side incentive distribution as the product a buyer purchases.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BNY Mellon Digital Asset Custody","category":"institutional_custody","kind":"region_or_audience_locked","reason":"A real deposit-taking bank, but the offering is invite-only to existing BNY/ETF relationships with no public product, pricing or terms surface — every axis would score on silence about a product no reader can procure, producing a rank that is uninformative rather than damning. Revisit if a public surface appears.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/bny-mellon-digital-asset-custody/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BNY publishes a public product, pricing or terms page for digital-asset custody.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Fidelity Treasury Digital (on-chain share class)","category":"institutional_custody","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in money_market_funds (verified present in Money-Market Funds); it is a fund share class, not a custody service. Only the custodian entity, Fidelity Digital Asset Services, belongs here — added separately as fidelity_digital_assets.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/fidelity-treasury-digital-onchain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fidelity's on-chain share class is offered as a custody service.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Fireblocks standard MPC platform (as distinct from the trust company)","category":"institutional_custody","kind":null,"reason":"Client-held key shares mean nobody is holding the assets — mpc_wallets territory (exit_survivability_mpc, share_custody_model_mpc). Only the Fireblocks Trust Company custody product is scored here, with the split stated in the entry.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/fireblocks-standard-mpc-platform-as-distinct-from-the-trust/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fireblocks' MPC platform takes custody of client assets in its own name.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Gemini (exchange) / Gemini eOTC","category":"institutional_custody","kind":null,"reason":"Already live in exchange and otc_desks pools on trading axes (ids gemini, gemini_eotc — verified); the custody product enters as the distinct id gemini_custody under the overlap rule — this category asks charter/insolvency/insurance questions those categories do not.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/gemini-exchange-gemini-eotc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gemini's exchange or eOTC desk is sold as a custody product separate from gemini_custody.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hex Trust","category":"institutional_custody","kind":null,"reason":"Real APAC custodian (Hong Kong TCSP + Dubai VARA) but the pool is at the 9-entry cap; its jurisdictional axis is already carried by Komainu and Zodia and it has the thinnest public primary-document surface among remaining candidates. Named first alternate if a live member dies or the Zodia entity dissolves.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/hex-trust/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A live member of the nine-entry pool dies, or the cap is raised.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Metaco / Ripple Custody (technology)","category":"institutional_custody","kind":null,"reason":"Custody technology sold to banks; it holds no client assets — the bank remains the custodian, so the asset-holding question does not apply. Custody-tech axes belong to mpc_wallets. Post-acquisition product identity (Metaco rebranded to Ripple Custody, 2023) is additionally unstable.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/metaco-ripple-custody-technology/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ripple Custody holds client assets as a custodian itself.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Standard Custody & Trust","category":"institutional_custody","kind":null,"reason":"Acquired by Ripple (2024) and absorbed into Ripple Custody, primarily as internal custodian for Ripple/RLUSD; fails liveness-as-the-same-product — no independently addressable client-facing custody surface remains.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_custody/standard-custody-trust/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Standard Custody publishes a client-facing custody product addressable separately from Ripple Custody.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bosonic","category":"institutional_execution","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead — https://bosonic.digital refuses connection (probed 2026-08-18); earlier probes found a Gandi domain-parking page on http. bosonic.com is Bosonic AB, an unrelated Swedish consultancy — the same same-name-domain trap as talos.statuspage.io. No live product surface exists to evaluate.","source":"https://bosonic.digital","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/bosonic/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"bosonic.digital serves a live product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Caspian","category":"institutional_execution","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Defunct. caspian.tech returned 403 on 2026-08-18 (the briefs recorded 503/Cloudflare-shell on earlier probes — dead either way); the Tora/Kenetic JV wound down years ago. Listing a corpse would repeat the documented listicle failure mode (a platform called 'definitive' four months after shutdown). Named here because older buyers still search the name.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/caspian/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"caspian.tech serves a live execution product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CleanRouter-type entrants (as a class)","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"No entrant located with a loadable product surface as of 2026-08-18 beyond Finery Markets, which was admitted. Rule 5 requires establishing liveness positively with a date; the standing re-open note covers the class — any entrant publishing public status plus pre-contract docs is a pool candidate.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/cleanrouter-type-entrants-as-a-class/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"An entrant publishes a public status page and pre-contract documentation for execution software.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbase Prime","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"Fenced twice: ranked live in otc_desks and present in institutional_custody ('coinbase_prime_custody' in Institutional Custody, verified 2026-08-18). Its execution offering is a desk/prime product where Coinbase is the counterparty; re-ranking it here would score the same product on a sibling's questions.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/coinbase-prime/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase Prime ships agency execution software where Coinbase is not the counterparty.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Cumberland, Kraken OTC, Wintermute, B2C2, Gemini eOTC, Binance OTC, Bitfinex OTC","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"The rest of the nine-desk OTC Desks. Principal desks are the DOWNSTREAM liquidity this category's software connects to — Talos's provider network lists the otc_desks pool as its own liquidity (a judging model run's finding). Including them would make this page a re-rank of otc_desks on weaker axes.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/cumberland-kraken-otc-wintermute-b2c2-gemini-eotc-binance-ot/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these desks ships agency execution software, separate from its principal desk ranked in OTC Desks.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"FalconX","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked in OTC Desks. A desk is a counterparty, not an execution management system, and docs.falconx.io redirects to a login page, so there is nothing to score before an NDA even in scope.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/falconx/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"FalconX ships an execution management system with public documentation a reader can load before an NDA.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Fireblocks","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked live in institutional_custody ('fireblocks_custody' in Institutional Custody, verified 2026-08-18) on custody axes; its network/trading features do not make it an EMS, and including it would re-rank a custody product on execution-software questions.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/fireblocks/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fireblocks ships an execution management system with order entry, routing and venue connectivity.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hidden Road / Aplo (prime brokers)","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"Counterparties, not software: the buyer contracts a broker balance sheet, which is the otc_desks purchase shape (counterparty footing, minimum ticket, settlement). Admitting brokers re-opens the pool split that killed order_routing.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/hidden-road-aplo-prime-brokers/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hidden Road or Aplo ships agency execution software a buyer licenses, separate from its broker balance sheet.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Quod Financial / Integral / FlexTrade (TradFi multi-asset EMS with digital-asset modules)","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"Homepages live, but excluded on category definition: digital assets is one module inside a TradFi EMS, and none publishes a crypto-specific pre-NDA surface (docs, status, venue list) this category's criteria could score — the record would derive almost entirely from absence, the Galaxy precedent. Revisit if any publishes a standalone crypto public surface.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/quod-financial-integral-flextrade-tradfi-multi-asset-ems-wit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them publishes a crypto-specific product surface: docs, status and a venue list a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"sFOX prime brokerage / sFOX SAFE custody","category":"institutional_execution","kind":null,"reason":"The non-EMS sides of the one pool member entering partially: 'unified prime brokerage' and bankruptcy-remote custody are counterparty and custody propositions belonging to otc_desks and institutional_custody axes respectively. Only the agency/EMS execution surface (order entry, RFQ, algos, FIX) is scored here, and the record must say so.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"institutional_execution/sfox-prime-brokerage-sfox-safe-custody/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"sFOX splits prime brokerage or SAFE custody into products scored in this category's terms.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Across Protocol","category":"intents","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 7 (score 67) until 11 November 2026. At 2:05 p.m. ET (19:05 UTC) on 10 November 2026 Across posted on its own X account that users should not visit its app, connect wallets or sign transactions while it investigates a possible security incident affecting its domain, as reported the same day by Cointelegraph (cointelegraph.com/news/across-protocol-warns-avoid-app-drained-wallets) and The Defiant (thedefiant.io/news/security/across-urges-users-to-avoid-app-over-domain-issue), both read on 10 November 2026. Users said on X that their wallets were drained after using the app; neither Across nor those reports say whether its contracts were affected. By 22:05 UTC across.to, app.across.to and docs.across.to no longer resolved to an address (checked again at 22:12 UTC), so the row cannot be re-read on Across’s own pages, and a link to that domain could take a reader to a site Across may not control. On 11 November 2026 Across said the domain had been taken over through its registrar and was back under its control (Cointelegraph, cointelegraph.com/news/across-protocol-restores-website-after-hackers-hijack-domain, read 11 November 2026); it has published no post-mortem yet. Across leaves the ranking, is listed as not confirmed, and no page links to its domain. This is not a score or a finding on Across; it returns to the table, re-scored, once Across publishes its post-mortem, the domain stays clean for 7 days after it, and the row is read live on its own pages. An archived copy is not used: an old copy is not a read of today’s pages.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"intents/across-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Across publishes its post-mortem on its own site (root cause, hijack window, contracts unaffected), the domain stays clean for 7 days after it, and the row is re-read live on Across's own pages: then restore and re-rank it.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Anoma","category":"intents","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because there is no live auction to score, not because it scores badly. anoma.net/blog/anomas-roadmap-to-mainnet, fetched 2026-08-08, sets out three phases and places the product in the third: \"Mainnet, the third phase, includes a stable application development interface\", and describes the solver function entirely in the future tense — \"Solvers will be able to combine Anoma intent liquidity and EVM intent liquidity and settle atomically\". No public endpoint returning a solver bid, a fill, or a settled user intent was located in this session. Protocol adapters reported on Ethereum and Arbitrum are infrastructure for intents, not an auction a buyer can send an order to today. Anoma should be re-checked rather than dismissed: on the criteria used here it would score at or near the floor on all four purely for lack of a market, which would misrepresent a research programme as a failed product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-08","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"intents/anoma/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Anoma reaches mainnet with a live solver auction a reader can see.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bungee / SOCKET Protocol","category":"intents","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"excluded because its own current documentation no longer describes an auction. docs.bungee.exchange now 301-redirects to docs.socket.tech; the machine-readable documentation index at docs.socket.tech/llms.txt, fetched 2026-08-08, lists 38 pages and contains no page on auctions, solvers, bids, transmitters or the Open Liquidity Marketplace that third-party write-ups still attribute to the product. docs.socket.tech/about/why-socket.md instead describes a \"Socket routing engine\" as \"The decisioning layer that compares routes across 10,000+ assets and 50+ chains\", and docs.socket.tech/about/fees-monetization.md states \"Socket does not charge any additional fees.\" A product that documents itself as a comparison-and-routing layer belongs in dex_aggregator or cross_chain_swaps, both of which are already live and already score all-in cost and routing model. Scoring it here would double-count it and would credit an auction the vendor no longer claims.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-08","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"intents/bungee-socket-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bungee or SOCKET documents a live auction, its solvers and bids in its own documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Essential","category":"intents","kind":null,"reason":"excluded on the same basis and with less to go on. No primary Essential documentation page describing a live solver auction, a fee, or a settlement contract was successfully loaded in this session; every description encountered was second-hand, characterising Essential as a framework for expressing intents as declarative constraints rather than a network a buyer can route an order through. Stating this as a limit rather than dropping it: the exclusion rests on the absence of loadable primary sources, not on evidence that the product does not exist.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"intents/essential/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Essential publishes first-party documentation of a live solver auction, its fee and settlement contract.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Khalani","category":"intents","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because it is no longer a venue a buyer transacts with directly. The material located describes Khalani as operating as a solver network inside Epoch Protocol as of May 2026, i.e. a supplier of solving capacity to another coordination layer rather than a network that runs its own user-facing auction. A buyer cannot send it an intent and compare bids, which makes all four criteria here inapplicable. This was not confirmed against a Khalani-operated primary source and is recorded as an unverified exclusion.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"intents/khalani/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Khalani runs its own user-facing intent auction again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbase Wallet recovery","category":"key_recovery","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Duplicate and off-buyer. Already ranked as coinbase_wallet in Wallets, where 'If I lose my device, how do I get back in?' scores the documented restore path at 18%. Cloud seed backup is a device-restore story for the ORIGINAL owner — no beneficiary, no claim trigger, no waiting period, no counterparty — so it fails this category's buyer definition, which begins at handover to a different person.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/coinbase-wallet-recovery/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase Wallet adds recovery for a beneficiary, with a claim trigger and a waiting period.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Inheriti (SafeTech)","category":"key_recovery","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Live but unresolved, not dead. Footer reads '(c)2017-2026 Inheriti(R) built by SafeTech' on 2026-08-17, but the product is secret-sharing for 'passwords, PINs, private keys, crypto, and other secret data' with no published claim trigger, no evidence standard, no waiting period and no named counterparty; the Business tier is pilot-only with no price on any primary page. It would score 0-2 on three of four axes while occupying the position Vault12 already fills, except that Vault12 publishes a number. Watch item — admit when a claim-process page and a price are published.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/inheriti-safetech/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Inheriti publishes a claim trigger, an evidence standard and a waiting period.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Loopring Smart Wallet","category":"key_recovery","kind":null,"reason":"Not a pool member; it is the category's anchoring incident. Its Official Guardian recovery service was compromised on 9 June 2024 and roughly $5M was taken from wallets whose only guardian was Loopring's own, with guardian and 2FA operations suspended. Cited inside the trigger criterion as the 0-2 calibration for a vendor-operated approval service, not ranked as a purchasable product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/loopring-smart-wallet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Loopring relaunches a guardian recovery service with a claim trigger and a waiting period for a beneficiary.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Safe Recovery / social-recovery modules","category":"key_recovery","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked elsewhere, and what remains is not a service. Safe and Zodiac are both ranked in Crypto Smart Accounts, which scores 'Recovery paths and their documented failure modes' at 20%: guardian sets, timelocks, veto windows, who can trigger and who can finalise, and what the vendor admits does not work. That is the question this category's second criterion asks, applied to the same product, and a separate multisig category was retired in favour of Crypto Smart Accounts for the same reason. Safe{RecoveryHub} is also the audited Zodiac Delay Modifier — a configurable module, not a purchasable recovery service with a counterparty.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/safe-recovery-social-recovery-modules/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Safe or Zodiac sells a recovery service with a beneficiary, a claim trigger and a waiting period.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Serenity Shield","category":"key_recovery","kind":null,"reason":"No product left to score. Read on 2026-08-17: serenity-shield.io and www.serenity-shield.io do not resolve, and serenityshield.io redirects (HTTP 301) to https://s.technology/, which serves an empty application shell whose only text is the title 'Serenity Technology': no product, no StrongBox, no notice.","source":"https://s.technology/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/serenity-shield/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"serenity-shield.io resolves, or s.technology serves a product a reader can assess.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TrustVerse","category":"key_recovery","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Unverifiable, established positively on 2026-08-17: trustverse.io resolves to 23.236.62.147 but the HTTPS handshake fails with 'certificate has expired' (curl exit 60). No primary page can be loaded, so every criterion would be scored against a page that does not exist to a browser. A vendor that cannot keep a TLS certificate current is not evidence-checkable on a thirty-year promise.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/trustverse/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"trustverse.io serves a valid certificate and a page a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zengo","category":"key_recovery","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Duplicate on the same axis. Already ranked as zengo_mpc in the live MPC & Embedded Wallets, where exit_survivability_mpc carries 40% and asks verbatim whether key material can be reassembled without the vendor's servers, app or permission. Verified in MPC & Embedded Wallets: its watchout already carries the EscrowTech/JRG escrow protocol AND the self-defeating precondition 'naturally, you must have an installed working app before the recovery can take place.' Re-ranking it here would be the same product on the same axis at a lower weight.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"key_recovery/zengo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zengo sells a recovery service separate from the MPC wallet ranked in MPC & Embedded Wallets.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Aptos","category":"l2_chains","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Aptos is a sovereign Move-based layer-1, not a chain that settles to Ethereum, so it fails this category's one hard gate and is not scored here. Aptos Labs' own repository states it in one line: \"Aptos is a layer 1 blockchain built to support the widespread use of blockchain through better technology and user experience\", \"Built with Move to create a home for developers building next-gen applications.\" It is searched as a competitor to the fast L2s, and it is ranked on this site — as a layer-1, against Ethereum, Solana and BNB Chain, on the axes that decide a settlement layer: documented downtime, whether finality is actually deterministic, validator concentration, and client diversity. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://github.com/aptos-labs/aptos-core","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/aptos/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Never as long as Aptos remains its own settlement layer.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Avalanche L1s (Subnets)","category":"l2_chains","kind":null,"reason":"An Avalanche L1 — the network formerly marketed as a Subnet — is not an Ethereum layer-2 and does not settle to Ethereum. Avalanche's own documentation defines it as sovereign: \"An Avalanche L1 is a sovereign network which defines its own rules regarding its membership and token economics\", and \"Every validator of an Avalanche L1 must sync the P-Chain of the Primary Network for interoperability.\" Its security comes from validators it recruits itself and registers on Avalanche's P-Chain, so it fails this category's one hard gate. What ChainChoice does rank is the Avalanche Primary Network those L1s register against, compared as a layer-1 alongside Ethereum and Solana; individual Avalanche L1s are not ranked in any comparison on this site today. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://build.avax.network/docs/avalanche-l1s","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/avalanche-l1s-subnets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ChainChoice opens a comparison of app-specific networks that settle to a non-Ethereum L1, at which point individual Avalanche L1s get a home and this entry should point to it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BNB Chain","category":"l2_chains","kind":null,"reason":"BNB Smart Chain is a sovereign layer-1 with its own validator set and its own consensus, and it does not settle to Ethereum — this category's one hard exclusion. Its own validator documentation states that \"BNB Smart Chain(BSC) relies on a system of multiple validators with Proof of Staked Authority (PoSA) consensus\", that \"BSC conducts a daily election process post 00:00 UTC to select the top 45 active validators\", and that \"In the set of 45 active validators, each epoch selects 18 validators from the Cabinets and 3 validators from the Candidates, forming a group of 21 validators as the consensus validators set for the current epoch to produce blocks.\" It is a competitor to Ethereum, not a chain built on top of it, so ranking it here on EVM equivalence and Ethereum data availability would score it on axes it was never designed to satisfy. It is compared twice on this site instead: as a settlement layer in Layer-1 chains against Ethereum and Solana, and as a bridged EVM chain in Sidechains against Polygon PoS and Gnosis Chain. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://docs.bnbchain.org/bnb-smart-chain/validator/overview/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/bnb-chain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Never for BNB Smart Chain itself. This is an architectural fact, not a dated observation.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Immutable X","category":"l2_chains","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Immutable X no longer accepts transactions. Immutable's own deprecation page states: \"Immutable X was Immutable's first rollup, which was merged into Immutable Chain in early 2026\", that it was \"a customised deployment of StarkEx\", and that \"All Immutable X functionality is now deprecated and will be removed in future\" — with its sequencer's write interface listed as \"No longer processing new transactions\" and the marketplace \"Removed\". A buyer searching for Immutable X wants its successor. That successor is Immutable Chain, the chain Immutable's own product docs head as \"The gaming-optimised blockchain built on Ethereum\" and refer to interchangeably as Immutable zkEVM, and it is ranked on this site under that name — as a gaming appchain, because it is built for one company's game assets and its Ethereum bridge relays through the Axelar validator set rather than through an Ethereum-enforced exit. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://docs.immutable.com/docs/products/immutable-chain/immutable-x-deprecation.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/immutable-x/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This one does not expire — the chain was merged away. What can change is Immutable Chain's own placement, if it stops being a single-studio chain.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Loopring","category":"l2_chains","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Loopring has shut down. Its own site now carries a single announcement: \"Loopring Has Shut Down\" and \"After years of building at the frontier of zero-knowledge technology, Loopring is no longer operational.\" There is no live chain left to score on EVM equivalence, track record or data availability. It is named here because Loopring was one of Ethereum's earliest production zkRollups and is still searched as one — a buyer deserves to be told it is gone rather than to find no entry. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://loopring.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/loopring/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The protocol is restarted by a new operator with a live mainnet and a published exit path.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"opBNB","category":"l2_chains","kind":null,"reason":"opBNB is a real optimistic rollup, but it settles to the wrong chain for this comparison. BNB Chain's own documentation states: \"The opBNB network is the Layer 2 scaling solution for the BNB Smart Chain powered by bedrock version of Optimism OP Stack\", and describes the settlement path plainly — \"Sequencers then aggregate transactions, compute state transitions and submit them to the rollup contract on BSC.\" Every security guarantee on this page is measured against Ethereum; opBNB's is measured against BNB Smart Chain, which this site ranks in Sidechains, not here. Ranking it alongside Base and Arbitrum would tell a buyer the two inherit the same settlement assurance, and they do not. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://docs.bnbchain.org/bnb-opbnb/overview/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/opbnb/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ChainChoice opens a comparison of non-Ethereum-settled rollups, or opBNB begins posting its data and state commitments to Ethereum.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Polygon PoS","category":"l2_chains","kind":null,"reason":"Polygon PoS is not a rollup and does not settle to Ethereum, which is the one hard gate on this page. Its own architecture documentation describes a separate proof-of-stake network that periodically anchors a hash: \"Heimdall-v2 aggregates blocks produced by Bor into Merkle trees and publishes the Merkle root periodically to Ethereum. These periodic snapshots are called checkpoints.\" The same page uses the word itself — \"The PoS mechanism also provides a partial mitigation for the data unavailability problem on Polygon sidechains, since checkpoint data is anchored to Ethereum.\" Your transactions are validated by Polygon's Bor/Heimdall validator set, not by Ethereum, so it is compared against other sidechains on bridge custody and validator concentration rather than against rollups on EVM equivalence and data availability. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://docs.polygon.technology/pos/architecture/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/polygon-pos/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Polygon PoS migrates to a design that posts its transaction data or a validity proof to Ethereum and has its state settled by an Ethereum contract, at which point it belongs on this page.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ronin","category":"l2_chains","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ronin is a gaming chain launched and operated by Sky Mavis for its own titles. Its own documentation leads with exactly that: \"Ronin is an Ethereum L2 built for gamified experiences and real-world crypto adoption\", and \"Launched by Sky Mavis, the creator of Axie Infinity, Ronin is the only blockchain proven to scale a single game to millions of daily active users and billions of dollars in transaction volume.\" This page compares general-purpose chains, where any application competes for the same blockspace; a chain built around one studio's games is ranked in Appchains & L3s instead, and that is a scope boundary, not a settlement one — the boundary applies whether or not a chain settles to Ethereum. Ronin is ranked and scored there. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://docs.roninchain.com/basics/introduction","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/ronin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ronin's third-party application base broadens enough that it is no longer a studio chain, at which point its placement is re-adjudicated. BLOCKING: the settlement architecture recorded in appchainsL3sPool.ts is pre-migration and stale, and must be re-verified before that page republishes.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Sui","category":"l2_chains","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Sui is a sovereign Move-based layer-1 with its own validator set and its own consensus; it does not settle to Ethereum, which is this page's one hard gate. Its own architecture documentation says so directly — \"Sui is a layer 1 blockchain that performs its own consensus and validation of transaction blocks.\" — and its consensus page names the protocol: \"Sui uses a directed acyclic graph-based consensus protocol called Mysticeti\" (docs.sui.io/concepts/sui-architecture/consensus). Like Aptos it is searched alongside L2s because it competes on speed and fees, so it is ranked on this site — as a layer-1, where the comparison includes its documented mainnet halts and its single-client implementation risk rather than EVM equivalence it never claimed. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://docs.sui.io/concepts/sui-architecture","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/sui/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Never as long as Sui remains its own settlement layer.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"World Chain","category":"l2_chains","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"World Chain is an OP Stack rollup that settles to Ethereum, so it passes this page's one hard gate; it is excluded on scope, the same test that keeps Zora Network and Ronin off this page. World's current documentation states the purpose: \"Which is why World Chain exists, it has pristine blockspace for the World App and the World ID ecosystem of applications.\" Blockspace is not offered on equal terms: its protocol specification says \"Priority Blockspace for Humans introduces a new transaction ordering policy on World Chain that grants verified World ID holders top-of-block priority\", and World ID is the sponsor's own product. On L2BEAT's scaling summary read 2026-10-01, $453.1M of the $499.9M it secures (90.7%) is WLD, the chain's own token; the highest share among chains ranked here is zkSync Era at 49.2%, and Base is at 0%. Openness alone does not decide it: anyone can deploy (\"Anyone can use, build on, or contribute to the ecosystem without needing approval\"), and Unichain is ranked here despite a DeFi focus because it does not privilege its sponsor's users. World Chain belongs with the appchains; it is not yet ranked in Appchains & L3s.","source":"https://docs.world.org/world-chain/quick-start/why","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-01","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-01","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/world-chain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Re-adjudicate if WLD falls below half of the value L2BEAT records as secured while apps from other teams broaden, or if Priority Blockspace for Humans and the World ID gas allowance are removed from the protocol.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Zora Network","category":"l2_chains","kind":null,"reason":"Zora Network genuinely is an Ethereum rollup — an OP Stack chain whose settlement contracts sit on Ethereum mainnet and whose data goes to Ethereum, recorded in the OP Stack Superchain Registry as data_availability_type = \"eth-da\" with OptimismPortalProxy 0x1a0ad011913A150f69f6A19DF447A0CfD9551054 on L1. So it is not excluded on architecture. It is excluded on scope: it exists to serve one ecosystem's assets — Zora's own minting and coins product — and this page compares general-purpose chains where any application competes for the same blockspace. ChainChoice ranks single-application chains in Appchains & L3s, where the questions that actually matter for them are asked instead: whether you can exit without the operator, and how much liquidity is really on the chain when you arrive. Zora Network is ranked and scored there. Read 2026-08-19.","source":"https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/superchain-registry/blob/main/superchain/configs/mainnet/zora.toml","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"l2_chains/zora-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zora Network becomes a general-purpose chain with a broad third-party application base, at which point the boundary that put it in Appchains no longer holds.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Base","category":"layer1_chains","kind":null,"reason":"Base is one of the highest-activity EVM networks and is frequently mistaken for an independent chain, but its own documentation homepage self-describes as \"The #1 Ethereum Layer 2, incubated by Coinbase.\" A rollup has no consensus set, deterministic-finality guarantee or client-diversity profile of its own — the four things this pool measures — so it belongs in our Layer-2 scope.","source":"https://docs.base.org/get-started/base","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"layer1_chains/base/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Base stops describing itself as an Ethereum Layer 2 and begins securing its own state with an independent validator set and settlement layer.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Celestia","category":"layer1_chains","kind":null,"reason":"Celestia is routinely listed alongside L1s because it runs its own consensus and token, but its docs state it \"is a modular data availability network: it orders blobs and keeps them available while execution and settlement live on layers above,\" and that \"the state machine neither validates nor stores the data that is made available by the celestia-app.\" It is infrastructure rollups build on rather than a chain a reader transacts on, and ChainChoice already ranks it in the Data Availability pool rather than double-counting it here.","source":"https://docs.celestia.org/learn/how-celestia-works/overview","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"layer1_chains/celestia/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Celestia ships a general-purpose smart-contract execution environment on its own base layer, so that users interact with dApps on Celestia itself rather than on rollups above it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Celo","category":"layer1_chains","kind":null,"reason":"Celo spent years as a standalone mobile-first Layer 1 and readers still look for it here, but it no longer is one. Celo's own docs — now labelled legacy, and warning they do \"not reflect Celo's current L2 architecture\" — record that \"in 2024, Celo began migrating from its Layer 1 architecture to become an Ethereum Layer 2 network built on the OP-Stack\" and that \"the migration was completed in March 2025 at block 31,056,500.\" It therefore falls under our Layer-2 scope.","source":"https://docs.celo.org/legacy/overview","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"layer1_chains/celo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Celo detaches from the OP Stack and resumes producing blocks under its own consensus and settlement rather than as an Ethereum rollup.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"EOS","category":"layer1_chains","kind":null,"reason":"EOS was one of the largest smart-contract L1s by raise and is still searched for by name, but the operating identity has been retired: \"On May 14, Vaulta will launch the official token swap, introducing $A as the new symbol for the network's native utility token,\" described by the project as \"a brand evolution—not a technical migration.\" There is no live network trading or operating as EOS to rank — the chain persists under a different name and token.","source":"https://www.vaulta.com/resources/vaulta-token-swap-a-begins-may-14","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"layer1_chains/eos/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The network restores EOS as its live operating identity with $EOS as the native token, or ChainChoice adds the successor chain under its current Vaulta name.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Polygon (Polygon PoS / POL)","category":"layer1_chains","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Polygon's own documentation heads the PoS section \"EVM-compatible Proof-of-Stake sidechain for Ethereum,\" and its architecture page covers \"Heimdall and Bor layers, checkpoints, and state sync\" — i.e. the chain periodically checkpoints its state to Ethereum rather than finalising sovereignly. A sidechain anchored to a chain already ranked here is a scaling venue, not a second base layer, so Polygon falls under our Layer-2/sidechain scope.","source":"https://docs.polygon.technology/pos/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"layer1_chains/polygon-polygon-pos-pol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Polygon's own documentation stops describing the PoS chain as an Ethereum sidechain and the chain settles independently without checkpointing to Ethereum, or ChainChoice merges the L1 and L2 pools.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bitnob","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Named as a candidate and live on 2026-09-04, but its documented centre of gravity is fiat and stablecoin payouts across Africa, not Lightning infrastructure. Lightning is one of eleven API-reference groups in bitnob.dev/llms.txt - \"Create Invoice, Initialize Payment, Pay Invoice, Decode Invoice\" - alongside payouts, card issuing, trading, stablecoins and beneficiaries. It sells a custodial account API where a Lightning endpoint exists, not a rail sold as such. (https://bitnob.dev/llms.txt)","source":"https://bitnob.dev/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/bitnob/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitnob makes Lightning infrastructure the centre of its documented product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Flashsats","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Named to this pool as a liquidity vendor. Live on 2026-09-04 - flashsats.xyz redirects to /lsp/order.html, titled \"Open a Lightning channel - flashsats\" - but the 1.4 KB response is a client-rendered order form with no rendered product text, and no documentation, terms, status or API surface was found on the host. A channel-buying widget, not a corpus a comparison can score on four criteria. (https://flashsats.xyz/lsp/order.html)","source":"https://flashsats.xyz/lsp/order.html","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/flashsats/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Flashsats publishes product text, documentation, terms or a status page a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Lightspark","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Handed here by the wallets brief for \"The API for money\", but on 2026-09-04 its documented product carries no Lightning integration surface. The 303 entries in docs.lightspark.com/llms.txt are the Grid API - global accounts, payouts, ramps, cards, P2P, stablecoins - and none mentions Lightning except an icon filename. The 30 capability and solution pages in its sitemap name no Lightning product; lightspark.com/capabilities/wallets describes \"Spark, a Lightning-compatible Bitcoin L2\" instead. (https://docs.lightspark.com/llms.txt)","source":"https://docs.lightspark.com/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/lightspark/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lightspark's documentation adds a Lightning integration surface.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"LNServer","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Named to this pool as a liquidity vendor and genuinely live on 2026-09-04, with a rendered rate table (2m sats for 5k sats, 3m for 10k, 4m for 15k; opening fee 2 sat/vB, closing 3 sat/vB) and caps of 10,000,000 sats receiving and 1,000,000 sats spending. That answers the liquidity criterion alone. The four pages linked from its nav - Home, Tutorials, Blog, Our Nodes, About Us - publish no availability figure, custody statement or portability path. (https://lnserver.com/)","source":"https://lnserver.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/lnserver/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"LNServer publishes terms, documentation or a status page beyond its rate table.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"LQwD","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Named to this pool as a liquidity vendor, and live on 2026-09-04 - lqwdtech.com returns 200 and describes itself as \"Enterprise Lightning Network Infrastructure\". Its 2.3 KB response is a client-rendered shell, and no developer documentation, published channel pricing, status page or terms surface was found on the host. Nothing scoreable on custody, liquidity price, availability or portability, so it cannot enter the pool. (https://lqwdtech.com/)","source":"https://lqwdtech.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/lqwd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"LQwD publishes developer documentation, channel pricing or a status page a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Megalith","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Named to this pool as a liquidity vendor, and it is live on 2026-09-04 (megalithic.me and /get_a_channel both return 200). But it publishes a channel-purchase widget rather than a corpus: the HTML is client-rendered and carries no product text, and no documentation, terms, status or API surface was found on the host. Excluded for want of a retrievable corpus scoreable on all four criteria, not for want of a live service. (https://megalithic.me/)","source":"https://megalithic.me/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/megalith/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Megalith publishes product text, documentation, terms or a status page a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Muun","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"An end-user wallet, and therefore the sibling category's. muun.com (read 2026-09-04) reads \"Muun is a self-custodial wallet for bitcoin and lightning\" and \"Send and receive instant payments using the Lightning Network\", with App Store and Google Play as the only distribution. There is no developer surface a merchant platform can integrate, so the buyer this category serves cannot buy it. (https://muun.com/)","source":"https://muun.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/muun/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Muun ships a merchant-facing Lightning infrastructure product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Phoenix (ACINQ)","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"An end-user wallet, and therefore the sibling category's. Its own repository states \"Phoenix is a Bitcoin wallet developed by ACINQ, that allows you to send and receive bitcoin securely over the Lightning Network.\" It is distributed on the App Store and Google Play to payers, not integrated by a merchant platform. Sourced from the repository because phoenix.acinq.co is client-rendered and /faq and /terms return 403 from its S3 origin (read 2026-09-04). (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ACINQ/phoenix/master/README.md)","source":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ACINQ/phoenix/master/README.md","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-05","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/phoenix-acinq/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ACINQ sells Phoenix's infrastructure to merchants as a payment rail.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Wallet of Satoshi","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"An end-user wallet, and therefore the sibling category's. walletofsatoshi.com (read 2026-09-04) is a consumer app page - \"Simple Layout\", \"Just what you need to see, and nothing you don't\", \"Top Up Options\", a Download App call to action and a running count of Lightning payments made. It offers a payer an app, not a developer or merchant platform a rail to integrate. (https://www.walletofsatoshi.com/)","source":"https://www.walletofsatoshi.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/wallet-of-satoshi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Wallet of Satoshi ships a merchant or developer API product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zaprite","category":"lightning_payment_infrastructure","kind":null,"reason":"Named as a candidate, live on 2026-09-04, but it operates no rail. Its own homepage states \"Zaprite is not a payment processor-we never touch your money.\" and \"Payments flow directly into your wallet of choice.\" It sits above whatever Lightning rail the merchant already bought, so the four questions here - custody in flight, liquidity supply, availability of the rail, channel portability - are answered by that rail, not by Zaprite. Invoicing and checkout tooling, not payment infrastructure. (https://zaprite.com/)","source":"https://zaprite.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_payment_infrastructure/zaprite/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zaprite operates a payment rail of its own rather than routing to the merchant's wallet.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Alby Account shared wallet (legacy custodial)","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"Being retired, so a payer cannot choose it today. The guides carry a page titled \"Embrace Alby Hub - phasing out Alby’s shared wallet\", and the fee page states Alby may take the \"Full remaining balance after 12 consecutive months of inactivity\", adding \"Only legacy Alby Accounts with a shared wallet are affected. Alby Accounts with connected wallets such as Alby Hub are not affected.\" Alby Hub is in the pool. Read 2026-09-04. (https://guides.getalby.com/user-guide/alby-account/faq/alby-account-fees.md)","source":"https://guides.getalby.com/user-guide/alby-account/faq/alby-account-fees.md","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/alby-account-shared-wallet-legacy-custodial/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Alby reverses the phase-out and keeps the shared wallet open to new payers.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Blockstream Greenlight","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"Node hosting for applications. The repository README describes \"your self-sovereign Lightning node in the cloud\" and says it \"exposes a number of services over grpc allowing applications to integrate\"; the console at greenlight.blockstream.com redirects to an OIDC login. There is no consumer app to install. Read 2026-09-04. (https://blockstream.github.io/greenlight/)","source":"https://blockstream.github.io/greenlight/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/blockstream-greenlight/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Blockstream ships a consumer app for Greenlight that a payer can install.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Breez mobile wallet (breez/breezmobile)","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"The original Breez Lightning wallet, superseded. Its README now opens with a Maintenance Mode notice - \"This project is in maintenance mode.\" and \"No new features, enhancements, or non-critical updates are planned.\" - and directs new work to the Breez SDK. Misty Breez is the current wallet and is in the pool. Read 2026-09-04. (https://github.com/breez/breezmobile)","source":"https://github.com/breez/breezmobile","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/breez-mobile-wallet-breez-breezmobile/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The breezmobile repository leaves maintenance mode and resumes development.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Breez SDK","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"Explicitly a developer product: \"The Breez SDK provides developers with an end-to-end solution for integrating instant, non-custodial bitcoin and stablecoins into their apps and services.\" The same page carries a Notice for Builders steering partners to the Spark implementation. The wallet built on it, Misty Breez, is in the pool in its place. Read 2026-09-04. (https://sdk-doc-liquid.breez.technology/)","source":"https://sdk-doc-liquid.breez.technology/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/breez-sdk/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Breez ships a consumer wallet under the SDK's name, rather than through Misty Breez, which is in the pool.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Lightning Service Providers - Olympus by ZEUS, Blocktank, Megalith, LQwD, Flashsats, LNServer, Magma by Amboss","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"Channel-liquidity vendors, not wallets. A payer meets them only through a wallet: \"Alby Hub makes it extremely easy to open a payment channel. It offers a selection of Lightning Service Providers (LSPs) from which users can lease channels.\", where six of them appear in one table with minimum durations and sending fees. Their pricing is scored inside the wallets that resell it. Read 2026-09-04. (https://guides.getalby.com/user-guide/alby-hub/faq/how-to-open-a-payment-channel.md)","source":"https://guides.getalby.com/user-guide/alby-hub/faq/how-to-open-a-payment-channel.md","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/lightning-service-providers-olympus-by-zeus-blocktank-megali/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these sells a wallet a payer installs and holds a balance in, rather than channel liquidity leased through one.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Lightspark","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"Integrator product. The homepage headline is \"The API for money\", the subhead \"Launch global accounts, payments, cards, stablecoins, and more. All of it under your brand, with your economics.\", and the body \"Lightspark is the open infrastructure for moving money worldwide.\" Nothing here is a spending balance a person holds. Read 2026-09-04. (https://www.lightspark.com/)","source":"https://www.lightspark.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/lightspark/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lightspark ships a consumer wallet a person holds a spending balance in.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"LNbits","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"A server the operator runs in front of somebody else's node, not a wallet holding a payer's balance. The site's primary action is \"Launch your own LNbits instance\", under \"The world's most powerful suite of bitcoin tools.\" and \"Run for yourself, for others, or as part of a stack.\" Read 2026-09-04. (https://lnbits.com/)","source":"https://lnbits.com/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/lnbits/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"LNbits ships a hosted wallet a payer holds a balance in, rather than a server an operator runs.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Strike","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"A bitcoin financial-services account rather than a Lightning spending wallet. Its own llms.txt: \"Strike is a Bitcoin financial services app trusted by millions of individuals and thousands of businesses. Buy, sell, and hold bitcoin. Borrow cash against your bitcoin. Pay bills. Send global payments.\" Note for re-checking: strike.me returns HTTP 403 with a Cloudflare cookie to a plain fetcher - a bot challenge, not a private site; llms.txt and sitemap.xml serve anonymously. Read 2026-09-04. (https://strike.me/llms.txt)","source":"https://strike.me/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/strike/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Strike's site loads for a reader and presents a Lightning spending wallet as its product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Voltage","category":"lightning_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"Developer and business infrastructure, not a wallet a payer installs. The homepage reads \"Global money infrastructure. Built on Bitcoin.\" and \"We give financial platforms the tools to send value instantly, globally, and at scale.\", with a nav of Product / Solutions / Industries / Pricing / Log In / Contact Sales. Its buyer integrates a rail; it belongs to the sibling category. Read 2026-09-04. (https://voltage.cloud/)","source":"https://voltage.cloud/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-04","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"lightning_wallets/voltage/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Voltage ships a wallet a payer installs and holds a balance in.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Babylon-based Bitcoin liquid staking (Babylon, SolvBTC, Lorenzo stBTC, pumpBTC, Bedrock uniBTC)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":null,"reason":"A stated scope boundary, written down here because until now neither this page nor its sibling said it and these products fell through the gap between two silences. Bitcoin pays no consensus issuance, so a Bitcoin-denominated 'staking' receipt does not earn what the receipts on this page earn, and its exit is a redemption queue against an issuer, a bridge or a custodian rather than a validator exit — which means redemption mechanics (28%) and operator decentralisation (26%) are being asked of a machine that does not have those parts. Babylon's own documentation, re-fetched 2026-08-19, frames the product as native BTC staking and a 'Trustless Bitcoin Vault' whose pitch is \"Use native Bitcoin as collateral in Ethereum DeFi without bridges, wrapped custody, or pooled BTC.\", not as a proof-of-stake receipt. This site's Restaking category publishes the same boundary from its side, putting Bitcoin restaking out of its scope as an asset outside an ETH restaker's decision; Bitcoin receipts are compared in Wrapped Assets, where SolvBTC and Lombard's LBTC are both ranked on who can move the bitcoin, who may redeem it and how fast, and how tightly the reserve is proven.","source":"https://docs.babylonlabs.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/babylon-based-bitcoin-liquid-staking-babylon-solvbtc-lorenzo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"this site opens a Bitcoin-yield category with its own criteria, at which point these move there rather than here.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bifrost vDOT","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A real liquid-staking product on a chain this page does not yet cover, refused on the stated chain boundary rather than on quality — and the boundary is not arbitrary, because the redemption mechanic is genuinely different. Bifrost's own vDOT page, re-fetched 2026-08-19, publishes \"Floating redemption period, vDOT redemption ≤ 28 days\" and explains that anything faster comes from \"matching the real-time vDOT minting quantity with the redemption quantity at the protocol layer in the form of a queue\": your quick exit is funded by somebody else depositing, not by a validator exiting. Scored against stETH that reads as a weakness; scored against other Polkadot receipts it may well be a strength, and only the second comparison would be useful to you. Until this page opens a Substrate lane, vDOT, vKSM and vASTR are named here rather than silently absent. No Polkadot receipt is ranked in this pool, so this refusal contradicts no row.","source":"https://docs.bifrost.io/faq/what-are-vtokens/vdot.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/bifrost-vdot/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"this category adds a Polkadot/Substrate lane with criteria built for relay-chain unbonding.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"ether.fi (weETH)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked on this site under Restaking — but read the boundary before you accept it, because it has moved. The restaking record scores only the two small Veda vaults that still carry a second slashing layer (weETHs, weETHk); the flagship weETH is explicitly outside its scope, in that record's own words: 'weETH is out of scope here precisely because it stopped being restaking'. ether.fi's own slashing page, re-fetched 2026-08-19, states \"ether.fi's restaked ETH is not signed up to any slashable service, and as a matter of policy ether.fi does not sign up to slashable services\", that \"as of August 2026, less than 1% of ether.fi's assets remain restaked with EigenLayer\", and that \"ether.fi stakes through a curated set of professional operators that run different software and infrastructure\". On its own evidence weETH is now a plain liquid-staking receipt with a curated operator set — the exact instrument this page ranks. We record that openly: weETH is a pending ADDITION to this pool, not a product we judged and rejected, and until it is scored here the ether.fi brand is compared under Restaking. One caution: the same page also declares protocol-wide \"There is no restaking slashing risk today\", which is not true of the two Veda vaults it never mentions — cite it for the operator set and the EigenLayer wind-down, never as a blanket safety claim.","source":"https://etherfi.gitbook.io/etherfi/security/security-and-risks/slashing-risk.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/ether-fi-weeth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"weETH is scored in this pool — which the vendor evidence dated 2026-08-19 already supports. Retire this entry by adding the row, not by re-arguing the refusal.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kelp DAO (rsETH)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked on this site under Restaking. Kelp's own homepage, re-fetched 2026-08-19, titles itself \"Kelp – The Leading Liquid Restaking Protocol | Restake Ethereum & Stay Liquid\" and states \"Kelp accepts deposits from major LSTs & ETH\" — the clearest statement of why it is not a competitor to the rows on this page. rsETH is usually a layer placed on TOP of a liquid-staking decision you have already made here, not an alternative to making it. Ranking the wrapper beside the thing it wraps would ask you to choose between a product and a product built on that product.","source":"https://kerneldao.com/kelp/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/kelp-dao-rseth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kelp ships an rsETH variant with no second slashing layer, or this page adds a segment for LST-of-LST receipts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Liquid Collective (LsETH)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":null,"reason":"A real institutional protocol, but a retail wallet cannot use it, and this page's heaviest criterion is redemption. The deployed River contract that mints LsETH gates the deposit behind an allowlist — line 321 of River.1.sol reads \"allowlist.onlyAllowed(_depositor, LibAllowlistMasks.DEPOSIT_MASK); // this call reverts if unauthorized or denied\" — and gates the exit the same way at line 204, \"IAllowlistV1(AllowlistAddress.get()).onlyAllowed(msg.sender, LibAllowlistMasks.REDEEM_MASK);\", before a redemption request is accepted (read from the protocol's own repository 2026-08-19). The README describes \"a liquid staking protocol designed to meet the needs of institutions, built and run by a collective of leading web3 teams\", and the documentation sells \"KYC/AML support for users and operators.\" as a built-for-institutions feature. If your address has not been granted the deposit right by an onboarded platform, the mint reverts and the redemption reverts — so redemption mechanics (28%) and exit depth (26%) would both be scored on a route this page's reader cannot take. That is a scoring artefact, not a comparison, and it is a different thing from the KYC a reader can complete themselves at Coinbase or Binance, both ranked here. If you already hold an institutional relationship with a Liquid Collective platform, this refusal does not apply to you.","source":"https://github.com/liquid-collective/liquid-collective-protocol/blob/main/contracts/src/River.1.sol","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/liquid-collective-lseth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"River's Allowlist stops gating deposits and redemptions for ordinary wallets, or Liquid Collective publishes a self-serve mint route a reader can complete from their own wallet.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Lombard Staked BTC (LBTC)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Out of scope twice over, and the second reason is newer than most write-ups you will find. Bitcoin is outside this page's asset scope (see the scope note). More decisively, LBTC is no longer a staking receipt at all: Lombard's own documentation index, re-fetched 2026-08-19, describes \"LBTC, a yield-bearing non-rebasing Bitcoin token whose backing earns in BTC through a covered-call options strategy\", says \"LBTC yield comes from an institutional covered-call strategy run by Bitwise, paid in Bitcoin terms.\" and prices it as \"LBTC charges a 20% performance fee on strategy gains subject to a high-water mark, and no management fee.\" The string 'Babylon' does not appear anywhere in that index. There is no validator set, no commission on staking rewards and no consensus-layer unbonding queue for this page's four criteria to score — the risks are an options manager, a custody split and a consortium bridge. LBTC is ranked on this site under Wrapped assets, which is where those questions are asked.","source":"https://docs.lombard.finance/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/lombard-staked-btc-lbtc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lombard reintroduces a proof-of-stake backing for LBTC AND this page opens a Bitcoin lane with criteria built for it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Origin Ether (OETH)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked on this site, so this is a duplicate refusal rather than a judgement against the product — and the correction matters, because the easy assumption about OETH is wrong. It is not a wrapper around other people's LSTs: Origin's own documentation, re-fetched 2026-08-19, states \"OETH earns its liquid staking yield from the Ethereum beacon chain using distributed validator technology (DVT)\". It is a genuine ETH staking receipt. It is scored under Yield aggregators as part of the 'Origin (OUSD / OETH / ARM)' record, where its take-rate is examined; Origin's fee page publishes \"Origin charges a 20% performance fee on the yield its products generate\" and \"The fee applies to yield generated by OETH, Super OETH, OUSD, and Origin's ARM Vaults.\" Ranking it a second time here would put the same product on two pages. To be explicit about what is NOT the reason: 20% is not disqualifying on this page's cost axis — cbETH is ranked here at 25%.","source":"https://docs.originprotocol.com/yield-bearing-tokens/core-concepts/performance-fees.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/origin-ether-oeth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"this pool takes a dedicated OETH row on the staking axes — in which case the Yield aggregators record must be narrowed to OUSD and ARM so the same product is not scored twice.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Puffer Finance (pufETH)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked on this site under Restaking. Puffer's own documentation home, re-fetched 2026-08-19, describes the product as a \"native Liquid Restaking Protocol (nLRP) integrated with EigenLayer, empowering users to maximize capital efficiency without compromising security\" — the second slashing layer is the headline feature, not a footnote. It also changes the answer to this page's heaviest criterion in a way this page cannot show: a pufETH exit has to clear the Ethereum validator exit AND the restaking-layer withdrawal delay (the vendor's own withdraw page prices the two routes at a 1% instant fee or a fee-free route that 'might take around 14 days to complete'), which is a different question from the one 'redemption mechanics' asks of stETH or rETH. Compare it against the other restaking wrappers, where those legs are scored.","source":"https://docs.puffer.fi/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/puffer-finance-pufeth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Puffer separates a non-restaked ETH staking receipt with its own redemption path.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Renzo (ezETH)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked on this site under Restaking. ezETH is a liquid RESTAKING token by Renzo's own filing: its documentation index carries a chapter titled 'Understanding Liquid Restaking' whose description reads \"For clarity and brevity, this section will focus only on ezETH (Eigenlayer) to explain Liquid Restaking\" (re-fetched 2026-08-19). The thing that distinguishes ezETH from stETH is a second, opt-in slashing layer whose loss ceiling, slashing key and veto arrangement are the questions the Restaking page is built to ask; none of this page's four criteria measures any of them. Scoring ezETH here would rank it on everything except the risk you are actually taking.","source":"https://docs.renzoprotocol.com/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/renzo-ezeth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Renzo withdraws ezETH from EigenLayer and Symbiotic so that it carries no slashing layer beyond Ethereum consensus — the move ether.fi has already made with weETH.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Sanctum-deployed branded Solana LSTs (hSOL, bonkSOL, pwrSOL and the rest of the Sanctum branded-LST directory)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a class because the four scored criteria return the same answers for every member, and a table that cannot separate its rows is not a comparison. Sanctum's own documentation, re-fetched 2026-08-19, describes launching one as a branding exercise: you submit a \"Logo\", \"Token Name\" and \"Token Symbol\" on a form, \"our team will handle the deployment of your LST on the Sanctum protocol\" in a process that \"typically takes no more than a couple of days\", and \"All Sanctum LSTs have a default 10% fee applied to the staking yield\", of which the brand has \"the option to collect half of this 10% fee\". The technical page (https://learn.sanctum.so/docs/technical-documentation/sanctum-lsts.md) adds one shared fee model — \"10bps (0.1%) withdrawal fees, applicable both on withdraw SOL and withdraw stake instructions\" and \"10% epoch fees, split equally between operators and Sanctum\" — and one shared operator answer: \"The day-to-day management of the LSTs is currently held by Sanctum. This management authority is in charge of setting up the LSTs and staking the deposited SOL.\" Identical redemption mechanics, identical cost, identical delegation authority; what differs is whose logo is on the token. Solana is represented here by the two receipts whose delegation sets and DeFi acceptance are independently established, jitoSOL and mSOL. Two limits, both established from Sanctum's own machine-readable registry: this covers only pools deployed on Sanctum's own stake-pool programs (SanctumSpl / SanctumSplMulti — 165 and 43 of the 245 listed LSTs), and it does NOT cover bSOL, which was removed (see killed). The prior draft's 'identical program risk' argument is also dropped: Sanctum's own page says the fork is 'also used by protocols like Jito and Blaze, amongst others', so the shared program lineage includes jitoSOL, which this page ranks.","source":"https://learn.sanctum.so/docs/creating-your-own-lst-with-sanctum/the-setup-process-launching-your-lst.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/sanctum-deployed-branded-solana-lsts-hsol-bonksol-pwrsol-and/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"one of these publishes a delegation set, redemption path or fee that differs materially from the Sanctum default — at which point it earns a row on that difference.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"StakeStone (STONE)","category":"liquid_staking","kind":null,"reason":"STONE is a governance-allocated PORTFOLIO, not a staking protocol, so two of this page's four criteria have nothing to score. StakeStone's own mechanism page, re-fetched 2026-08-19, says the deposited ETH \"is allocated to the Strategy Pool. This pool is composed of various underlying yield strategies, each proposed through OPAP\", and its mint page states \"All deposited ETH will be staked, and the stETH is kept in StakeStone's strategy vault\" — what you own is a claim on Lido's receipt and whatever else governance has voted in. The OPAP page lists what those have been: \"Past assets approved by OPAP include Symbiotic, Eigenlayer, Rocketpool, Curve, Balancer, and Mellow.\" StakeStone runs no validator set of its own — operator decentralisation (26%) has no subject — and two things it holds, Lido and Rocket Pool, this page ranks directly, so scoring STONE too would rank the same ETH twice at two different fee layers. Its non-instant exit is a settlement queue against the vault rather than a validator exit: \"The requested ETH will be available to claim after the next settlement, which typically occurs a few days later depending on the total amount of ETH requested.\" Worth knowing before you go looking: the protocol has repositioned, and its documentation index now leads with a 'StakeStone 2.0' crypto-native neo-bank and a Stone Wallet payments product.","source":"https://docs.stakestone.io/stakestone/stone-eth/how-it-works/opap.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"liquid_staking/stakestone-stone/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"StakeStone runs its own validators, or this site opens a lane for portfolio-style ETH yield wrappers with criteria that fit them.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Amberdata","category":"market_data_apis","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 8 (score 58) until 10 November 2026. Amberdata's terms, pricing and legal addresses (amberdata.io/terms, /pricing, /on-chain-terms-of-use) all redirect to Kaiko's announcement that it has acquired Amberdata, which carries no terms and no country statement; its API docs still load. The scheduled re-read of 10 November 2026 could not read the terms its country statement must come from. Rather than rank it on a read past the 45-day promise, Amberdata leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on Amberdata.","source":"https://www.amberdata.io/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"market_data_apis/amberdata/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Amberdata, or Kaiko for the Amberdata API, publishes terms for the product at an address that can be read: then re-read its country statement and restore the row, or retire it if the product is folded into Kaiko.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"1inch (Fusion / 1inch Shield)","category":"mev_protection","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under DEX Aggregators — and 1inch Fusion is ranked a second time under Intents. Its absence here is a placement in our taxonomy, not a verdict, and the MEV dimension is already scored where it sits: our aggregator entry reads \"1inch Fusion adds MEV-protected intent swaps filled by competing (whitelisted) resolvers off the public mempool,\" alongside the recorded watchout that \"Fusion resolvers are a permissioned, whitelisted set.\" 1inch's own homepage (fetched 2026-08-20) advertises exactly the job a reader would come here for: \"Protect your crypto against front-running, sandwich attacks and asset loss with MEV protection, wallet screening & more\" — and offers no standalone wallet-configurable protection RPC on that page. Follow the DEX Aggregators or Intents page to see it scored.","source":"https://1inch.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/1inch-fusion-1inch-shield/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"we move 1inch into this pool, or 1inch ships a standalone wallet-configurable protection RPC documented independently of its swap app.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"beaverbuild","category":"mev_protection","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Titan Builder is ranked in this pool, so a reader will look for its closest peer — but beaverbuild retired the thing that made it comparable. The Flashbots Collective announcement dated 6 May 2025 states \"Beaverbuild is retiring their centralized block builder to work full time on BuilderNet,\" with beaverbuild continuing as an operator and development partner and transitioning its existing users. What survives is BuilderNet, which its own site (fetched 2026-08-20) describes as \"A decentralized block building network for Ethereum that runs on TEEs and shares MEV with the community\" — an orderflow destination whose documentation addresses integrators sending flow (\"Send orderflow\", API reference), not a protection endpoint an individual points a wallet at. Stated precisely so it is not overclaimed: beaverbuild.org is still up and still references an endpoint at https://rpc.beaverbuild.org/ (a plain GET returned HTTP 403 on 2026-08-20); what is gone is the independent centralized builder a comparison would have scored.","source":"https://collective.flashbots.net/t/announcement-beaverbuild-buildernet/4924","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/beaverbuild/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"beaverbuild announces it is again operating an independent centralized block builder, or publishes end-user documentation for a protection RPC of its own rather than orderflow submission into BuilderNet.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Blocknative (block builder, MEV auctions, private order flow)","category":"mev_protection","kind":null,"reason":"Ceased operating, on its own notice. Blocknative's homepage (fetched 2026-08-20) carries the wind-down announcement: \"To that end, I'm excited to share that the Blocknative team has joined Deloitte\" and \"The Blocknative API services will be winding down. Services will continue to operate through June 19, 2026. After that date, the APIs will stop responding.\" The notice names precisely the surface a reader would expect ranked here as the chapter that is closing — \"This chapter of our work in the ecosystem is coming to a close: on mempool visibility, transaction orchestration, block building, MEV auctions, private order flow, transaction pricing, and more\" — and says Gas Network \"will cease operations on the same schedule, as it currently depends on these APIs.\" That sunset date is two months in the past as of 2026-08-20, so there is no self-serve endpoint left to score.","source":"https://www.blocknative.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/blocknative-block-builder-mev-auctions-private-order-flow/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"blocknative.com — or a Deloitte-operated successor — publishes a live, self-serve MEV-protection RPC or private-orderflow endpoint with working docs and a responding API.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Eden Network (Eden RPC, Eden Bundles)","category":"mev_protection","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The endpoint a reader would configure no longer exists. Checked 2026-08-20: rpc.edennetwork.io, docs.edennetwork.io and explorer.edennetwork.io all fail DNS resolution (NXDOMAIN — no record, not a 404 page); www.edennetwork.io still returns HTTP 200 but serves a Namecheap parked-domain lander titled \"has been recently registered with namecheap.com\", not Eden's site, and the apex edennetwork.io does not complete a request at all. The team's own GitHub org corroborates a wind-down rather than a rebrand: its most recently pushed repository is `token-retirement` (org eden-network, 7 commits, last pushed 2025-08-12 per GitHub's own API for that repo) — a token-retirement contract, not a product roadmap; the repo page itself carries no description. Beware a false match: eden.network is an unrelated live site whose meta description reads \"Connecting Players\", not the MEV protocol.","source":"https://github.com/eden-network/token-retirement","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/eden-network-eden-rpc-eden-bundles/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"rpc.edennetwork.io resolves and answers JSON-RPC again, or Eden Network republishes RPC/bundle documentation on a domain it controls.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Jito (Block Engine / bundles)","category":"mev_protection","kind":null,"reason":"Infrastructure other products are built on, not a product a reader opens. Jito's own documentation addresses integrators, not users: \"Searchers, dApps, Telegram bots and others connect to the Block-Engine and submit transactions & bundles.\" Bundles are \"groups of transactions (max 5) bundled together\" whose \"transactions are executed sequentially and atomically meaning all-or-nothing\"; they \"compete against other bundles on tips to the validator\", \"MEV rewards from bundles are distributed to validators and stakers\", and \"Jito enforces a minimum tip of 1000 lamports for bundles\" — an auction you enter with code. Its anti-sandwich primitive is likewise a developer integration: \"In your Solana transaction, add any valid Solana public key that starts with `jitodontfront` to any of the instructions\" — not a setting a user toggles, and the page documents no wallet-configurable end-user RPC. Separately, our own catalog does score a Jito product, but the liquid-staking one (\"Solana liquid staking with MEV-aware reward capture\"), which is a different product from the Block Engine. The Solana protection surfaces a reader can actually reach are the ones riding on it: Jupiter's MEV Protect and Phantom's swapper, both addressed separately.","source":"https://docs.jito.wtf/lowlatencytxnsend/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/jito-block-engine-bundles/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Jito publishes a self-serve, wallet-configurable protected RPC or send endpoint documented for end users rather than for searchers, dApps and validators.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Jupiter (MEV Protect)","category":"mev_protection","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under DEX Aggregators, where the entry is literally titled \"Solana's dominant aggregator — MEV Protect via Jito\" and the protection is scored as a named strength (\"MEV Protect via Jito bundles\"), with the honest offsets recorded there too: \"Solana-only (SVM) — not for EVM-chain swaps\" and \"Router programs are upgradeable; routing engine is only partially open-source.\" Jupiter's own developer documentation describes the mechanism it depends on: \"Jito enables bundling transactions to ensure they execute together or not at all, helping protect against front-running and other MEV risks through 'revert protection' if any part of the sequence fails\" — and documents no MEV-protection endpoint usable outside the Jupiter API, only submission to a Jito RPC endpoint. A reader who wants Jupiter compared will find it one category over, not missing.","source":"https://developers.jup.ag/docs/swap/send-swap-transaction","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/jupiter-mev-protect/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"we move Jupiter into this pool, or Jupiter publishes an MEV-protection endpoint usable from outside the jup.ag swap app.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Phantom","category":"mev_protection","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but twice under neighbouring categories — Wallets, and again under Transaction Simulation — so its absence here is taxonomy, not oversight. Phantom does ship the feature: its own blog states the swapper offers \"Slippage and MEV protection to minimize the impact of sandwich attacks, saving users an average of 50-80% on slippage.\" The distinction from MetaMask Smart Transactions, which is ranked in this pool, is checkable rather than editorial: MetaMask ships a separately named and separately documented service, whereas Phantom's page gives the protection no product name and no endpoint of its own — it is described as a capability of the 0x Swap API powering Phantom's swapper — so it is scored as part of the wallet.","source":"https://phantom.com/learn/blog/swap-ethereum-and-polygon-tokens-in-phantom","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/phantom/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Phantom launches a separately named and documented MEV-protection service or a protected RPC endpoint usable from wallets other than Phantom.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Shutter Network (Shielded Trading / encrypted mempool)","category":"mev_protection","kind":"deferred_or_not_live_yet","reason":"Live, but on one chain only — a reader protecting Ethereum, Solana or L2 trades cannot use it. Shutter's own Shielded Trading page (fetched 2026-08-20) states \"Encrypted mempools are only live on Gnosis Chain, but it will soon be available on other chains.\" Ethereum L1 is still at proposal stage on that same page (LUCID EIP) and the PBS route is marked \"PoC coming soon\", with BNB Chain also only proposed. Access is a single Gnosis-scoped endpoint added to a wallet — \"Simply add the custom RPC to your wallet\", https://erpc.gnosis.shutter.network. Shutter also discloses live caveats: \"While it's a full mainnet implementation, there are currently a limited number of participating validators and Keypers, which may lead to longer transaction inclusion times,\" with validators \"not yet subject to slashing.\"","source":"https://www.shutter.network/shielded-trading","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mev_protection/shutter-network-shielded-trading-encrypted-mempool/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Shutter's encrypted mempool goes live on Ethereum mainnet or a major L2 with a published public RPC endpoint, replacing the \"only live on Gnosis Chain\" line on its own site.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"ASIC firmware, mining software and miner-management stacks — Braiins OS+, LuxOS, Vnish, ePIC, Awesome Miner, Foreman","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"A separate product with separate axes (efficiency gain, autotuning, devfee, warranty voidance, remote-management security). Their devfees are nevertheless a REAL deduction from what the miner is paid, so a firmware requirement attached to a pool fee is recorded as a CONDITION under fee_completeness_txfee_mev — this is precisely why a '0% fees with our firmware' claim contradicted by a documented pool fee scores 3-4 there rather than 9-10 — but the firmware is never itself ranked in this category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/asic-firmware-mining-software-and-miner-management-stacks-br/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them operates a pool, which would be assessed as that pool.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Cloud-mining and hashrate-rental contracts — Genesis Mining, HashFlare, Bitdeer Cloud Hashrate, BitFuFu, StormGain cloud mining, ECOS, IQ Mining, and every 'buy X TH/s for N days' storefront","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"The buyer purchases a CONTRACT, not a payout promise, so all four criteria are structurally inapplicable rather than merely undisclosed: there is no scheme electing who bears variance (the seller sets a payout unilaterally), no share log to reproduce, no coinbase transaction attributable to the buyer, no template the buyer influences, and the 'fee' is a contract price rather than a percentage of a block reward. Admitting it would mean ranking the risk that a contract is not delivered on axes built to score payout mechanics. Note the split, which must not overreach: Bitdeer's MINING POOL is in scope on its own merits; only its cloud-hashrate contracts are excluded.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/cloud-mining-and-hashrate-rental-contracts-genesis-mining-ha/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A cloud-mining seller offers a pool payout scheme with a share log and attributable coinbase transactions.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hashrate marketplaces and rental venues — NiceHash, and any order-book where a buyer rents hashrate by the hour","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"The venue never builds a block on its own account: the renter supplies the pool endpoint and therefore the template, so block_template_control has no subject, and the payout the venue owes is an order-book clearing price rather than a scheme allocating block-discovery variance. Any coinbase share it appears to hold is the aggregate of unrelated renters and is attributable to no decision the venue made. It is also the standard vector for renting a short-lived majority against small chains, which is a security question about the marketplace rather than a comparison of pools. Excluded on structure, not on quality.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/hashrate-marketplaces-and-rental-venues-nicehash-and-any-ord/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"NiceHash builds blocks on its own account under a payout scheme.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hosting, colocation and managed mining — Compass Mining, Core Scientific hosting, Applied Digital, Blockware Mining, Simple Mining, Sazmining, Mawson","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"This is a PHYSICAL-INFRASTRUCTURE comparison whose real discriminators are cost per kWh, power-contract type, uptime SLA, curtailment terms, jurisdiction, insurance, and what happens to your machine on the operator's insolvency — none of which any of the four criteria measure, and all of which would dominate any blended score if admitted. Decisively: a hosted miner still chooses a POOL separately and independently, so hosting customers are also buyers of the category being compared here, and mixing the two would rank a landlord against a tenant on the tenant's axes. A hosting provider authors no block template and publishes no coinbase tag. Including it would make the electricity price the loudest variable in a category that exists to score a payout promise.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/hosting-colocation-and-managed-mining-compass-mining-core-sc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them runs a pool that pays miners under a published payout scheme.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Mining data, hashrate indices and derivatives — Luxor Hashrate Index, hashprice futures and forwards, mining-revenue swaps, Braiins Insights, and Bitcoin mining ETFs","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"Information and financial products, not counterparties to whom a miner sells hashrate: there is no payout scheme, no fee base, no coinbase transaction and no template. They price exactly the bitcoin-and-difficulty variables this category refuses to score. The split must be held precisely so the exclusion does not overreach — Luxor the POOL is a candidate and should be researched; Luxor's index and derivative business is not. The same split applies to any pool operator that also sells data or firmware.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/mining-data-hashrate-indices-and-derivatives-luxor-hashrate/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them becomes a counterparty a miner sells hashrate to.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Non-Bitcoin proof-of-work pools — Kaspa, Ergo, Litecoin/Dogecoin merged-mining pools, and Monero's P2Pool","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"Scoped out of the FIRST BUILD rather than judged, and recorded here rather than dropped silently. The entire evidence base above is Bitcoin-specific: coinbase tags as attribution, Stratum V2 job declaration, the subsidy-versus-transaction-fee split that fee_completeness_txfee_mev turns on, and the fee-floor mempool check that detects filtering. Applying these bands to a chain with different block construction would produce scores that look comparable and are not. Monero's P2Pool is the strongest single argument for a later second category rather than a widened pool, because it would score at the very top of block_template_control on its design alone.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/non-bitcoin-proof-of-work-pools-kaspa-ergo-litecoin-dogecoin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"This category opens a lane for a non-Bitcoin proof-of-work chain.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Proof-of-stake staking pools, node operators and liquid staking — Lido, Rocket Pool, Jito, Figment, Kiln, Chorus One, Everstake","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"A different consensus mechanism with zero provider overlap and zero criterion transfer, verified against this repo on 2026-08-19: none of Foundry USA, AntPool, F2Pool, ViaBTC, Braiins, Luxor or ocean.xyz returns a single row across src/ or data/, and the only 'Foundry' present is the Solidity dev framework. The site already ships staking, liquid_staking, restaking and liquid_lockers; Figment, Kiln, Chorus One and Everstake are live rows in Staking. These providers belong there and appear here under no circumstances.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/proof-of-stake-staking-pools-node-operators-and-liquid-staki/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them runs a proof-of-work pool that pays outside miners, which would be assessed as that pool.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Publicly traded self-miners as equities — Marathon Digital (MARA), Riot Platforms, CleanSpark, Hut 8, Core Scientific","category":"mining_pools","kind":null,"reason":"These are listed companies whose comparison axes are cost per coin, fleet efficiency, balance-sheet treasury and equity dilution — an investment comparison with a different buyer and no overlap with the four criteria here, and market data by another name, which this category rules out alongside price, hashprice and hardware. They are named first among the merely-adjacent because 'Bitcoin mining' colloquially means these tickers to most readers, so their absence is the omission most needing an explanation. The split is clean and must be held: where such a company also operates a pool a third-party miner can point hashrate at, THE POOL may be researched as its own row on the axes above, judged on its published Stratum documentation, its fee terms and its coinbase tag, and never on its parent's stock.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mining_pools/publicly-traded-self-miners-as-equities-marathon-digital-mar/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them operates a public pool paying outside miners.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitski","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Acquired and switched off. Phantom's announcement, dated 21 May 2024 (fetched 2026-08-20), states \"acquiring Bitski, a leading provider of embedded wallets\" and that Bitski's \"existing products will be sunset in the coming months and users will be notified all along the way\"; both strings verified on that page. Two years on, the shutdown is observable rather than promised, so this does not rest on the acquisition release alone: checked 2026-08-20, https://www.bitski.com returns HTTP 404 (Cloudflare) and the apex https://bitski.com returns HTTP 530, to both a browser and a bare user-agent. The stated caveat, because it would otherwise look like an error: docs.bitski.com is still served (HTTP 308 to /introduction) and still advertises \"Wallet as a Service\" with no sunset, deprecation or Phantom notice anywhere on it — none of \"sunset\", \"deprecat\", \"phantom\", \"shutting down\" or \"no longer\" appears on it, and it carries no signup and no pricing. That is an orphaned docs subdomain behind a 404'd product site, not a purchasable product. Phantom, the acquirer, is ranked under Crypto Wallets.","source":"https://phantom.com/learn/blog/phantom-acquires-bitski","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/bitski/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"bitski.com returns HTTP 200 with a working signup for a wallet product, or Phantom reinstates a Bitski-branded wallet-as-a-service SKU.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Circle Wallets (formerly Circle Programmable Wallets)","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Relayers. Circle's developer wallet is genuinely in scope on the mechanism — its docs (fetched 2026-08-20 at developers.circle.com/wallets, HTTP 200, where the old /w3s/docs/programmable-wallets path now 308s) carry the heading \"User-controlled wallets\" and state that \"Circle secures keys with MPC or passkeys\"; both strings verified present. It is excluded because ChainChoice already scores this stack one layer down, as \"Circle Gas Station\" in the Relayers pool. The Gas Station documentation (cited /w3s/docs/gas-station now 308s to /wallets/gas-station, fetched 2026-08-20) confirms the overlap: it describes Gas Station using \"paymasters (on EVM) and fee-payers (on Solana)\", references ERC-4337 account abstraction, and tabulates sponsorship support for both User-Controlled and Developer-Controlled programmable wallets. The buyer relationship, the console, the billing account and the failure mode are Circle's in both pools; only the metered unit differs.","source":"https://developers.circle.com/wallets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/circle-wallets-formerly-circle-programmable-wallets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle Gas Station is dropped from our Relayers pool, or Circle separates its user-controlled MPC wallet into a product sold independently of the Circle Developer Platform account.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Curv","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":null,"reason":"The pioneer MPC custody brand, with nothing Curv-branded left to buy — and the disqualifying evidence is the domain, not the 2021 PayPal acquisition, which would prove only that an acquisition happened. Checked 2026-08-20: https://curv.co returns HTTP 301 with the response header \"location: https://www.paypal.com/us/digital-wallet/manage-money/crypto\" (served by Varnish), and https://www.curv.co returns the identical 301 to the identical target; both reproduce under a bare user-agent. Following it lands on PayPal's consumer buy-sell-hold crypto page, HTTP 200, titled \"Buy and Sell Crypto | Cryptocurrency Wallet | PayPal US\", which mentions no MPC key management, no institutional custody offering and no developer wallet SDK — a case-sensitive grep for \"MPC\" returns zero hits and \"SDK\" zero hits. Guard for re-checkers: a case-insensitive grep raises one \"mpc\" inside an image asset id (6tJmMpcHNOed4EhLpkIyqI), and \"custody\" appears only in consumer disclosures about Paxos issuing and holding PayPal USD; neither is a Curv product reference. The vendor's own domain serves no product page, no documentation and no signup. Included deliberately: this category's thesis is that vendor exit is the base case, and Curv is what that looks like five years later — a redirect to somebody else's retail funnel.","source":"https://curv.co","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/curv/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"curv.co stops redirecting and serves a Curv product or documentation again, or PayPal launches a Curv-branded MPC wallet or key-management SDK.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Dynamic (dynamic.xyz)","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Institutional Custody — via its parent. Dynamic was the closest independent analogue to Privy and Turnkey in this pool until it changed hands: its own homepage (fetched 2026-08-20) states verbatim \"Dynamic was acquired by Fireblocks in October 2025.\", in the same paragraph that describes folding authentication \"and secure key management into one flexible SDK\". Both strings verified on dynamic.xyz. The Fireblocks announcement post returns HTTP 200 and carries the headline \"Fireblocks Acquires Dynamic: Accelerating Onchain Adoption for Fintechs and Enterprises\" with datePublished 2025-10-23, corroborating the date. The Dynamic brand and SDK are still live — this is not a shutdown claim, and mode F does not apply because withdrawal is not being asserted — but the variable this category weighs heaviest, vendor-exit survivability, is now answered by Fireblocks, and Fireblocks is already scored in Institutional Custody. Ranking Dynamic here would put the same corporate parent, the same balance sheet and the same wind-down path into two pools under two names.","source":"https://www.dynamic.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/dynamic-dynamic-xyz/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"dynamic.xyz drops the Fireblocks acquisition line and Dynamic is spun back out under independent ownership, or Fireblocks leaves the Institutional Custody pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fireblocks Embedded Wallets","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Institutional Custody. Fireblocks is the largest MPC vendor in the segment and does sell a direct competitor to this pool: its product page (fetched 2026-08-20, HTTP 200) is headed \"Embedded wallets that turn demand into revenue\", carries the promise \"Users stay in control\", and offers to \"Deliver true non-custodial wallets where users own their assets\" so that the buyer can \"avoid the operational and regulatory complexity of providing custody\". All four strings verified present on that page. It is excluded here only because ChainChoice already scores the vendor in the Institutional Custody pool, where it is assessed as an MPC infrastructure vendor whose qualified-custody arm is a separate NYDFS-chartered affiliate. Scoring the same key-management stack twice would double-count one vendor-exit answer under two labels. Note for re-checkers: a prior draft of this entry claimed fireblocks.com serves HTTP 403 to a bare user-agent; that is not reproducible — on 2026-08-20 both a bare curl user-agent and a browser user-agent returned HTTP 200.","source":"https://www.fireblocks.com/products/embedded-wallets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/fireblocks-embedded-wallets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fireblocks is removed from the Institutional Custody pool, or Fireblocks Embedded Wallets is spun out and sold as a separately-owned product rather than a Fireblocks SKU.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Safe{Wallet}","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Wrong mechanism, and Safe says so itself. safe.global (fetched 2026-08-20, HTTP 200) describes the product as \"Safe{Wallet} is the original multisig wallet for secure self-custody\", and its own FAQ block on that page draws the boundary this pool needs: Safe secures assets \"without relying on centralized custody or offchain MPC systems\". Both strings verified present on safe.global. Authorisation is an onchain approval against an owner-upgradeable proxy contract, not a threshold signature reassembled from offchain key shares, so the four criteria that rank this category — key-share custody disclosure in particular — have nothing to measure. There is also no seedless embedded-wallet SDK: the signers are ordinary externally-owned accounts the buyer brings. Separately, it is already ranked, under Smart Accounts & Multisig, so this is a pointer as well as a scope call.","source":"https://safe.global/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/safe-wallet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Safe ships an offchain threshold-signature or MPC key-management product, or safe.global drops the \"without relying on centralized custody or offchain MPC systems\" framing.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"thirdweb In-App and Ecosystem Wallets","category":"mpc_wallets","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Account Abstraction Infra. thirdweb sells a real competitor here — its wallets page (fetched 2026-08-20, HTTP 200) advertises \"Secure, self-custodial, and customizable embedded wallet infrastructure to onboard users to your app\", says it is \"Built on TEE architecture to isolate and encrypt keys, non-custodially.\", and pitches Ecosystem Wallets as a way to \"Keep your identity and assets across applications and games\". The developer portal (HTTP 200) confirms the shipping surface, documenting \"Using In-App Wallets\" alongside an \"Ecosystem Wallets\" section. All five strings verified on the two pages named. ChainChoice scores thirdweb as \"thirdweb Account Abstraction\" in the Account Abstraction Infra pool: same vendor, same developer-platform account, same SDK distribution and the same wind-down path, so the bundler/paymaster entry and the wallet SDK are one vendor-exit answer, not two. One vendor, one scored entry.","source":"https://thirdweb.com/wallets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"mpc_wallets/thirdweb-in-app-and-ecosystem-wallets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"thirdweb is dropped from the Account Abstraction Infra pool, or its in-app wallet is sold under a separate account and contract from the developer platform that currently contains it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"3DNS","category":"naming_services","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"3DNS sold tokenised ICANN domains; its own site now reads \"3dns.box has moved to my.box\" (read 2026-11-03), and my.box sells flat-priced .box ENS names under a new registration agreement, a different product. No page offers tokenising a .com any more, so the product this row ranked is discontinued. Ranked #3 of 7 (score 63) until 5 November 2026; it leaves the table with no product to re-read. My.Box may be assessed as a new entry.","source":"https://3dns.box/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"naming_services/3dns/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A 3DNS product that tokenises ICANN domains is offered again, or My.Box is assessed as its own entry.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Avvy Domains (.avax)","category":"naming_services","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead by its own published notice, checked first-party on 2026-08-20. The shutdown notice is now the only page the domain serves: https://avvy.domains/ returns HTTP 302 to /blog/avvy-has-shut-down/, and app.avvy.domains resolves to that same notice. It states verbatim 'Avvy has shut down all services and operations including avax.sh & our primary announcement channels.' and is dated May 5th, 2026. The wind-down post of October 15th, 2025 opens 'Today we announce a big change: Avvy will be closing down.' and sets the holder deadline verbatim as 'Important steps start today and must be completed by December 31, 2025'. It also names the successor: 'In coordination with Ava Labs, AVAX names will continue on through a partnership with D3 and Doma Protocol'. On the heaviest criterion — whether you can lose the name, 40% — this is the definitional failure: the registry did not survive its issuer, and holders had a hard date by which to act or forfeit the migration path.","source":"https://avvy.domains/blog/avvy-has-shut-down/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/avvy-domains-avax/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"avvy.domains stops redirecting to the 'Avvy has shut down' notice and .avax registration or renewal reopens on a first-party Avvy surface. A successor .avax storefront run by someone else would be an admission candidate under that operator's own name, not a revival of Avvy.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Farcaster (fnames / Farcaster usernames)","category":"naming_services","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under SocialFi — Farcaster is a member of our socialfi pool, so its absence here is taxonomy, not oversight; a reader cannot see that from this page, hence this note. On this pool's own axes it would also cap out on the heaviest criterion. Every string below is on docs.farcaster.xyz/learn/architecture/ens-names, read 2026-08-20. Farcaster's own docs state 'Fnames are issued as offchain names under the subdomain fcast.id.' and 'Fnames are free but are subject to a usage policy to prevent squatting and impersonation.' That policy reserves reclamation in three cases: 'Names connected to public figures or entities may be reclaimed', 'Names that haven't been used for 60+ days may be reclaimed.', and 'Names that are registered for the sole purpose of resale may be reclaimed.' It also constrains the holder: 'An account can only have one Fname at a time.' and 'An account can change its Fname once every 28 days.' A free, issuer-revocable, one-per-account offchain subname is a social handle — the product socialfi scores — and whether you can lose the name (40% here) is structurally capped by a documented take-back right. The same page points holders elsewhere for durability: onchain ENS names 'cannot be revoked', and ENS is already ranked in this pool.","source":"https://docs.farcaster.xyz/learn/architecture/ens-names","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/farcaster-fnames-farcaster-usernames/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Farcaster ships a paid, non-revocable onchain name — its own registry contract rather than offchain fcast.id subnames, with no reclamation clause and no one-per-account limit — at which point it becomes a naming-services candidate distinct from its socialfi ranking.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Handshake (HNS)","category":"naming_services","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Excluded on resolution reach (25%), which it fails by design — not because it is dead: on 2026-08-20 handshake.org answered with current content. The site describes the project as 'An experimental peer-to-peer root naming system.' and 'Decentralized naming and certificate authority'. What it sells is the root itself, not a second-level name at a published price: 'The community will be able to initiate auctions and place bids for top-level domains using HNS'. Reaching a Handshake name requires the counterparty to change their resolution stack — the site's own developer path is 'Install an SPV resolver' (hnsd). Our criterion is worded 'Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin', and Handshake's answer is no by construction. The retail rail is also mid-transition rather than steady state: Namebase, the best-known Handshake registrar, is LIVE and still sells .hns (listed at '$10 / yr'), but has rebuilt itself — its blog carries a Jul 10, 2026 post stating 'Namebase is now a non-custodial registry and registrar for the decentralized web' while the custodial predecessor sunsets behind a site-wide banner reading 'Withdraw or transfer your names & HNS before Oct 1, 2026.'","source":"https://handshake.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/handshake-hns/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A mainstream wallet or browser resolves Handshake names natively with no added resolver, extension or DoH endpoint; or Handshake SLDs become buyable at a published, first-party price-and-renewal ladder comparable to the ranked registrars.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Namecoin (.bit)","category":"naming_services","kind":null,"reason":"The origin of blockchain naming (2011) and still actively maintained — on 2026-08-20 namecoin.org's front page carried a news item dated 2026-08-17 — so nothing here is a shutdown claim. It is excluded on resolution reach (25%). Namecoin describes itself as 'Namecoin is an experimental open-source technology which improves decentralization, security, censorship resistance, privacy, and speed of certain components of the Internet infrastructure such as DNS and identities.' Its own browsing-instructions page states the requirement plainly: 'ncdns is software for accessing .bit domain names. If you want to access .bit domain names, ncdns is most likely what you want to install.' That page names no mainstream browser that resolves .bit without the install, which is a bottom-band answer to the criterion 'Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin'. Neither page checked points to a first-party registrar publishing a price and renewal ladder, so there is nothing to score on cost transparency either. Historically foundational; not an answer to 'which name should I buy'.","source":"https://www.namecoin.org/dot-bit/browsing-instructions/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/namecoin-bit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A mainstream wallet or browser resolves .bit natively without ncdns or an equivalent local resolver/proxy, or Namecoin ships a first-party registrar publishing a price and renewal ladder.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Namefi","category":"naming_services","kind":null,"reason":"Live and shipping — on 2026-08-20 namefi.io's front page was serving build 'v3.5.84-de2a3a-2026-08-20', so nothing here is a liveness claim — but it duplicates a ranked member's construction without separating on any scored axis. Namefi describes itself as 'ICANN Accredited Registrar on Ethereum & Base' and its product as 'Tokenize traditional DNS names into NFTs so transfers settle in seconds with clear, onchain provenance.', with control represented as 'Minted when you import and burned when you export, each NFT is verifiable proof of control over your domain.' That is 3DNS's construction: 3dns.box states it 'partners with an ICANN accredited registrar to initiate your domain registration off-chain, then securely tokenize it'. The accreditation sits in-house at Namefi and with a partner at 3DNS, but the buyer's answers are identical across all four criteria — tenure governed by the ICANN renewal obligation, registrar-held authority behind the token, DNS-native resolution everywhere without a plugin, registrar-style published pricing. One anchor per lane, and 3DNS holds it on incumbency.","source":"https://namefi.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/namefi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Namefi separates from 3DNS on a scored axis — a materially different lapse/redemption regime, a registrar-independent onchain registry, or a published price ladder that undercuts 3DNS's — or 3DNS leaves the pool, vacating the tokenized-ICANN lane.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"NameStone","category":"naming_services","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Ceased operations, stated on its own homepage — not inferred from press. On 2026-08-20 https://namestone.com/ served nothing but a notice reading 'NameStone has ceased operations.' and 'NameStone ceased operations on August 3, 2026.' — no product, docs or pricing anywhere on the root. Its GitHub organisation corroborates rather than contradicts: the org description still reads 'Serving ENS, through namestone.com, durin.dev, and enspro.xyz', and the namestone repository's last activity is stamped 'Updated Aug 3, 2026' — the same day as the stated cessation. Note the second, independent reason it would not have been ranked even while live: NameStone sold ENS subname issuance to developers and brands as an API, so its buyer was an integrator, not a name-holder. This pool scores the name a reader buys and keeps, and the ENS namespace NameStone served is already ranked here in its own right.","source":"https://namestone.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/namestone/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"namestone.com replaces the ceased-operations notice with a live product, or the API is revived under new ownership at another domain — in which case it re-enters as a developer-infrastructure candidate for a different category, not as a naming-services member.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SuiNS (Sui Name Service, .sui)","category":"naming_services","kind":null,"reason":"Turned away on lane duplication, not on quality or liveness — this is the strongest chain-native namespace we do not rank, and docs.sui.io/sui-stack/suins, read 2026-08-20, confirms it is current and first-party. The official Sui documentation describes it as 'Sui Name Service (SuiNS) is a decentralized naming service on Sui that maps human-readable .sui names to wallet addresses': a single-ecosystem namespace whose resolution reach is Sui — native inside it, app- or plugin-dependent outside it, with the docs directing node operators to 'Configure full nodes to resolve SuiNS names'. The pool already carries the chain-native construction three times over — SNS for Solana, Basenames for Base, and SPACE ID for .bnb/.arb — and SuiNS answers the four criteria the way they do rather than differently. Admitting it would add a fourth chain-native row without adding a distinction. Stated plainly so the reader can weigh it: this is the first re-admission candidate.","source":"https://docs.sui.io/sui-stack/suins","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"naming_services/suins-sui-name-service-sui/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The pool widens past its current three chain-native slots, or SuiNS resolves natively outside the Sui ecosystem in mainstream multi-chain wallets — either makes the no-separation argument false and admits it.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BendDAO","category":"nft_lending","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 7 (score 71) until 10 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on BendDAO. We compare NFT lending venues on four things. One of them, whether each venue is still operating and what incidents it has had (22% of the weight), was measured on DefiLlama's NFT lending figures and its record of hacks. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every venue again on 10 November 2026 that part could not be dated. The same read found MetaStreet closing: its own app reads \"MetaStreet app is winding down. Withdraw your positions below.\" Two more venues are shut: NFTfi closed on 31 August 2026 by its own notice, and JPEG'd ended new loans on 28 December 2024 by its own governance vote. That leaves four operating venues, fewer than the five a fair order needs. Until then the venues are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/benddao/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find a primary source for the operating record that we are allowed to use, and at least five operating venues can be read. Then we read every venue again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Blend (by Blur)","category":"nft_lending","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 7 (score 62) until 10 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Blend (by Blur). We compare NFT lending venues on four things. One of them, whether each venue is still operating and what incidents it has had (22% of the weight), was measured on DefiLlama's NFT lending figures and its record of hacks. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every venue again on 10 November 2026 that part could not be dated. The same read found MetaStreet closing: its own app reads \"MetaStreet app is winding down. Withdraw your positions below.\" Two more venues are shut: NFTfi closed on 31 August 2026 by its own notice, and JPEG'd ended new loans on 28 December 2024 by its own governance vote. That leaves four operating venues, fewer than the five a fair order needs. Until then the venues are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/blend-by-blur/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find a primary source for the operating record that we are allowed to use, and at least five operating venues can be read. Then we read every venue again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"GONDI V3.1","category":"nft_lending","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 7 (score 71) until 10 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on GONDI V3.1. We compare NFT lending venues on four things. One of them, whether each venue is still operating and what incidents it has had (22% of the weight), was measured on DefiLlama's NFT lending figures and its record of hacks. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every venue again on 10 November 2026 that part could not be dated. The same read found MetaStreet closing: its own app reads \"MetaStreet app is winding down. Withdraw your positions below.\" Two more venues are shut: NFTfi closed on 31 August 2026 by its own notice, and JPEG'd ended new loans on 28 December 2024 by its own governance vote. That leaves four operating venues, fewer than the five a fair order needs. Until then the venues are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/gondi-v3-1/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find a primary source for the operating record that we are allowed to use, and at least five operating venues can be read. Then we read every venue again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"JPEG'd","category":"nft_lending","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down by its own governance. JPEG'd's token holders voted the lending product closed on Snapshot (space jpeg'd.eth): PIP-96, \"Wind down pUSD/pETH lending operations and uncustody treasury\" (closed 18 December 2024), and PIP 98 (closed 26 December 2024): \"As of December 28th, 2024, interest rates in all JPEG Vaults will increase to 100%.\" and \"debt ceilings for all vaults will be reduced to zero in order to prohibit any new borrows.\" Read again through the Snapshot hub on 10 November 2026; jpegd.io no longer resolves. New lending ended on 28 December 2024. It stayed in this table without a rank from 13 August 2026, the day this site found the app gone, and leaves it now.","source":"https://hub.snapshot.org/graphql?proposal=0x0828b066542fb6caf5f67138cb56873556cd67f81e0e2a40551ec68916ab1881","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/jpeg-d/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"JPEG'd governance votes to reopen lending and a live app or documentation publishes its terms.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"MetaStreet v2","category":"nft_lending","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #1 of 7 (score 80) until 10 November 2026; its own app now tells users to withdraw their positions, and it is not ranked right now with its category. We compare NFT lending venues on four things. One of them, whether each venue is still operating and what incidents it has had (22% of the weight), was measured on DefiLlama's NFT lending figures and its record of hacks. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every venue again on 10 November 2026 that part could not be dated. The same read found MetaStreet closing: its own app reads \"MetaStreet app is winding down. Withdraw your positions below.\" Two more venues are shut: NFTfi closed on 31 August 2026 by its own notice, and JPEG'd ended new loans on 28 December 2024 by its own governance vote. That leaves four operating venues, fewer than the five a fair order needs. Until then the venues are listed A to Z.","source":"https://app.metastreet.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/metastreet-v2/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find a primary source for the operating record that we are allowed to use, and at least five operating venues can be read. Then we read every venue again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"NFTfi","category":"nft_lending","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down by its own notice. NFTfi's wind-down repository reads \"NFTfi has shut down.\", gives the day the platform closed in full as \"August 31, 2026\", and adds \"The NFTfi lending contracts have been paused. New loans and refinancing are no longer possible\" (github.com/NFTfi-Genesis/nftfi-wind-down, read 10 November 2026). The repository keeps the guides for repaying or foreclosing existing loans. It stayed in this table without a rank from 31 August 2026 and leaves it now.","source":"https://github.com/NFTfi-Genesis/nftfi-wind-down","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/nftfi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"NFTfi reopens lending under its own published notice.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Zharta NFT Lending V2","category":"nft_lending","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 7 (score 62) until 10 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Zharta NFT Lending V2. We compare NFT lending venues on four things. One of them, whether each venue is still operating and what incidents it has had (22% of the weight), was measured on DefiLlama's NFT lending figures and its record of hacks. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using DefiLlama while we ask it for written permission to republish its data, so when we read every venue again on 10 November 2026 that part could not be dated. The same read found MetaStreet closing: its own app reads \"MetaStreet app is winding down. Withdraw your positions below.\" Two more venues are shut: NFTfi closed on 31 August 2026 by its own notice, and JPEG'd ended new loans on 28 December 2024 by its own governance vote. That leaves four operating venues, fewer than the five a fair order needs. Until then the venues are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"nft_lending/zharta-nft-lending-v2/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama gives us permission to republish its data, or we find a primary source for the operating record that we are allowed to use, and at least five operating venues can be read. Then we read every venue again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Binance NFT Marketplace","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"Binance announced on 3 June 2026 that it is ending NFT support on the exchange: holders had until 3 July 2026 to withdraw transferable NFTs, and non-transferable NFTs could not be moved at all (Binance Academy issued PDF certificates instead). NFT management moved to the self-custodial Binance Wallet — custody, not a trading venue with listings and order matching. Binance's own NFT surface now renders as an empty holdings view with no marketplace.","source":"https://cointelegraph.com/news/binance-exchange-halt-nft-services-binance-wallet","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/binance-nft-marketplace/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Binance Wallet ships a first-party NFT marketplace under the Binance brand with live listings and order matching a reader can trade against.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Blur","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #9 of 9 (score 51) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Blur.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/blur/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Coinbase NFT","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Coinbase's first-party NFT marketplace no longer exists. The Defiant reports it among the CEX-backed marketplaces that retreated, with Coinbase NFT sunset and visitors redirected to the Base app. We state no closure date here because the cited page carries none.","source":"https://thedefiant.io/news/nfts-and-web3/binance-closes-its-centralized-nft-marketplace-joining-coinbase-kraken-in-cex-backed-nft-retreat","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/coinbase-nft/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase (or Base) ships a first-party NFT trading front end under its own brand where a reader can list and fill orders.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Courtyard","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 9 (score 55) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Courtyard.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/courtyard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Foundation","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"Foundation's own site now serves a shutdown letter rather than a marketplace: 'After careful consideration, we have made the decision not to resume operations.' The team that built and maintained it is no longer in place, listed NFTs must be manually delisted from the contracts, and Foundation commits only to keeping its IPFS gateway alive through 27 April 2027.","source":"https://foundation.app/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/foundation/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"foundation.app returns to serving live listings and accepting bids under any owner.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fragment","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 9 (score 62) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Fragment.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/fragment/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"GameStop NFT Marketplace","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"GameStop wound its NFT marketplace down effective 2 February 2024, stating it did so 'due to the continuing regulatory uncertainty of the crypto space' and telling holders their NFTs 'will remain accessible and saleable through other platforms.' The venue itself no longer accepts buys, sells or mints.","source":"https://cointelegraph.com/news/gamestop-ceases-nft-platform-regulatory-uncertainty","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/gamestop-nft-marketplace/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"GameStop relaunches a first-party NFT marketplace, on Immutable/Loopring or anywhere else.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Magic Eden","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #8 of 9 (score 53) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Magic Eden.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/magic-eden/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Nifty Gateway","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"Gemini announced on 23 January 2026 that Nifty Gateway would close on 23 February 2026, putting the platform into withdrawal-only mode the same day and instructing customers to move NFTs and USD/ETH balances into the wider Gemini ecosystem. What remains is NFT support inside the Gemini wallet, not a venue. The platform that defined custodial credit-card NFT drops is gone.","source":"https://www.gemini.com/blog/announcing-nifty-gateways-closure","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/nifty-gateway/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gemini reopens a Nifty Gateway-branded venue, or launches a wallet-connected NFT marketplace under the Gemini brand.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"OKX NFT Marketplace","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 9 (score 59) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on OKX NFT Marketplace.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/okx-nft-marketplace/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"OpenSea","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #1 of 9 (score 84) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on OpenSea.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/opensea/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Reservoir","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"Reservoir was never a venue a reader opens — it was the NFT indexing and order-routing API behind other people's front ends, including Coinbase, MetaMask and Magic Eden. It then announced it would sunset Reservoir NFT, the API and associated services on 15 October 2025 and pivoted to Relay, a cross-chain swap and bridging product rather than a marketplace, so it fails both the product test and the still-running test.","source":"https://crypto.news/reservoir-infra-provider-for-coinbase-and-metamask-shuts-down-nft-services/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/reservoir/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Reservoir or Relay launches a consumer-facing, wallet-connected NFT trading front end under its own brand with cross-collection listings.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SuperRare","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 9 (score 58) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on SuperRare.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/superrare/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Tensor","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 9 (score 61) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Tensor.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/tensor/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"UniSat Marketplace","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 9 (score 69) until 5 November 2026. NFT marketplaces are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) is real depth in the reader’s asset class, read from DefiLlama’s NFT venue statistics, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74). The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) found no non-paused, venue-separated depth source, so no marketplace’s liquidity score could be dated and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on UniSat Marketplace.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/unisat-marketplace/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused, venue-separated depth source for liquidity (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank NFT marketplaces again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"X2Y2","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"X2Y2 announced on 31 March 2025 that it would close, and its front end went dark on 30 April 2025 while the team pivoted to an AI project. The smart contracts persist and trades can still be executed against them, but there is no maintained interface — exactly the case this category refuses to rank as a product.","source":"https://theoutpost.ai/news-story/ethereum-nft-marketplace-x2-y2-shuts-down-pivots-to-ai-driven-crypto-project-13833/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/x2y2/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A maintained X2Y2-branded front end returns with live listings, whether run by the original team or a successor.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Zora","category":"nft_marketplace","kind":null,"reason":"Zora is no longer presented as an NFT marketplace. Its current developer documentation frames Zora around creator coins — 'Our Coins SDK lets developers create engaging experiences for creators and traders' — with NFT material demoted to a separate 'Legacy NFT Docs' section on another subdomain. It competes with content-coin and token-launch products, not with the venues ranked here.","source":"https://docs.zora.co/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"nft_marketplace/zora/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zora reinstates a first-party NFT marketplace as a primary product with cross-collection listings and bids, rather than legacy documentation.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Banxa","category":"offramps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five off-ramp products remain, which is no judgement on Banxa.","source":"https://banxa.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/banxa/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of two of Coinbase, Kraken, MoonPay and Ramp Network in a browser, or two more off-ramp products can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Binance","category":"offramps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto Exchanges. Binance genuinely offramps — its own support FAQ (fetched 2026-08-20) states \"You can now sell crypto to cash and withdraw them directly to your card on the Binance app\", and the same guide covers the website, with a card that has not been used before required to \"first go through a verification process by authorising a 0-debit transaction\". ChainChoice scores Binance in the Crypto Exchanges pool, where the order book and withdrawal rails are measured as one venue rather than as a standalone sell widget. Its absence here is a taxonomy boundary, not an omission of the largest venue in the market.","source":"https://www.binance.com/en/support/faq/detail/68ad9df9cbb84d1e9840ac2b61607b0e","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/binance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ChainChoice removes Binance from the Crypto Exchanges pool, or the offramps methodology is widened to score full exchanges alongside sell widgets — at which point Binance belongs in both.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bitpanda","category":"offramps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five off-ramp products remain, which is no judgement on Bitpanda.","source":"https://www.bitpanda.com/en","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/bitpanda/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of two of Coinbase, Kraken, MoonPay and Ramp Network in a browser, or two more off-ramp products can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitrefill","category":"offramps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto Gift Cards — and it does not do what this pool measures. Bitrefill's own homepage (fetched 2026-08-20) offers buying \"digital gift cards, eSIMs, and phone refills with Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies\", advertising \"8,000+ Gift Cards, eSIMs, Payment Cards, and Phone Refills in 180+ countries\". That homepage advertises no bank transfer and no fiat payout of any kind; users receive digital codes, not cash. Converting crypto into spending power at merchants is a different product from receiving money in a bank account, and it is scored as such.","source":"https://www.bitrefill.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/bitrefill/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitrefill launches a documented fiat withdrawal to a user's bank account, or ChainChoice merges the Crypto Gift Cards pool into offramps.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Circle Mint","category":"offramps","kind":"region_or_audience_locked","reason":"Enterprise-only, with no self-serve consumer access. Circle's own Circle Mint page (fetched 2026-08-20) states: \"Circle Mint is for institutional customers minting USDC, EURC, and cirBTC. It is typically used by exchanges, institutional traders, wallet providers, banks, and consumer-app companies\", and \"Circle Mint is not available to individuals; however, individuals can access these digital assets in the secondary market through a network of providers.\" The 1:1 redemption is real — the page says USDC and EURC \"can always be redeemed 1:1 for US dollars or euros through Circle\", with \"automatic transfers directly from your USDC balance back into your bank account\" — but it is a vetted facility gated behind the page's stated background checks, KYC checks and sanctions screening, not a retail offramp a reader can sign up for.","source":"https://www.circle.com/circle-mint","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/circle-mint/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle publishes individual eligibility for Circle Mint or launches a retail redemption product, i.e. the sentence \"Circle Mint is not available to individuals\" disappears from that page.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Coinbase","category":"offramps","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Coinbase's user agreement, which says how Coinbase's sites may be used, answered our requests only behind a bot check, which this site never bypasses, so it has not been read, and Coinbase's help pages on selling and withdrawals and its licences page are not re-read the way this site reads a provider until it is. Until a person reads it, Coinbase is not ranked here as an off-ramp and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.coinbase.com/legal/user_agreement/united_states","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/coinbase/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads Coinbase's user agreement in a browser: if it does not bar automated reads, the help pages on selling and withdrawals and the licences page are read again and the row returns on that read; if it does, a person reads them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Kraken","category":"offramps","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Kraken's general terms (section 9) bar the use of \"any web scraping, web harvesting, or data extraction methods\" and of \"any bots, robots, parsers, spiders, scripts\" on its services and content, so Kraken's fee schedule and its support pages on cash withdrawals and licensing are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Kraken is not ranked here as an off-ramp and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.kraken.com/legal/global-terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/kraken/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken's fee schedule, its support pages on cash withdrawals and licensing, and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"LocalBitcoins","category":"offramps","kind":null,"reason":"Closed. localbitcoins.com still resolves and returned HTTP 200 to a browser request on 2026-08-20 (it 403s automated fetchers, so re-check it in a browser), but the homepage carries only a wind-down notice, not a marketplace: \"LocalBitcoins Oy has closed its Bitcoin trading service. You may still have funds available for withdrawal. You can still withdraw your remaining funds by logging into your account.\" The remaining flow is identity verification plus a Bitcoin wallet address for former users to submit a withdrawal request; the page adds that \"no maintenance fees have been charged since 1 July 2025\". There is no order book and no way to place a sell order. A site kept alive to return balances is not a service a reader can sell crypto through.","source":"https://localbitcoins.com","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/localbitcoins/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The closure notice is removed from localbitcoins.com and the P2P trading service accepts new sell orders again.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Mercuryo","category":"offramps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Fiat Onramps. Mercuryo's own site (fetched 2026-08-20) describes helping users \"buy, sell, transfer, and manage cryptocurrencies\" through \"fiat-to-crypto and crypto-to-fiat solutions\", and links a \"Sell Crypto\" widget — so it does offramp. It is the same B2B2C widget, integrated by partners \"using a crypto widget, iFrame, SDK, or API\", that ChainChoice already scores in the Fiat Onramps pool. Ranking one product in two pools would double-count it rather than add a comparison.","source":"https://mercuryo.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/mercuryo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ChainChoice removes Mercuryo from the Fiat Onramps pool, or Mercuryo separates its sell flow into a distinct product with its own pricing and licensing disclosures.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"MoonPay","category":"offramps","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"MoonPay's terms of use say \"you will not use an anonymizing proxy, or any other automatic devices, spider or manual processes to copy or monitor our websites without our prior written permission\", so MoonPay's pricing disclosure, licence and help pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, MoonPay is not ranked here as an off-ramp and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.moonpay.com/legal/terms_of_use_europe","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/moonpay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MoonPay's pricing disclosure, licences page, its help pages and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Nexo","category":"offramps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Crypto Neobanks. Nexo's homepage (fetched 2026-08-20) positions it as \"Your Wealth Platform for Digital Assets\" and \"the premier wealth platform built to grow your crypto\", built around \"Earn, borrow, and spend crypto. All in one place.\" Its own headline route to a bank account is the opposite of a sale: a crypto-backed Credit Line whose funds are \"either sent to your bank account or your Nexo account in the form of stablecoins\", marketed as \"Spend without selling your digital assets\". The page describes no sell-to-bank payout at all, so Nexo is scored where its actual mechanism lives.","source":"https://nexo.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/nexo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nexo ships and documents a direct sell-crypto-to-bank-payout flow with published spreads and rails, or ChainChoice removes Nexo from the Crypto Neobanks pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"PayPal","category":"offramps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Simple Buy, as \"PayPal Crypto\". PayPal's own crypto hub (fetched 2026-08-20) markets \"Trade Bitcoin, Ethereum, PayPal USD (PYUSD) and more\" and, for PYUSD, \"Buy, sell, hold, and transfer it in our app\", and answers \"Yes, you can transfer cryptocurrency into and out of PayPal\". What that page does not describe anywhere is a fiat payout of crypto sale proceeds to a linked bank account — the flow this pool measures; its only post-sale detail is 1099 tax reporting. The ranked surface is the buy-and-hold wallet, so that is where ChainChoice scores it.","source":"https://www.paypal.com/us/digital-wallet/manage-money/crypto","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/paypal/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"PayPal publishes a crypto page describing sale proceeds withdrawn to a bank account with stated rails and fees, or ChainChoice moves the PayPal entry out of the Simple Buy pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ramp Network","category":"offramps","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Ramp's terms of service, which count its website among its services, say users won't \"reverse engineer, copy, modify, data scrape, automate or re-sell any part of the Services\", so Ramp's fee and payout help pages and its licence page are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Ramp Network is not ranked here as an off-ramp and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://rampnetwork.com/terms-of-service","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/ramp-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ramp's fee and payout help pages, its licences page and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Transak","category":"offramps","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five off-ramp products remain, which is no judgement on Transak.","source":"https://transak.com/off-ramp","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"offramps/transak/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of two of Coinbase, Kraken, MoonPay and Ramp Network in a browser, or two more off-ramp products can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zero Hash","category":"offramps","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Infrastructure others build on, not a product a reader can open — and separately, ranked under Stablecoin Settlement. Zero Hash's own site (fetched 2026-08-20) states plainly that \"zerohash is not a consumer crypto exchange. Instead, it provides infrastructure that powers digital asset products inside other companies' platforms\", serving banks, brokerages, fintech platforms, payment companies and marketplaces. Its \"On & Off Ramp\" capability is embedded in partner apps; the public site carries no consumer signup and no published retail fee schedule, so there is no spread or payout rail a retail reader could be quoted directly.","source":"https://www.zerohash.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"offramps/zero-hash/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zero Hash opens a self-serve consumer account with published retail sell pricing, or ChainChoice removes it from the Stablecoin Settlement pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Allium","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"No published price, and the vendor's own URL routing is the proof: https://www.allium.so/pricing returns HTTP 301 to https://www.allium.so/contact (re-verified by direct probe 2026-08-20). The destination is a sales page headed \"Get in touch with us\" whose primary action is \"Get a demo\"; no price, tier, credit rate or overage figure appears anywhere on it, and the site carries no pricing page at any other URL. The refusal is deliberately not \"it is only pipes\" — Allium does ship analyst-facing surfaces (Allium Terminal, Allium Explorer, Allium AI) alongside developer APIs, Datastreams and Datashares, pitched on that same page as \"Analyze onchain activity, report financials, and build applications on the same SOC-certified blockchain data\", with named customers including Visa, Stripe and Phantom. Nor is it that no account exists — the page's navigation does carry \"Sign up\" and \"Log in\". The refusal is that a vendor which routes its pricing URL to a contact form scores nothing on the 20%-weighted pricing axis, and its query portability and coverage claims cannot be falsified by anyone who has not already signed. The ranked pool is chosen so a reader can reproduce our evaluation without a sales call.","source":"https://www.allium.so/contact","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/allium/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"allium.so/pricing stops redirecting and serves a published tier table with rates a reader can read without contacting sales.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Chainalysis","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Ranked, not refused — under Wallet Screening, where the question it actually answers is graded. Verified in this repo: Wallet Screening, id 'chainalysis', whose record is built on the United States v. Sterlingov Daubert ruling and the vendor's own admissions in that opinion; a second Chainalysis product is separately ranked under On-chain Monitoring as \"Hexagate (by Chainalysis)\" in On-chain Monitoring. Its homepage (HTTP 200, fetched 2026-08-20) confirms the shape: the headline is \"The intelligence layer for the crypto economy\", the products are investigations and compliance — Reactor, Wallet Scan, Rapid, KYT, Sentinel, Address Screening, VASP Risking, Alterya, Hexagate — the named customers span exchanges, banks, regulators and law enforcement (Coinbase, Kraken, BNY Mellon, BBVA, ADGM, IRS-CI, Calgary Police Service), and the single call to action across the page is \"Request a demo\", with no self-serve signup and no published price. www.chainalysis.com/pricing/ returns HTTP 404 (probed 2026-08-20). Carrying it here would score one vendor twice on two pages and import a sales-gated forensics tool into a pool whose premise is that a reader can check both the price and the method themselves. The same applies to TRM Labs and Elliptic, both also ranked in that Wallet Screening pool.","source":"https://www.chainalysis.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/chainalysis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Chainalysis ships a self-serve analyst research product with a published price, distinct from the screening, investigation and monitoring products already ranked under Wallet Screening and On-chain Monitoring.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Coin Metrics","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":null,"reason":"Absorbed, and no longer purchasable under its own name. Re-verified 2026-08-20 by direct HTTP probe: coinmetrics.io returns HTTP 301 to https://www.talos.com/our-solutions/data/overview, and coinmetrics.io/pricing returns HTTP 301 to that identical Talos URL — so the vendor no longer serves a pricing page at all, and published pricing & free-tier honesty is 20% of this pool's weighting. Talos's own spotlight page is headed \"Coin Metrics is now part of Talos\" and states \"Talos has acquired the leading provider of crypto financial intelligence, Coin Metrics, offering network data, market data, indexes and network risk solutions to the most prestigious institutions touching cryptoassets.\" The surviving destination page — fetched separately, not inferred from the acquisition notice — describes the offering as \"Talos delivers Coin Metrics market and on-chain data, reference rates and indexes via robust APIs so institutional teams can move seamlessly from research to execution, risk management and operations\", names tiers (Market Data Feed, Market Data Pro, Atlas, Network Data Pro) but publishes no price for any of them, and offers only \"Request a demo\" and support/contact links. This is a refusal about access, not about the data or its quality: charts.coinmetrics.io still resolves (HTTP 302 to /crypto-data/, page title \"New Chart - Crypto Data - Coin Metrics\"). But there is no Coin Metrics product a reader can price, trial or evaluate without a sales conversation, so it cannot be graded on the same four axes as the ranked pool.","source":"https://www.talos.com/spotlight/coinmetrics","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/coin-metrics/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Talos publishes a self-serve Coin Metrics plan with a readable price, or coinmetrics.io serves its own pricing page again instead of redirecting to talos.com.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"CryptoQuant","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, not refused — under Crypto Trading Tools. Verified in this repo: Trading Tools, id 'cryptoquant'. This is the single most surprising absence from the page and the pointer is the entire answer, because CryptoQuant is genuinely on-chain: its API documentation (HTTP 200, fetched 2026-08-20) opens \"Simple and powerful endpoints for on-chain data, market data, and aggregate blockchain statistics\", and it documents \"Exchange Flows\" and \"Flow Indicator\" categories for Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, stablecoins and ERC20 assets. What a buyer is choosing, though, is a precomputed metric seat, so it is graded on the axes that decide that purchase — which venues are inside a number and where it under-reports, what a restatement does to the figure you traded on last quarter, and what the affordable tier refuses. Grading it here on query portability and chain coverage would rank a metric feed against SQL workbenches it does not compete with. Worth knowing before you shop it: cryptoquant.com returned HTTP 403 to a non-browser fetch on 2026-08-20, and this repo's Crypto Trading Tools record notes (2026-08-17) that cryptoquant.com/pricing returns HTTP 200 — re-confirmed 2026-08-20 — yet renders no tier table to a non-JavaScript client, the priced matrix surviving only inside its i18n payload.","source":"https://docs.cryptoquant.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/cryptoquant/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CryptoQuant ships a user-authored query surface over raw or decoded chain data, at which point it competes with this pool rather than with the metric seats — or this site moves it out of Crypto Trading Tools.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"DefiLlama","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, not refused — under DeFi Dashboards. Verified in this repo: DeFi Dashboards, id 'defillama', where it scores 9/10 on pricing transparency & continuity — tied for the highest in that pool. That placement also corrects a stale line in this category's own methodology spec, which lists DefiLlama among \"Free public dashboards with no commercial tier (DefiLlama, Etherscan analytics, block explorers) — nothing to price\": that is wrong, and checkably so. docs.llama.fi/pro-api (HTTP 200, 2026-08-20) publishes a complete commercial ladder — Pro at \"$49/month or $490/year\" with a \"Free 7-day trial available\", API at \"$300/month or $3,000/year\", \"1,000 requests per minute\", \"1 million API calls per month\", with overage at \"$0.60 per 1,000 additional calls after the 1M limit\". What keeps it out of this pool is scope, not price. The docs root (docs.llama.fi, same host, fetched 2026-08-20) states the mission as producing \"inclusive, non-biased, and community driven statistics for the decentralised finance industry\", organised metric-first — TVL, fees and revenue, DEX and perp volume, yields, stablecoins, bridges — where \"each metric has its own open-source adapter repository where anyone can contribute\". That is protocol-and-pool accounting with an auditable adapter per metric, not the raw/decoded/curated chain data plus entity attribution this pool grades. Note for re-checkers: defillama.com itself returned HTTP 403 to a non-browser fetch on 2026-08-20, which is why the citation is the docs host.","source":"https://docs.llama.fi/pro-api","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/defillama/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama ships a user-authored query surface over raw or decoded chain data with entity labelling, rather than protocol-level metric adapters — or this site moves it out of DeFi Dashboards.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Flipside Crypto","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":null,"reason":"The brand has no analytics product left to price. Re-verified 2026-08-20 by direct HTTP probe: flipsidecrypto.com returns HTTP 301 to flipsidecrypto.xyz, which itself returns HTTP 301 to https://edisyl.com/; flipsidecrypto.xyz/pricing, flipsidecrypto.xyz/dashboards, data.flipsidecrypto.xyz and docs.flipsidecrypto.xyz all return HTTP 301 to that same edisyl.com homepage. There is therefore no reachable Flipside pricing page, docs page or product page for a buyer to read — which forecloses three of this pool's four criteria outright. What survives at the destination is an enterprise AI company selling a semantic layer, with products named Stratum, Forge and Lattice under the headline \"Your data isn't broken. Your AI just doesn't know what it means.\" It references the blockchain work only in the past tense and only as provenance: \"Built ingestion across 20+ blockchains. 700M+ entities scored. Foundational patent granted.\", \"700M+ entities scored and disambiguated across 20+ chains.\", \"The entity-resolution and scoring techniques built for blockchain underpin the semantic intelligence layer we deploy across enterprise data environments today.\" and \"Most AI companies were built in the last eighteen months. Edisyl was built over eight years on blockchain — the most unstructured, high-velocity, pseudonymous data environment that exists.\" Corporate continuity is stated on the same page, in a patent listing (US10706472B1) whose assignee reads \"Flipside Crypto Inc (edisyl)\". No SQL workbench, dashboard or blockchain-analytics plan is offered for sale anywhere on it. One caveat a re-checker should know: app.flipsidecrypto.com does not redirect — it returns HTTP 403 behind a Cloudflare challenge page, so its contents cannot be inspected either way; nothing priced or documented is reachable through it.","source":"https://edisyl.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/flipside-crypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"flipsidecrypto.xyz stops redirecting and serves a Flipside analytics product with its own pricing page again, or edisyl.com lists a blockchain-analytics SKU a reader can buy.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"IntoTheBlock","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Retired by its own vendor, which says so in one sentence. Re-verified 2026-08-20: www.intotheblock.com returns HTTP 301 to sentora.com, and app.intotheblock.com — the analytics application itself, not just the marketing site — returns HTTP 301 to https://sentora.com/analytics-research. That destination page is headed \"The platform you knew as IntoTheBlock Analytics has evolved.\" and states verbatim: \"After six groundbreaking years delivering blockchain data to traders, developers, and institutions, we've sunset the legacy web app, widgets, and API to relaunch as Sentora Research—a completely free, research-first solution for decoding decentralized finance.\" It carries FAQ entries titled \"Is IntoTheBlock shutting down?\", \"Can I still use the old widgets or API?\" and \"Is Sentora Research really free?\". The successor is not a substitute on these axes: Sentora Research is free, so there is no price, no overage rate and no free-tier cliff to grade; and sentora.com itself describes \"Institutional-grade intelligence for capital deployment across DeFi, covering yield strategies, risk, and cover in one platform\" behind a \"Contact Us\" call to action with no published price — an institutional DeFi allocation platform rather than an analyst research seat.","source":"https://sentora.com/analytics-research","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/intotheblock/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Sentora removes the sunset notice and republishes an IntoTheBlock-style analytics platform with a documented API and a subscription price a reader can buy.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI)","category":"onchain_analytics","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, not refused — under Sentiment Analytics. Verified in this repo: Sentiment Analytics, id 'santiment', name 'Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI)', where it scores 10/10 on source and asset coverage. The placement is a judgement call and is worth stating plainly rather than letting the absence read as an oversight, because a reader who expects Santiment here is not wrong about the product: its own academy (HTTP 200, fetched 2026-08-20) describes it as \"Behavioral analytics for the crypto market\" built on co-equal families of \"on-chain, social and development\" indicators, accessed through Sanbase, its \"crypto analytics & behavior platform\", and SanAPI. It sits next door because the axis that separates it from its real competitors is the one Sentiment Analytics grades and this pool does not: named text sources with per-source scale, latency and history start date, and documented bot or spam filtering. On this pool's axes it would be graded as a precomputed metric feed with no user-authored query layer over raw or decoded chain data, which would understate the product rather than describe it.","source":"https://academy.santiment.net/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onchain_analytics/santiment-sanbase-sanapi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Santiment ships a user-authored query surface over raw or decoded chain data, or this site moves Santiment out of Sentiment Analytics.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"bitso / ripio / busha / luno / valr / mudrex (regional venue apps)","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"Venue shape, not rail shape: local exchanges with fiat deposit belong to the exchange/simple_buy siblings, which already ask the venue questions (simple_buy allInCost/withdrawal/access/trust). Ranking them here would re-rank sibling axes on the siblings' pools — the overlap rule's residue case.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/bitso-ripio-busha-luno-valr-mudrex-regional-venue-apps/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these sells a rail an integrator embeds, separate from its venue app.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"cashramp (Accrue)","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"Wrong shape: 'a peer-to-peer agent network' — the buyer's counterparty is an agent, not the platform-as-rail; belongs to the p2p_exchanges sibling. Its own copy also self-contradicts on fees ('No fees!' header beside 'we charge users a fee, and share a decent piece of it with you') — it would fail quote_honesty_and_settlement before shape even entered.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/cashramp-accrue/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Cashramp sells through the platform as the rail rather than through an agent network, with consistent fee terms.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Changelly","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"Wrong product shape: a non-custodial crypto-to-crypto instant-swap aggregator whose fiat routes are resold third-party onramps. It is not the rail — its cost and licence answers are its suppliers', and the rails it rides are already in the pool.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/changelly/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Changelly runs its own fiat rail, holding the licence and setting the price rather than reselling a supplier's.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kotani Pay","category":"onramp","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Kotani Pay's developer documentation, which one of its scores rests on, did not load on 10 November 2026 and its older address returns a not-found page. Until it is read, Kotani Pay is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://docs.kotanipay.com/reference/onrampcontroller_onramp","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"onramp/kotani-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kotani Pay's documentation loads again: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Latamex","category":"onramp","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead purchase path, positively evidenced by two independent 2026-08-18 loads: /fees and /en/fees 404, buy.latamex.com fails to connect, and the homepage now presents blockchain dev-services agency copy ('Diseñamos y desarrollamos soluciones blockchain...') with only a contact form. Liveness of the onramp product cannot be established positively; the 2026-08 rebuild already removed it from Onramps.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/latamex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Latamex's fee page loads and buy.latamex.com connects to a live purchase flow.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Manteca","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"Live 2026-08-18 (manteca.dev HTTP 200) but a B2B developer surface with demo-gated pricing and no public numeric schedule found. The lens rejects evidence behind 'request a demo'. Revisit if a schedule is published — Argentina/PIX coverage would otherwise fit.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/manteca/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Manteca publishes a numeric fee schedule a reader can load without a demo.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"MoonPay","category":"onramp","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"MoonPay's terms of use say \"you will not use an anonymizing proxy, or any other automatic devices, spider or manual processes to copy or monitor our websites without our prior written permission\", so MoonPay's pricing disclosure, terms, licence and help pages are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, MoonPay is not ranked here as an on-ramp and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.moonpay.com/legal/terms_of_use_europe","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"onramp/moonpay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MoonPay's pricing disclosure, licences page, its help pages and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Onramper","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"An aggregator OF the pool's own rails; ranking it against its suppliers on cost and licence axes double-counts — its licence answer is whichever underlying onramp wins the route. A residue of the category, not a member.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/onramper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Onramper becomes a rail with its own licence and pricing, rather than an aggregator of the rails ranked here.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ramp Network","category":"onramp","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Ramp's terms of service, which count its website among its services, say users won't \"reverse engineer, copy, modify, data scrape, automate or re-sell any part of the Services\", so Ramp's fee and verification help pages, its terms and its licence page are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Ramp Network is not ranked here as an on-ramp and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://rampnetwork.com/terms-of-service","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"onramp/ramp-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ramp's fee and verification help pages, its licences page and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Sardine","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"Its own pricingSourceUrl (https://docs.payments.sardine.ai/overview/pricing, loaded 2026-08-17) now describes generic ACH/card/local-rail payment pricing with ZERO crypto content — positive evidence the consumer crypto onramp was quietly retired. The live catalog record is no longer supported by its own source; record in `unresolved` as a catalog correction, not just an exclusion.","source":"https://docs.payments.sardine.ai/overview/pricing","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/sardine/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Sardine's own pricing page describes a consumer crypto onramp again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Simplex","category":"onramp","kind":null,"reason":"Displaced on evidence quality with the pool capped at 9: post-Nuvei it is sold as embedded card acquiring inside exchange checkouts — no self-serve integrator surface, no published consumer fee schedule located on its own surfaces, and the legacy record carries only unnumbered licence type-labels. The buyer this category serves never selects it directly. Readmit if the rebuild locates a primary numeric schedule and an entity-matched register entry.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/simplex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Simplex publishes a self-serve integrator surface and a consumer fee schedule on its own pages.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TransFi","category":"onramp","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Pricing sits behind a demo request (a 'Speak to an expert' pattern across its product pages), and its regulatory page is a wall of PCI, ISO and SOC 2 badges naming no regulator; an audit is not a licence. Its '100+ markets' Ramp product aggregates local payment rails at a breadth that cannot be checked from primary sources. It would be reconsidered if a public numeric fee schedule and a named regulator appeared.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/transfi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TransFi publishes pricing without a demo request and names its regulator.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Unlimit Crypto","category":"onramp","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"The pricing page Unlimit Crypto's record rests on now forwards to the Stable.com home page, which showed no prices when read on 10 November 2026, so its on-ramp fees could not be read on its own pages. Until they are, Unlimit Crypto is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.crypto.unlimit.com/pricing/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"onramp/unlimit-crypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Unlimit Crypto publishes its on-ramp fees on a page that loads: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Yellow Card","category":"onramp","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Not ranked, although its own licences page (read 2026-08-18) is this segment's best, naming the entity and licence number in about 12 jurisdictions. Its consumer purchase path no longer exists (checked 2026-08-18): the retail app permanently closed 2026-01-01 (announced 2025-10-29, withdrawal deadline 2025-12-31; the closure help article itself now 404s); the widget host yc-widget.yellowcard.io has NO DNS record; yellowcard.io/products lists only 'API Suite' and 'Treasury Portal' — no widget product; and every retail-era help article (fees, tier limits, widget, deposit methods) returns 404. The homepage is now B2B ('The Infrastructure for Modern Money Movement'). The pivot was orderly — two months' notice, a stated withdrawal deadline, no stranded-funds reports located — which counts in its favour, but a rail with no consumer purchase path cannot be ranked in this category. It may belong in Crypto Stablecoin Settlement.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"onramp/yellowcard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Yellow Card reopens a consumer purchase path.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Api3","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 9 (score 68) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Api3.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/api3/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Binance Oracle","category":"oracles","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"An exchange-operated feed service rather than an independent oracle network — Binance ran it for BNB Chain and opBNB — and it is being wound down under its own brand. On 6 May 2026 Binance Oracle began a 90-day handover to Atlas, \"a blockchain oracle infrastructure provider backed by CoinMarketCap,\" with the warning that \"projects that do not finalize engagement and migration arrangements within the 90-day window may face service interruption, data unavailability, or delayed updates.\" That window closed in early August 2026. A brand whose feeds now sit with a different operator cannot be scored on forward reliability.","source":"https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2026/05/06/oracle-migration-atlas-binance-services/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/binance-oracle/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Binance resumes operating oracle feeds under its own brand, or Atlas is assessed on its own record — published feed addresses, node set and incident history — in which case rank Atlas, not Binance.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Chainlink","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 9 (score 61) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Chainlink.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/chainlink/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Chronicle Protocol","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 9 (score 59) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Chronicle Protocol.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/chronicle-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"DIA","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 9 (score 71) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on DIA.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/dia/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Flare (FTSO)","category":"oracles","kind":null,"reason":"Chain-enshrined infrastructure, not a portable feed you can buy. Flare's developer docs describe the FTSO as \"an enshrined oracle that provides decentralized data feeds to the Flare network,\" with \"Block-latency feeds in FTSOv2 [that] are free to use onchain.\" You consume it by deploying your contract on Flare; the documentation describes no delivery to Ethereum, Solana or an L2, so it is not substitutable for anything in this pool.","source":"https://dev.flare.network/ftso/overview","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/flare-ftso/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Flare publishes FTSO feed addresses readable by contracts deployed on chains outside its own network.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hyperliquid oracle","category":"oracles","kind":null,"reason":"An internal component of one exchange's clearinghouse, not a service other protocols procure. Hyperliquid's docs state \"The validators are responsible for publishing spot oracle prices for each perp asset every 3 seconds,\" computed as \"the weighted median of Binance, OKX, Bybit, Kraken, Kucoin, Gate IO, MEXC, and Hyperliquid spot mid prices,\" and \"The final oracle price used by the clearinghouse is the weighted median of each validator's submitted oracle prices.\" It exists to margin Hyperliquid's own book — funding, mark price and liquidations; the docs describe no offering to external protocols.","source":"https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/hypercore/oracle","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/hyperliquid-oracle/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hyperliquid documents its oracle as a supported product for third-party protocols — named consumer contracts, coverage list and a stated reliability commitment — rather than a HyperCore clearinghouse internal.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kaiko","category":"oracles","kind":null,"reason":"An institutional off-chain market-data vendor, and it says so itself: the site sells \"Market data feeds for front and mid-office operations, business intelligence, and risk management,\" describes its on-chain arm as \"Institutional-grade centralized oracle services,\" and offers a Data On-Ramp to \"Distribute offchain data products onchain, retaining access control and IP.\" Self-described centralized, access-controlled distribution to enterprise clients is the opposite of the permissionless multi-publisher networks ranked here.","source":"https://www.kaiko.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/kaiko/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kaiko operates a permissionless oracle with a published, independently verifiable node/publisher set and feed addresses readable without a licence agreement.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pyth Network","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #1 of 9 (score 83) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Pyth Network.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/pyth-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"RedStone","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 9 (score 61) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on RedStone.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/redstone/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Stork","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #9 of 9 (score 45) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Stork.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/stork/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Supra","category":"oracles","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #8 of 9 (score 49) until 5 November 2026. Oracles are scored on four criteria; stress-tested (20% of the score) is an independently measured integration count, and the method reads it from DefiLlama, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74) while it asks DefiLlama for written permission to republish its data. The scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) read the other criteria from each oracle’s own pages but could not date this score for any oracle, so the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Supra.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/supra/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names an independent, non-paused source for the integration count (a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read the stress-tested score and rank oracles again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Switchboard","category":"oracles","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Switchboard is winding down: its own homepage reads \"Switchboard is winding down.\" and \"The Switchboard site has now been deactivated.\" (read 2026-11-03), and its docs and on-demand hosts no longer resolve. Ranked #7 of 9 (score 51) until 5 November 2026; it leaves the table with no live network to compare.","source":"https://switchboard.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"oracles/switchboard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Switchboard announces its network is running again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"UMA","category":"oracles","kind":null,"reason":"A different class of oracle, not a competitor on the axes this pool scores. UMA's docs describe \"an optimistic oracle that resolves wide-ranging requests for information in a scalable and reliable way,\" where \"Proposals are considered pending for a challenge period during which anyone can dispute the proposal,\" and disputes are settled by a \"Schelling point mechanism where UMA stakers resolve disputes in return for staking rewards.\" That is challenge-window resolution of one-off claims, not the continuous per-block price feed a lending market or perps venue reads; the page documents no continuous feed product.","source":"https://docs.uma.xyz/protocol-overview/how-does-umas-oracle-work","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/uma/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"UMA ships a continuously-updating price-feed product under its own brand with published feed addresses and a sub-minute update cadence, independent of the challenge-window mechanism.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Umbrella Network","category":"oracles","kind":null,"reason":"Dormant. Every repository in the umbrella-network GitHub organisation shows a last update of 3 August 2025 or earlier — including pegasus, the validator node backend, at 22 March 2025, and pegasus-feeds, the validator config, at 3 August 2025 — meaning the node software behind the feeds has gone untouched for more than a year as of 2026-08-20. Reliability and incident scores computed on an unmaintained feed network would be fiction.","source":"https://github.com/umbrella-network","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/umbrella-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The umbrella-network org resumes commits to pegasus and pegasus-feeds and Umbrella publishes current mainnet feed addresses and update cadence.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Uniswap TWAP oracle","category":"oracles","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Not a product a reader can open or procure — it is a side effect of a DEX pool, with no vendor, no support path and no reliability commitment. Uniswap's own docs state \"All Uniswap v3 pools can serve as oracles, offering access to historical price and liquidity data,\" and that \"Uniswap v4 does not include built-in oracle functionality.\" There is nothing here to compare on cadence, publisher set or incident record.","source":"https://developers.uniswap.org/llms.mdx/docs/protocols/v3/concepts/price-oracles","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"oracles/uniswap-twap-oracle/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Uniswap Labs ships a supported, branded oracle product with published feed addresses, update cadence and a stated reliability commitment, rather than leaving TWAP as a pool primitive.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Binance Convert","category":"otc_desks","kind":null,"reason":"excluded on the category definition even though Binance itself routes sub-minimum OTC enquiries to it: \"For trade sizes less than 200,000 USD, you may get a live quote on Binance Convert or trade via the Convert API with no minimum size\" (www.binance.info/en/support/faq/detail/557f95eaf8fb4460aed0a891d42a1425). Convert is a retail quote surface, not a desk filling a block off the public book, and its pricing surface differs from the OTC desk's.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"otc_desks/binance-convert/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Binance Convert offers block-size OTC execution with published terms, rather than routing sub-minimum enquiries.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Galaxy Digital (Galaxy Global Markets)","category":"otc_desks","kind":null,"reason":"excluded after reading its Global Markets trading page in full on 2026-08-06, because there is nothing on it to score. Galaxy publishes no minimum ticket, no fee, no commission, no spread, no settlement mechanic, no settlement timing, no prefunding rule and no client-asset language on any trading page fetched. What it publishes instead is superlative: \"Access to the best risk transfer pricing in the market via our block and electronic OTC desk\", \"World-class Pricing Trade at competitive prices through Galaxy's world-class network of exchanges and market makers\", and \"Our desk of seasoned traders facilitate block risk transfer in a risk managed way with minimal market impact\" (www.galaxy.com/trading). The only checkable facts on the page are in the footer: \"Security products and services are offered by Galaxy Digital Partners LLC and Galaxy Securities, LLC, members of FINRA and SIPC\" and \"Certain money transmission services are provided by GalaxyOne Prime LLC (NMLS ID: 1988685)\" — both of which describe securities and money-transmission businesses, not the crypto OTC desk. Scoring Galaxy would have meant deriving four numbers almost entirely from absence, and naming the absence here is more honest than dressing it as three zeros and a footnote. This is an exclusion for lack of scoreable primary evidence, not a judgement on the desk.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-06","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"otc_desks/galaxy-digital-galaxy-global-markets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Galaxy publishes a minimum ticket, fees, spread or settlement terms on its trading pages.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kraken OTC Desk","category":"otc_desks","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Kraken's general terms (section 9) bar the use of \"any web scraping, web harvesting, or data extraction methods\" and of \"any bots, robots, parsers, spiders, scripts\" on its services and content, so Kraken's OTC desk page and terms are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, the Kraken OTC Desk is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.kraken.com/legal/global-terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"otc_desks/kraken-otc-desk/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken's OTC desk page and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bluechip","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Free nonprofit with no seat price — fails the category's defining purchase; out of pool. Its A+ to D grades with /methodology resolving 302→404 (verified by a judging model run on 2026-08-17) remain citable as criterion 2's free bottom-band anchor without pool membership.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/bluechip/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bluechip sells a research seat at a published price.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CertiK Skynet","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Not research a reader pays for. CertiK is ranked in Crypto Smart-contract Audits, whose record says a Skynet Score is not an audit result (CertiK calls it 'a security intelligence signal, not a guarantee') and that Skynet Boost is sold separately.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/certik-skynet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CertiK sells a research seat a reader pays for, separate from Skynet's project-facing scores.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Galaxy Research","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Free sell-side client-acquisition distribution — open dated archive, no price served anywhere (verified 2026-08-17). No reader pays a seat; the open archive is an artifact of a sales channel, not a subscription product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/galaxy-research/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Galaxy Research sells a seat a reader pays for.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Glassnode Insights","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A free written layer that sells a data product: Glassnode is ranked in On-chain Analytics, and what a reader buys from it is data, not judgment.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/glassnode-insights/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Glassnode sells written research as a paid seat, separate from the data product ranked in On-chain Analytics.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Into The Cryptoverse","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Probed 2026-08-18: product is risk-indicator dashboards, charts, and weekly videos — a data/video terminal, not a written-judgment seat; /plans and /premium 404'd 2026-08-17 with no server-side price. Instrument mismatch plus unpriced.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/into-the-cryptoverse/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Into The Cryptoverse sells a written-research seat at a price its own pages serve.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kaiko Research","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Free distribution marketing a data business — no seat sold; kaiko is ranked in market_data_apis. Overlap rule: this category would add no question the sibling does not answer.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/kaiko-research/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kaiko sells a research seat a reader pays for, separate from the data business ranked in Market-data APIs.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Messari (research seats)","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Self-serve Lite/Pro 'permanently retired', 'Enterprise is now the only Messari plan available', June 15 2026 cutoff. Enters the category page as the central market fact — the retired incumbent that explains why the buyer is shopping — and stays ranked in onchain_analytics on analytics axes.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/messari-research-seats/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Messari reopens a self-serve research seat at a published price.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Reflexivity Research","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Loaded 2026-08-18: 'Join over 50,000 subscribers for free', no seat price anywhere, alongside an OTC Desk and a distribution partnership program — conflicted-payer free sell-side distribution, the payer-side cut in its purest form. No purchase exists to rank.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/reflexivity-research/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Reflexivity Research sells a seat at a published price.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"The Block Research / The Block Pro","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Sales-gated institutional notes: /research shows dated report titles pre-auth (probed 2026-08-18) but no self-serve price anywhere; purchase runs through go.theblock.co/pro-demo-request and /research/subscribe 404s. Its 'IN COLLABORATION WITH Binance / AVA Labs' sponsored-research banners are criterion-1 page-prose evidence, not a rankable seat.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/the-block-research-the-block-pro/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The Block publishes a self-serve price for its research seats.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Token Metrics","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"tokenmetrics.com 403'd browser-UA curl (301 www→apex, then 403) AND WebFetch on 2026-08-18 — the third consecutive day of failed probes (2026-08-17, 2026-08-18 x2). Coinalyze precedent: unloadable evidence is unscorable. The biggest absent retail brand; standing order to re-probe from a real browser every pass and admit on first successful load with dated quotes.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/token-metrics/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"tokenmetrics.com loads for a reader, so its pricing can be read.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TokenInsight","category":"paid_research_seats","kind":null,"reason":"Project-paid ratings revenue puts it on the wrong side of the payer cut (the Skynet pattern), and tokeninsight.com/en/rating was bot-walled 403 on 2026-08-17 and 2026-08-18 — excluded on both identity and evidence.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"paid_research_seats/tokeninsight/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TokenInsight stops taking project-paid ratings revenue and its rating pages load for a reader.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Alchemy Pay","category":"payment_gateway","kind":null,"reason":"Verified by fetching https://alchemypay.readme.io/docs/alchemy-pay-crypto-payment (HTTP 200, 2026-08-20) and matching each quote in the response, and by fetching the marketing page to confirm it renders nothing. Alchemy Pay is a two-sided business and ChainChoice scored only the ramp side: the onramp membership was confirmed in the repository's own artefacts (public/data/evidence/onramp.json carries an 'alchemy-pay' evidence block; Onramps discusses it as part of the 16-provider union) — CAVEAT, the live page at https://chainchoice.io/best/onramp currently renders only the earlier incumbent set and does not yet show Alchemy Pay, so the placement is real in the catalogue but not visible to a reader today. On the ramp side the verdict was already unflattering: deep local-rail coverage (UPI, PIX, SPEI, African mobile money) and published numeric KYC tiers, but no public fee schedule and a licence story whose numbered registers belong to entities that are not the regional buyer's counterparty. The merchant-acceptance leg does exist and is documented — the developer docs describe a product that 'provide aggregated cryptocurrency payment services and a cryptocurrency settlement system', supporting 'Crypto:USDT / USDC / ETH / BTC / PCI' over 'Network: TRX, BSC, ETH, SOL, ARB', crediting merchants to either a 'USDT Account' or a 'Fiat Account', with a choice of real-time 'S0 Settlement' ('settle the payment to the withdrawable account in real-time… Refunds are not allowed for this settlement method') or batched 'D+X Settlement'. It is excluded here for the same reason the ramp scored badly on price: https://alchemypay.org/crypto-payment-acceptance/ returned HTTP 200 on 2026-08-20 as a 1,690-byte JavaScript shell — an empty
and the document title 'Alchemy Pay - Bridging the Fiat and Crypto Global Economies' — with no merchant discount rate, no settlement-delay figure and no contracting entity readable from a vendor surface. A gateway that will not put a rate or a counterparty in public cannot be ranked against providers here that publish both.","source":"https://alchemypay.readme.io/docs/alchemy-pay-crypto-payment","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/alchemy-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Alchemy Pay publishes a merchant discount rate and names the contracting entity for its acceptance product on a server-rendered page of its own, at which point it becomes rankable here rather than only under Crypto Onramps.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Binance Pay","category":"payment_gateway","kind":null,"reason":"Verified by retrieving https://developers.binance.com/docs/binance-pay/introduction (2026-08-20; the host returns a 202 challenge to plain curl, so it was fetched through the fetch tool, which returned the introduction verbatim). Excluded as a closed-loop balance transfer rather than a settled merchant payment, and Binance is already scored elsewhere — 'Binance' in Crypto Exchanges (confirmed on the live page https://chainchoice.io/best/exchange, HTTP 200) and 'Binance P2P' in P2P Exchanges. Binance's own developer documentation opens: 'Binance Pay is a contactless, borderless and secure cryptocurrency payment technology designed by Binance. Binance Pay allows Binance customer to pay and get paid in crypto from your friends and family worldwide.' The scoping word is Binance's own: the payer is a 'Binance customer'. Both flows the page documents — Merchant Acquiring (C2B) by QR and Transfer (C2C) — run inside the Binance app, and the page nowhere contemplates a payer without a Binance account. The merchant side carries the mirror-image requirement — Binance's merchant FAQ states 'You will need to have a Binance Entity Account before registering as a Merchant.', reached through Entity Verification requiring 'A copy of the original Certificate of Incorporation and Business Registration', an official report covering directors and beneficial ownership, 'Valid passport copies/IDs of the directors, UBOs, and traders' and 'A Sanctions Questionnaire' (https://www.binance.com/en/support/faq/detail/7a49148912214defa816f14ee51b9f9f, 2026-08-20). Acceptance is therefore conditional on the customer already banking with the same venue as the merchant, the structural opposite of every provider ranked here: BTCPay Server, OpenNode, CoinGate and NOWPayments all settle a payment that originates from an arbitrary self-custody wallet. Note the contrast this pool's own evidence supplies — PayPal's docs explicitly advertise buyers paying 'without needing to create a PayPal account'; Binance's do not, and cannot.","source":"https://developers.binance.com/docs/binance-pay/introduction","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/binance-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Binance's own Binance Pay documentation stops scoping the payer as a 'Binance customer' and documents acceptance of payments settled from external self-custody wallets by payers who hold no Binance account.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"PayPal (Pay with Crypto)","category":"payment_gateway","kind":null,"reason":"Verified by fetching https://developer.paypal.com/docs/checkout/apm/crypto/ (HTTP 200, 2026-08-20) and matching each quoted string in the response body; the help article and the newsroom release were fetched and string-matched the same way. Excluded on merchant eligibility, and PayPal is already scored elsewhere on the site — 'PayPal Crypto' in Simple Buy Apps and 'PayPal USD (PYUSD)' in Stablecoins (the latter confirmed on the live page at https://chainchoice.io/best/stablecoins, HTTP 200). PayPal's developer documentation states the constraint twice in its Eligibility block: 'Verified US PayPal Business required.' and 'Available only to US merchants.' The same page confirms the asymmetry that makes this a US product with a global audience rather than a global gateway — 'Global buyers can pay with about 100 supported cryptocurrencies (for example, BTC, ETH, PYUSD) using their preferred third-party wallet without needing to create a PayPal account' — and fixes settlement to fiat: 'Receive settlements in your preferred local currency based on your PayPal Business account's primary currency setting.' PayPal's consumer help article narrows it further inside the US: 'If you are a merchant in New York, you cannot currently use Pay with Crypto.' (https://www.paypal.com/us/cshelp/article/what-is-pay-with-crypto-help1236, HTTP 200, 2026-08-20). This pool is read by merchants in the EU, UK, LATAM and APAC, and for all of them the answer today is that PayPal will not sell them this. Note also that the widely-cited 0.99% rate is not open-ended: footnote 4 of PayPal's launch release reads '0.99% represents Pay with Crypto transaction rate until July 31, 2026', a date now passed, so any comparison quoting 0.99% as current is stale.","source":"https://developer.paypal.com/docs/checkout/apm/crypto/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/paypal-pay-with-crypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"developer.paypal.com's Eligibility block stops reading 'Available only to US merchants' and 'Verified US PayPal Business required', i.e. PayPal opens Pay with Crypto to merchants incorporated outside the United States.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Radom","category":"payment_gateway","kind":null,"reason":"Verified by fetching https://www.radom.com/ (HTTP 200, 2026-08-20) and string-matching every quote below in the response; the apex https://radom.com/ was separately confirmed to return HTTP 404. The subscriptions placement was verified in ChainChoice's own catalogue source rather than only in prose: Crypto Subscriptions carries the entry id 'radom_subscriptions', name 'Radom Subscriptions' — note that https://chainchoice.io/best/subscriptions currently serves the client-rendered shell to a raw fetch, so the placement is real but not readable in that page's static HTML today. Radom is ranked, but there. This is a taxonomy split a reader cannot see, and Radom's absence here would otherwise read as an oversight, because Radom genuinely does sell a one-off gateway. Its homepage leads with 'Your business, powered by crypto.' and 'Accept crypto payments, subscriptions, invoices, payment links, and payouts from one platform. Settle in crypto or fiat, track balances, and launch with APIs or no-code tools.', and the product grid lists 'Crypto Checkout — Prebuilt crypto payment checkout page, optimized for maximum conversion.' alongside 'Crypto Billing — Streamline your subscription payments in crypto.', 'Crypto Invoicing', 'Crypto Payments', 'Crypto Crowdfunding' and 'Crypto Presales'. ChainChoice scored the recurring-billing leg because that is where Radom is differentiated — its EVM subscription contract pulls a plain ERC-20 allowance on a schedule and it publishes the most complete renewal-failure state machine in that pool. The one-off Crypto Checkout has not been put through this pool's evidence pass, and listing an unscored product beside ten researched ones would be worse than pointing at where the research actually is.","source":"https://www.radom.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/radom/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ChainChoice completes a payment_gateway evidence pass on Radom's one-off Crypto Checkout and admits it to this pool, or Radom retires Crypto Billing so the subscriptions placement no longer holds.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Shopify (USDC on Base)","category":"payment_gateway","kind":null,"reason":"Shopify's own announcement says in terms that this is not a gateway: https://www.shopify.com/news/stablecoins-on-shopify (read 2026-08-20) reads 'Now in early access, merchants can accept USDC from customers globally on the Base network, using their existing payment and order fulfillment flows—no integrations or new gateways required.' The selling point is the absence of the product this pool compares. It is single-asset: USDC and nothing else (on five networks, Base, Ethereum, Optimism, Polygon and Arbitrum, per Shopify's help centre at https://help.shopify.com/en/manual/payments/shopify-payments/usdc-payments, read 2026-08-20), against the multi-asset coverage every ranked provider here offers. It is platform-locked: the help centre states 'You must have Shopify Payments activated on your store.' and 'The account representative of your Shopify Payments account must have a residential address in a USDC-eligible region.', with the US region qualified as 'United States, excluding Alaska, New York, or Texas' — so it is unavailable to any merchant on WooCommerce, Magento, a bespoke checkout, or a Shopify store outside a supported Shopify Payments region. And settlement defaults to fiat: 'Merchants will receive their local currency by default, with no foreign transaction or exchange fees—or they can choose to claim USDC directly into their own wallet.' Ranking Shopify against BTCPay Server or CoinGate would compare a storefront feature with the products a storefront buys — including on Shopify itself, where several ranked providers ship apps.","source":"https://www.shopify.com/news/stablecoins-on-shopify","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/shopify-usdc-on-base/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Shopify sells stablecoin acceptance to merchants who are not on Shopify Payments, or the accepted-asset set broadens past USDC into a general multi-asset acceptance product a non-Shopify merchant can contract for.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Stripe (stablecoin payments)","category":"payment_gateway","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Verified against a fresh fetch of https://docs.stripe.com/payments/stablecoin-payments?locale=en-GB (HTTP 200, 2026-08-20); every string below was matched byte-for-byte in the response. Ranked, but under Crypto Onramps, where it appears as 'Stripe Crypto Onramp' — confirmed by fetching https://chainchoice.io/best/onramp (HTTP 200), which carries that exact name. Merchant-side crypto acceptance is excluded here on scope, not on quality. Stripe's own documentation describes a payment METHOD inside Stripe's existing checkout rather than a gateway a merchant can buy: it states 'Stablecoin payments settle in your Stripe balance in your local currency', so no crypto ever reaches a merchant-controlled wallet, and 'Refunds are always returned as stablecoins to the customer's original wallet', so the refund leg is asymmetric with the settlement leg. The asset list is stablecoin-only — 'USDC (Tempo, Ethereum, Solana, Polygon and Base networks)', 'USDP (Ethereum and Solana, US-only)', 'USDG (Ethereum, US-only)' — which means no BTC, no ETH, no Lightning, the assets that define half this pool. There is a hard ceiling, 'Customer transaction limits are US$10,000 per transaction', and under the Disputes heading dispute support is listed as 'No'. On eligibility the page's Business locations tab draws the line explicitly: 'Customers can use stablecoins as payment globally, but only businesses in supported countries and regions can accept stablecoin payments.' The generally-available country list that follows contains exactly one entry, US; a private-preview callout then adds 'Stablecoin payments are available in private preview to businesses operating in the European Union, Hong Kong, Mexico and Switzerland', attached to a 32-code list (AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GI GR HK HR HU IE IT LI LT LU LV MT MX NL NO PL PT RO SE SI). GB appears nowhere on either list. A merchant who is not already a Stripe merchant in a listed country cannot buy this at any price, which is the test this pool applies.","source":"https://docs.stripe.com/payments/stablecoin-payments?locale=en-GB","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/stripe-stablecoin-payments/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Stripe's stablecoin-payments docs stop saying payments 'settle in your Stripe balance in your local currency' and offer settlement to a merchant-controlled wallet, or the accepted-token list adds non-stablecoin assets, or acceptance becomes generally available outside the US rather than private preview.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Utrust","category":"payment_gateway","kind":null,"reason":"Every status code and quote here was re-run on 2026-08-20 and reproduced exactly. A retired brand, not a live competitor — and the successor is a different shape of company. Traced with curl: https://utrust.com/ returns HTTP 301 to https://xmoney.com/, which returns HTTP 301 to https://www.xmoney.com/, which returns HTTP 200. The www host, https://www.utrust.com/, returns HTTP 522 and serves nothing. The word 'Utrust' does not appear anywhere in the xMoney homepage, checked by searching the full 158,647-byte response in every casing — the brand has been erased rather than cross-referenced, which is why merchants still searching 'Utrust' find no explanation. The live product is xMoney, and it fails this pool's scope test the same way Stripe does: crypto acceptance is one method inside a card-acquiring and EMI suite, listed on the homepage as 'Accept crypto payments (BTC, ETH, EGLD, SOL, SUI & more) and regional methods with ease.' next to Card Payments, Recurring Billing, Card Issuing, Invoices, Payment Links and its own EURXM/USDXM/RONXM stablecoins. There is also a licence-perimeter problem a merchant should price: the trust badge a buyer sees first is 'Licensed Electronic Money Institution, regulated by the Bank of Romania. MiCA compliant.', but the same page's footer assigns the crypto leg to two entirely different entities — 'Crypto services are provided by Cifralfabeto Unipessoal Lda, a registered Virtual Assets Service Provider (VASP) in Portugal and by Modernityparty OÜ, a licensed VASP in Estonia.' The Romanian EMI authorisation therefore does not govern the product this pool compares, and the two VASPs are named without registration numbers. Not scored, and not silently dropped.","source":"https://utrust.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"payment_gateway/utrust/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"utrust.com stops resolving to xmoney.com or a separately contractable Utrust-branded gateway returns; or xMoney publishes registration numbers for the two VASP entities and brings crypto acceptance under the Romanian EMI authorisation, at which point xMoney becomes a ranking candidate here under its own name.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Binance Futures","category":"perp_dex","kind":null,"reason":"It is a centralised custodial venue, not a DEX. CoinGecko's exchange record for Binance Futures carries the label \"Centralized Exchange\" directly above the Binance logo, across 773 listed trading pairs including its Perpetuals Markets table — margin sits in a Binance-operated futures account and Binance runs the matching and liquidation engine, which is the opposite of what this category ranks. Size is not the issue; custody is.","source":"https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/binance_futures","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_dex/binance-futures/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Binance launches a self-custodial on-chain perpetuals venue under its own brand where traders hold their own margin, at which point that product — not binance.com/futures — becomes rankable here.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BitMEX","category":"perp_dex","kind":null,"reason":"BitMEX invented the perpetual swap, but it is centralised and it is closing. HDR Global Trading Limited, \"owner and operator of BitMEX\", announced closure of the exchange effective \"23 September 2026 at UTC 04:00:00\"; risk limits from 26 August 2026 at 04:00 UTC stop users placing new positions, leaving accounts reduce-only, and after 23 September the platform holds assets for withdrawal only. Ranking a venue that force-closes positions within the month would be actively harmful.","source":"https://www.bitmex.com/blog/bitmex-closure","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_dex/bitmex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"HDR Global reverses the 23 September 2026 closure and reopens trading, or the BitMEX brand relaunches as a non-custodial on-chain venue.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kwenta","category":"perp_dex","kind":null,"reason":"Kwenta is no longer an independent venue — it is the Synthetix front end, and we already rank Synthetix Perps. Synthetix announced the reacquisition on 7 November 2024: \"By combining protocols, Synthetix will regain ownership and operation of its dedicated front end,\" with \"1 KWENTA will convert to 17 SNX.\" Listing Kwenta separately would double-count one perps engine under two names.","source":"https://blog.synthetix.io/synthetix-acquires-ecosystem-leading-perps-platform-kwenta/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_dex/kwenta/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kwenta is spun back out as an independent venue with its own matching engine and liquidity rather than operating as a Synthetix-owned front end.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"MUX Protocol","category":"perp_dex","kind":null,"reason":"MUX is a router, not a venue. Its own docs describe the \"MUX Perpetual Aggregator\" as software that \"automatically routes traders' positions to one or multiple liquidity sources based on market, available liquidity, position size, composite trading cost and user preferences,\" and walk through a $10,000 position whose underlying execution lands on GMX V1. Its execution quality is the execution quality of venues already in this pool, so ranking it against them compares a thing to itself.","source":"https://docs.mux.network/protocol/overview/leveraged-trading-aggregator","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_dex/mux-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MUX becomes the primary venue for its own order flow — its own matching engine and native liquidity rather than routing to third-party perp DEXs — or we open a separate aggregators sub-category.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Perpetual Protocol","category":"perp_dex","kind":null,"reason":"The brand that named the category no longer runs one. perp.com today serves an entirely different product — a \"V1 testnet — early access open\" app offering \"leveraged, no-expiry long and short positions on real-world event probabilities\" at up to 5x, gated behind a \"Get early access\" application — with no live perpetual-futures DEX behind it. A gated testnet product in an adjacent category (prediction markets) is not rankable here on either count.","source":"https://perp.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_dex/perpetual-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"perp.com exits testnet and opens a live, publicly tradable non-custodial perpetual-futures venue under the Perp brand.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Zeta Markets","category":"perp_dex","kind":null,"reason":"Zeta's own documentation states plainly: \"Zeta Markets has ceased operating as of May 2025.\" The same docs redirect readers to Bullet, \"a new network purpose-build for trading which extends many of things that Zeta achieved\" — a successor network with its own documentation, not a live Zeta perps venue a reader can open today.","source":"https://docs.zeta.markets/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_dex/zeta-markets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Perpetuals trading opens to the public on Bullet as a product with its own front end, which we would then assess on its own merits under whatever name it ships.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Aark","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead. api.llama.fi/protocols read 2026-08-17 returns Aark Digital at TVL $0 (app.aark.digital). A reachable docs domain over a zero-TVL protocol is not liveness, and there is nothing to route a depositor to.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/aark/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Aark's TVL recovers and it serves a depositor vault.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Drift Insurance Fund / DLP under the Drift name","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":null,"reason":"Not excluded as a product — relisted as Velocity, and the DLP half dropped. On 2026-08-17 docs.drift.trade 307-redirects to docs.velocity.exchange, so listing under the Drift name would route a buyer into a redirect while crediting a stale marketing shell as liveness. 'DLP' is not a documented product on either docs domain, and the AMM liquidity-provider role is a market-making position in a DEX, not the venue's loss-absorbing book (DefiLlama 2026-08-17: Drift Trade $642,436, Drift AMM null). Only the Insurance Fund is scored.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/drift-insurance-fund-dlp-under-the-drift-name/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Velocity documents a house vault a depositor can enter under its new name.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Elixir","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead, and the wrong shape even at full size. api.llama.fi/protocols read 2026-08-17 returns Elixir at TVL $13.415442777793983, classified 'Yield', not Derivatives. It was a cross-venue market-making liquidity network rather than one venue's book, so neither of the two orphaned questions — what did one trader take from THIS vault, and who can force-settle THIS market — has an answer for it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/elixir/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Elixir runs one venue's house book a depositor can enter.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Extended (ex-X10) Community Vault","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded in the vendor's own words, which is a better basis than either brief gave. docs.extended.exchange/extended-resources/vault.md, read 2026-08-17, states the vault 'will act as the primary lender within Extended's native money market' and, on the liquidation side, that 'the vault is designed to operate with low leverage... it is highly unlikely to become a counterparty to ADL. Therefore, the vault is not intended to serve as a last-resort backstop for failed liquidations.' Correcting one brief: the vault DOES process liquidations and publishes per-liquidation loss caps, so it is not purely a lender — but it explicitly disclaims the loss-absorbing role this category scores. Large and live (Extended Perps $124,761,506) and correctly a yield_vaults product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/extended-ex-x10-community-vault/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Extended's vault stops acting as the money-market lender and takes the other side of traders as a house book.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"GMX GLP (V1)","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":null,"reason":"Retired by the vendor, and listing it beside GM would double-count one issuer. docs.gmx.io/docs/archived/liquidity-v1.md, read 2026-08-17: 'Since July 2025, GLP has been phased out and no longer provides liquidity as V1 trading is disabled, so buying GLP tokens is no longer possible.' Corroborated by api.llama.fi/protocols the same day: GMX V1 Perps $2,776,973 against GMX V2 Perps $183,554,756. Stranded TVL is not an operating product. GLP's history, including the July-2025 v1 re-entrancy already recorded in this repo's perp_dex entry, belongs in the GM entry's prose.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/gmx-glp-v1/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"GMX re-enables V1 trading so GLP can be bought again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hyperliquid user vaults (as distinct from HLP)","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":null,"reason":"Same shape as Paradex VTFs and Lighter Public Pools: a copy-trading wrapper where a named leader trades and takes 10% of profits, already priced in this repo's Yield Vaults HLP pricing note. The buyer question becomes who the manager is and whether they can change — yield_vaults `mandate` — not how much the house lost or who can force-settle to save it. Only a venue's own protocol vault belongs here.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/hyperliquid-user-vaults-as-distinct-from-hlp/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hyperliquid's user vaults become house books rather than leader-run copy trading.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Lighter","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":null,"reason":"No depositor-side house vault establishable from primary sources. Its documented public product is operator-run copy trading — Public Pools combine participant funds under a designated operator — and the LLP is an internal insurance buffer with no deposit page and no depositor risk disclosure. Lighter is real and large as a VENUE (DefiLlama 2026-08-17: Lighter Bridge $530,634,434) and is correctly ranked as one in perp_dex. Revisit only if a documented public LP vault ships.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/lighter/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lighter publishes a depositor-facing house vault with a deposit page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Paradex VTFs","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":null,"reason":"Wrong product shape: a curator marketplace, not a house book. Paradex's vault product is the user-created VTF, and its own tutorial walks a user through creating one at app.paradex.trade/vaults; the handful of protocol-labelled vaults are named managed strategies plus a liquidator vault. A depositor there is backing a named manager, which is the question yield_vaults `mandate` already asks. api.llama.fi/protocols 2026-08-17 reports Paradex Perps, Options and Spot all null TVL, with only Paradex Bridge at $17,239,955.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/paradex-vtfs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Paradex offers a protocol-run house vault that takes the other side of traders.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Synthetix sUSD debt pool","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"No live perp house-vault line to score. Synthetix Perps is already ranked as a venue in the perp_dex block of the catalog, and the staker-as-counterparty debt-pool model it was known for is no longer the product on offer. api.llama.fi/protocols 2026-08-17: Synthetix V3 $0.42, Synthetix V4 $872,427, Synthetix v1+v2 $1,789. Including it would re-rank a perp_dex member on perp_dex-adjacent facts.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/synthetix-susd-debt-pool/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Synthetix restores a staker-as-counterparty debt pool depositors can enter.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Vertex VLP","category":"perp_house_vaults","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Dead on dated primary evidence. api.llama.fi/protocols read 2026-08-17 returns Vertex Perps at TVL $49.97923252412185 with an empty url field, and Vertex AMM null. This repo's own structuredProducts.ts methodology spec independently recorded $49.98 on 2026-08-07, so this is not a single bad read. There is no vault a depositor could enter.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"perp_house_vaults/vertex-vlp/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Vertex's protocol TVL recovers and it serves a live depositor vault.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Accointing","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Shut down 2023 after the Blockpit acquisition; users force-migrated. Casualty evidence for tier_truth_and_continuity, not a pool member.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/accointing/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Accointing relaunches as a product separate from Blockpit.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"AssetDash / Exirio / Getquin","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":null,"reason":"Product shape or liveness not positively established at scope time, or multi-asset net-worth apps where crypto exchange-API connection is peripheral — outside the blockchain-only scope. Revisit only if research needs a ninth member.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/assetdash-exirio-getquin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Research needs a ninth member, or one of them establishes a crypto exchange-API product positively and with a date.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Blockfolio","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":null,"reason":"Became the FTX app and died with FTX (Nov 2022) — the category's defining casualty. Continuity evidence, nothing live to rank.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/blockfolio/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A product under the Blockfolio name relaunches, which would be assessed as a new tracker.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CoinGecko","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":null,"reason":"Portfolio is manual watchlist entry taking neither API keys nor addresses — every trust axis in this category is moot. Keep as a fact mention for manual trackers, not a ranked member.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/coingecko/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CoinGecko's portfolio accepts exchange API keys or wallet addresses.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinigy","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":null,"reason":"Trade-scoped API terminal for active traders — requesting trade scope IS the product; wrong buyer, and it would score 0 on the lead criterion by design, which is a category mismatch, not a finding.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/coinigy/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinigy offers a read-only portfolio connection that does not request trade scope.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CoinMarketCap","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Contested keep RESOLVED against inclusion, on the vendor's own pages (2026-08-18): the portfolio does support wallet-paste and account sync — but with exactly ONE exchange, its parent Binance ('You can also sync your CoinMarketCap Portfolio with your Binance Account', coinmarketcap.com/events/portfolio/). A buyer connecting Kraken/Coinbase/OKX API keys gets nothing, so the category's defining connection fails: mismatch, not finding — the mirror of the Coinigy exclusion. Its wallet-paste shape belongs to defi_dashboards. The completed research draft (incl. the 20 Jun 2025 front-end compromise that drained connected wallets) is retained at research-pending/.drafts-portfolio_tracking/coinmarketcap.json as evidence, not a ranked record.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-18","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/coinmarketcap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CoinMarketCap's portfolio syncs with exchanges beyond its parent Binance.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"DeBank","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":null,"reason":"Same as Zerion: address-paste onchain reader with no CEX API flow; live in defi_dashboards as debank-dash. Duplicate under the overlap rule.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/debank/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DeBank adds exchange API-key connections, the connection this category is defined by.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Koinly / Blockpit / CoinLedger","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":null,"reason":"Tax products ranked in tax_software; their tracker surfaces are lead generation for the tax report. Scoring them here would rebuild tax_software's coverage axis.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/koinly-blockpit-coinledger/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Koinly, Blockpit or CoinLedger sells a portfolio tracker as a product of its own, separate from the tax report.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Nansen","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Research/analytics product already ranked in defi_dashboards AND onchain_analytics; no exchange-API aggregation, wrong buyer. Note: the trading_tools scope pass found its live $199/$799 pricing is retired and the source URL 404s — that correction belongs to the sibling pools that keep it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/nansen/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nansen adds exchange API aggregation for a portfolio holder.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zapper","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD — site, mobile apps and API switched off 3 August 2026 (verified in the defi_dashboards pool header). The live portfolio_tracking record still says 'Still strongest where wallet-first tracking… matter' — remove the record; this is the pass's headline catalog correction.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/zapper/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zapper's site, apps or API come back online.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zerion","category":"portfolio_tracking","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Wallet-address-only tracker, takes no exchange API keys — the category's defining connection does not apply; already ranked in defi_dashboards as zerion-dash on verified 2026-08 evidence. Keeping it would re-rank the same product on the sibling's axes: residue.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"portfolio_tracking/zerion/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zerion adds exchange API-key connections, the connection this category is defined by.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"ADI PredictStreet","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 8 (score 54) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on ADI PredictStreet.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/adi-predictstreet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Augur","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"No trading interface a reader can open. This is a reboot, not a shutdown — the protocol is under active development and I am explicitly not claiming it is dead. augur.net today is an informational site: headline \"THE FRONTIER OF PREDICTION MARKETS\" under \"Augur is Rebooting,\" with an August 1 REP migration deadline and 2026 blog posts (dated 08/05/2026, 07/21/2026, 07/02/2026) on the Moon Fork and Augur Lituus. Checked 2026-08-20: the page's only links are informational (FAQ, whitepapers, terms, privacy, blog, team/reboot sections), token links (Etherscan, Kraken, Uniswap, GeckoTerminal) and social/partner links (GitHub, X, Discord, Telegram, The Dark Florist, Lituus Foundation) — there is no \"Launch App,\" \"Trade\" or \"Markets\" CTA anywhere on the page; https://www.augur.net/app returns HTTP 404; app.augur.net and v2.augur.net fail to resolve (curl exits 6, no HTTP status); and the old augur.casino frontend domain now serves only a 114-byte JavaScript redirect to a GoDaddy \"forsale\" parked page for the domain. A protocol mid-fork with no front-end has no fees, no book and no live dispute record to compare.","source":"https://www.augur.net/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/augur/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Augur or Augur Lituus publishes a working trading frontend — a live \"Launch App\"/markets URL reachable from augur.net where a user can take a position on an outcome.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Azuro","category":"prediction_markets","kind":null,"reason":"Infrastructure others build venues on, not a venue a reader opens. Azuro's own documentation describes it as \"a decentralized protocol for prediction markets, providing tooling & infrastructure for EVM chains to host powerful apps and betting interfaces,\" and offers connected apps \"the full might of our singleton LP's liquidity with robust oracle feeds.\" There is no first-party Azuro market list, fee schedule or resolution surface for a reader to trade against — those are set by whichever third-party frontend is built on top, so the four things this pool scores belong to the app, not to Azuro. Docs fetched 2026-08-20.","source":"https://gem.azuro.org/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/azuro/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Azuro ships a first-party consumer trading frontend under its own brand, with its own published market list, fee schedule and resolution rules, rather than only powering third-party apps.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Drift BET (Drift Protocol, now Velocity)","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Ranked, but under Perpetual DEXs — and its prediction-market documentation is currently gone. B.E.T was never a standalone venue: Drift's own docs (archived snapshot 2025-11-19) placed \"Prediction Markets\" as a section of the Drift Protocol v2 documentation alongside Perpetuals Trading and Spot Margin, stating \"B.E.T is the first capital-efficient prediction market on Solana,\" that \"Each Drift prediction market supports a binary outcome (YES or NO) represented by price 1 or 0,\" and that \"These markets support all the advanced order types (limit, stop, etc) available in other markets\" — the same collateral, margin and orderbook engine we already score as Drift Protocol in perp_dex. Drift then rebranded to Velocity: checked 2026-08-20, app.drift.trade returns HTTP 308 to velocity.exchange, docs.drift.trade returns HTTP 307 to docs.velocity.exchange, and the migration guide describes Velocity as a fork of Drift Protocol v2 deployed under its own program ID with a reduced feature set focused on perpetual futures and borrow-lend, explicitly listing prediction markets among the deprecated/removed features. The old prediction-markets doc path 307s to docs.velocity.exchange/prediction-markets/prediction-markets-intro, which returns HTTP 404, and Velocity's docs sitemap (122 URLs) contains no prediction-market page at all; drift.trade's own site now surfaces only trading, earn and institutional products, with no prediction markets mentioned.","source":"https://docs.velocity.exchange/developers/migrate-from-drift","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/drift-bet-drift-protocol-now-velocity/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Velocity republishes live prediction-market documentation and tradable BET markets under its own brand — a docs page that returns 200 plus markets a user can enter — at which point it stops being a pointer to Perpetual DEXs and becomes a candidate for this pool on its own.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"ForecastEx","category":"prediction_markets","kind":null,"reason":"A CFTC-registered exchange with no self-serve retail access. Its own site states \"ForecastEx is the CFTC registered Designated Contract Market (DCM) and Derivative Clearing Organization (DCO) for Forecast Contracts,\" and routes every prospective trader outward: \"Trade Forecast Contracts with one of the qualified Futures Commission Merchants (FCM),\" behind a \"Find a Broker\" link to /members/fcms (HTTP 200, checked 2026-08-20). A reader cannot open a ForecastEx account and place a trade; they open a brokerage account elsewhere — Robinhood's support article confirms ForecastEX, LLC is one of the DCMs its FCM routes to. Every access, funding and cost dimension this pool scores is therefore set by the intermediating broker, not by ForecastEx. Both pages fetched 2026-08-20.","source":"https://forecastex.com/about","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/forecastex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ForecastEx opens direct retail onboarding — a sign-up / open-account flow on forecastex.com that lets a user fund and trade Forecast Contracts without an FCM intermediary.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kalshi","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #1 of 8 (score 83) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Kalshi.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/kalshi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Limitless Exchange","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 8 (score 64) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Limitless Exchange.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/limitless-exchange/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Manifold Markets","category":"prediction_markets","kind":null,"reason":"Play money — nothing this pool scores is measurable there. Manifold's own about page (fetched 2026-08-20) describes it as \"the world's largest social prediction market\" and invites a visitor to \"create your own play-money\" market. Total trading cost, liquidity where you trade and settlement friction are undefined when positions are not funded in cash. An earlier draft of this refusal quoted a sentence about Mana not being convertible that is NOT on that page; it was removed rather than re-sourced.","source":"https://manifold.markets/about","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/manifold-markets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The about page drops the line \"It cannot be converted to cash\" — i.e. Manifold restores a real-money market where users deposit and withdraw cash or stablecoins against their positions.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Myriad Markets","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 8 (score 56) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Myriad Markets.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/myriad-markets/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Opinion (Opinion Labs)","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #8 of 8 (score 53) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Opinion (Opinion Labs).","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/opinion-opinion-labs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Polymarket","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 8 (score 81) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Polymarket.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/polymarket/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Predict.fun","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 8 (score 69) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on Predict.fun.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/predict-fun/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Robinhood (Prediction Markets Hub / Robinhood Derivatives)","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Not an exchange — an order-routing broker, and one of the venues it routes to is already ranked here. Robinhood's own support article states verbatim: \"Event contracts are offered by Robinhood Derivatives, LLC through either KalshiEX LLC, ForecastEX, LLC or Rothera Exchange and Clearing LLC,\" and describes RHD as \"Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, a registered futures commission merchant with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and Member of National Futures Association (NFA).\" Robinhood's launch announcement adds: \"The prediction markets hub–and corresponding contracts–will initially be available across the US through KalshiEX LLC, a CFTC regulated exchange,\" and \"As a registered futures commission merchant, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, does not make markets in any futures or event contracts\" (robinhood.com/us/en/newsroom/robinhood-prediction-markets-hub/). Robinhood therefore publishes no rulebook of its own for the criterion this pool weights first: a contract bought on Robinhood is resolved by whichever DCM it was routed to, and KalshiEX LLC is the exchange we already rank as Kalshi. Both pages fetched 2026-08-20.","source":"https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/event-contracts-overview/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/robinhood-prediction-markets-hub-robinhood-derivatives/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The support article stops naming third-party DCMs as the venues Robinhood's contracts are offered through — i.e. Robinhood Derivatives begins listing and resolving event contracts under a rulebook of its own — or Rothera Exchange and Clearing LLC is opened as a directly accessible retail venue publishing its own resolution and dispute process, at which point Rothera becomes a pool candidate in its own right.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SX Bet","category":"prediction_markets","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 8 (score 65) until 5 November 2026. Prediction markets are scored on four criteria; liquidity (24% of the score) was measured on DefiLlama’s volume series, which this site paused on 27 October 2026 (owner decision O-74), so the scheduled re-read (3 November 2026) could not date it for any market, and the whole category is not ranked right now rather than ranked on a September measure past the 45-day promise. This is not a judgement on SX Bet.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/sx-bet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The owner names a non-paused liquidity source (for example each market’s own order-book or volume data, a method change), or the O-74 pause on DefiLlama ends: re-read liquidity and rank prediction markets again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Truth Predict (Trump Media × Crypto.com)","category":"prediction_markets","kind":null,"reason":"Announced, then abandoned before launch — there is no product to rank. Crypto.com's own announcement of 28 October 2025 said \"The event contracts will be offered via CDNA,\" described CDNA as \"a CFTC-registered exchange and clearinghouse,\" and said \"The integration will begin Beta testing live on Truth Social in the near future, followed by a full launch in the United States\" — no launch date was ever given. The joint Crypto.com / Trump Media press release filed with the SEC as Exhibit 99.1, headlined \"Crypto.com and Trump Media and Technology Group to Realign Integration Partnership to Marketing Agreement\" and dated August 7, 2026, states verbatim: \"Rather than develop a direct prediction market integration on Truth Social, the companies will pivot to a marketing agreement under which Crypto.com's prediction markets experiences will be marketed to the Truth Social user base.\" Note what this does and does not establish: it kills the Truth Predict venue, not Crypto.com's own CDNA prediction markets, which remain live at crypto.com/us/prediction. SEC filing (retrieved with a declared user agent; WebFetch alone gets a 403 from sec.gov) and the Crypto.com announcement both fetched 2026-08-20.","source":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1849635/000143774926026595/ex_1000265.htm","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/truth-predict-trump-media-crypto-com/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Trump Media or Crypto.com publishes a live Truth Predict trading surface on Truth Social — a working product page or launch announcement reversing the 7 Aug 2026 pivot from integration to marketing-only.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"UMA","category":"prediction_markets","kind":null,"reason":"The resolution layer, not a market — and ranking it would double-count a criterion we already score on a ranked venue. UMA's own docs open with \"An optimistic oracle (OO) that can record any verifiable truth or data onto a blockchain\" and list OOv2's primary use cases as \"Prediction markets, sports betting applications, and insurance protocols.\" It is the settlement mechanism of a venue already in this pool: Polymarket's own help centre states \"Markets are resolved by the UMA Optimistic Oracle, a smart-contract based optimistic oracle\" (help.polymarket.com/en/articles/13364518-how-are-prediction-markets-resolved). A user cannot take a position on an outcome at UMA; UMA's dispute record is already what drives Polymarket's resolution-integrity score. Both pages fetched 2026-08-20.","source":"https://docs.uma.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"prediction_markets/uma/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"UMA launches a first-party prediction market venue where a user takes positions on outcomes directly, rather than only supplying the oracle that other venues resolve against.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Aztec Network","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 8 (score 54) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Aztec Network. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/aztec-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"eXch (exch.cx)","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The best-known no-KYC swap service of its era and a concrete instance of this category's class exclusion for custodial mixers, which names \"ChipMixer, Sinbad, Blender.io and successors\". Germany's Federal Criminal Police recorded the takedown in its own press release dated \"07. Mai 2025\", read 2026-08-20: the Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Frankfurt am Main (ZIT) and the BKA \"haben am 30.04.2025 die in Deutschland befindliche Serverinfrastruktur des Krypto-Swapping-Dienstes „eXch\" beschlagnahmt und die Plattform abgeschaltet.\" The release records that \"Der Dienst war unter der Domain eXch.cx sowie verschiedenen weiteren Internetadressen erreichbar.\", that \"Neben umfangreichen Daten von über acht Terabyte wurden die Kryptowerte Bitcoin, Ether, Litecoin und Dash in Höhe von derzeit umgerechnet ca. 34 Millionen Euro sichergestellt.\", and that \"Gegen die Betreiber von eXch besteht daher der Verdacht der gewerbsmäßigen Geldwäsche sowie des Betreibens einer kriminellen Handelsplattform im Internet.\" Consistent with that, exch.cx does not serve today: on 2026-08-20 the connection timed out after 15 seconds on both HTTPS and HTTP (curl exit 28, no HTTP status returned). Two independent grounds for refusal, either sufficient: the service was custodial — you surrendered your coins to an operator to get privacy, inverting the custody principle this category holds — and it no longer exists.","source":"https://www.bka.de/DE/Presse/Listenseite_Pressemitteilungen/2025/Presse2025/250509_exch_abgeschaltet.html","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/exch-exch-cx/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nothing revives this one: even a lawful, identifiable operator relaunching an eXch-branded swap service would still be custodial and still excluded on that ground alone. The class exclusion would only need revisiting if this category were widened to cover custodial privacy services, which would require changing the methodology spec rather than this entry.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fhenix (CoFHE)","category":"privacy_tools","kind":null,"reason":"The nearest peer to a tool we DO rank — Zama Confidential Tokens — and therefore the absence most likely to be read as bias rather than as a rule. It is excluded on availability, not on quality. Read on 2026-08-20, fhenix.io carries the badge \"TESTNET IS LIVE\", states \"CoFHE is currently live on public testnets — Ethereum Sepolia, Arbitrum Sepolia, and Base Sepolia — with mainnet planned to follow.\", repeats in its FAQ that \"CoFHE is live on Arbitrum Sepolia, Ethereum Sepolia, and Base Sepolia.\", and its email capture reads \"Subscribe for early access to updates, launches, and insights before mainnet.\" Sepolia balances are not an anonymity set: no real value at risk, no adversary paying to deanonymise it, and no 30-day deposit count comparable to the mainnet figures this category's tie-break runs on. That is squarely inside the shipped exclusion for \"Protocols with no live public mainnet deployment and no independently reproducible onchain measurement\" — Fhenix fails both halves of that conjunction, unlike a live-but-unmeasurable tool. One caution: on 2026-08-20 third-party write-ups asserted mainnet activity while simultaneously reporting a target of late 2026, i.e. the confusion is live. The vendor's own site is the authority used here, it says mainnet is still \"planned to follow\", and a vendor understating its own launch status is not a failure mode that occurs — so the testnet framing is the conservative and correct read.","source":"https://www.fhenix.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/fhenix-cofhe/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fhenix's own site or docs announce CoFHE live on a public mainnet with encrypted ERC-20 balances users hold real value in, and an outside party can count those confidential holders or size the value behind them.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Flashbots Protect","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under MEV Protection: without this note its absence here would read as an oversight rather than a placement. Private-RPC endpoints are routinely sold as transaction privacy, and Flashbots' own documentation, fetched 2026-08-20, makes the claim in those terms: \"Transactions are sent to a private Flashbots mempool where they will be hidden from frontrunning and sandwich bots.\", adding that \"Flashbots Protect RPC does not track user information (i.e. IP, location, etc.).\" and \"No user information is stored or logged.\" That is real, and it is a different good. It is PRE-INCLUSION privacy: your transaction is hidden from searchers for the seconds before it lands, and the moment the block is published the sender, recipient and amount are as public as any other transaction. This category measures POST-INCLUSION privacy — what stays hidden after settlement, permanently. Scoring Flashbots Protect on this category's cryptographic-guarantee or anonymity-set criteria would produce a near-zero that misrepresents a well-built product, so it is scored where its actual criteria live. MEV Protection ranks it alongside MEV Blocker, MetaMask Smart Transactions and bloXroute Protect RPC.","source":"https://docs.flashbots.net/flashbots-protect/overview","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/flashbots-protect/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Flashbots ships a product that hides transaction contents after inclusion — a shielded balance, encrypted mempool with permanent confidentiality, or confidential settlement — at which point it becomes rankable here as well; or the MEV Protection category is retired, at which point the pointer is stale.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fluidkey","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #8 of 8 (score 54) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Fluidkey. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/fluidkey/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Light Protocol","category":"privacy_tools","kind":null,"reason":"Remembered across Solana as the shielded-transfer protocol, and refused because that is no longer the product — a reader searching for it here would otherwise read the gap as an oversight. Both of the company's own surfaces, read 2026-08-20, describe compression infrastructure, not a shielded pool. lightprotocol.com leads with \"Scale on Solana with ZK Compression\" and describes itself as \"Infrastructure and APIs that reduce the cost of scaling payments, privacy, and PDAs on Solana.\" The primary repository's description is \"The ZK Compression Protocol for Solana\" and its README opens \"Developers can use Light to create rent-free tokens and PDAs on Solana without sacrificing performance, security and composability\" — rent exemption, not sender/recipient/amount concealment. Be precise about the one word that cuts the other way: the homepage does still list \"privacy\" among the things ZK Compression makes cheaper to scale. That is a developer primitive others may build privacy on, not a pool a holder can deposit into. Neither surface offers a deposit flow, a shielded balance, or a set any third party can size, so there is nothing to score on the 25% live-anonymity-set criterion or the 30% cryptographic-guarantee criterion as this category defines them. The repo is actively maintained (2,348 commits, audits listed from OtterSec, Neodyme, Zellic and Reilabs) — this is a live company shipping a different product, not an abandonment claim.","source":"https://lightprotocol.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/light-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Light ships a user-facing shielded-transfer or private-balance product on Solana mainnet — a deposit flow plus a shielded set that DefiLlama, L2BEAT or an equivalent third party can size — rather than compression primitives for developers.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Nocturne (Nocturne Labs — onchain private accounts)","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"A $6M-seed Ethereum privacy protocol whose marketing site is still selling a product its own repository says is being turned off — and this refusal exists mainly to stop a reader trusting that site. Fetched 2026-08-20: nocturne.xyz serves HTTP 200, reads \"v1 is live on mainnet!\" with a \"Launch app →\" button pointing at app.nocturne.xyz, and carries no shutdown notice anywhere on the page. That app is unreachable: app.nocturne.xyz resolves via CNAME to interface-nocturne.netlify.app but the TLS handshake fails with curl error 60, \"SSL: no alternative certificate subject name matches target host name 'app.nocturne.xyz'\" — no browser will load it. The team's own ejector repository states the position the homepage does not: \"Since Nocturne is shutting down, all off-chain infrastructure run by Nocturne Labs, including the frontend, will eventually be turned off.\" The repository exists specifically so users can withdraw by calling the contract directly once the interface is gone, and the GitHub org shows its companion nocturne-ejector-ui last updated July 2024. This is the category's own thesis in miniature — our spec already warns that sunsetting a shielded pool does not retire its risk and records Nocturne with $60,921 still stranded — but a wound-down protocol whose exit path is a CLI cannot be scored on live anonymity set or audit currency against tools taking deposits today.","source":"https://github.com/nocturne-xyz/nocturne-ejector-cli","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/nocturne-nocturne-labs-onchain-private-accounts/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nocturne Labs or a successor restores a working frontend (app.nocturne.xyz serving a valid certificate and a usable deposit flow) AND the ejector repository's shutdown language is removed, indicating the protocol is accepting new deposits rather than only permitting exits.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Nym / NymVPN","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Marketed at crypto users for crypto transactions, and out of scope because it protects a different layer than every criterion here measures. On 2026-08-20 nym.com's headline was \"The anonymous decentralized VPN\" and Mixnet Mode is described as \"Complete metadata protection using a 5-hop connection through Nym's Noise Generating Mixnet. For crypto transactions, messaging, and more.\" What that buys is concealment of the network path between you and an RPC node: your IP, timing and traffic patterns. It does not change what the chain records. Broadcast a transfer through a 5-hop mixnet and the sender address, recipient address, amount and resulting balance are still public forever — which is exactly what this category's cryptographic-guarantee criterion (30%) asks a tool to hide and what its anonymity-set criterion (25%) sizes. Nym is complementary to every tool in this pool — several are strictly better used behind it — but it is not substitutable for any of them, and a table placing it beside Railgun would tell a reader they are alternatives when using one does nothing the other does. The page carries no mention of shielded pools, token privacy or hiding onchain transactions.","source":"https://nym.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/nym-nymvpn/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nym ships an onchain product that conceals sender, recipient, amount or balance at the ledger level — a shielded pool, stealth-address scheme, or confidential-token standard with a set a third party can size — rather than network-layer metadata protection only.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Penumbra","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 8 (score 59) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Penumbra. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/penumbra/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Privacy Pools (0xbow)","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #3 of 8 (score 66) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Privacy Pools (0xbow). We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/privacy-pools-0xbow/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Railgun","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #1 of 8 (score 80) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Railgun. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/railgun/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Samourai Wallet (Whirlpool and Ricochet)","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The most-asked-for Bitcoin privacy name in this category, and the service no longer exists in any form a buyer can use. IRS Criminal Investigation's release records co-founders Keonne Rodriguez and William Lonergan Hill sentenced, the page stating that Judge Denise L. Cote sentenced \"Rodriguez on November 6, 2025, and Hill on November 19, 2025\". The same page names both products: \"Whirlpool,\" which \"coordinated batches of Bitcoin exchanges between groups of Samourai users. Through this process, the original source of particular Bitcoin holdings became obscured\", and \"Ricochet,\" which \"enabled users to introduce additional and unnecessary intermediate transactions—known as \"hops\"—between sending and receiving addresses\". It records \"More than 80,000 Bitcoin—valued at over $2 billion at the time—passed through these services\", that they \"facilitated over $237 million in illegal transactions\", and fees \"estimated to have a total value of more than $6 million\". Note what the IRS page does NOT say, because the distinction is load-bearing: it does not address seizure of infrastructure and states no shutdown date. That half is this site's own network check, run 2026-08-20: samouraiwallet.com returns SERVFAIL from both Google Public DNS (8.8.8.8) and Cloudflare (1.1.1.1) for A and NS queries, i.e. no address and no working delegation; samourai.io resolves to 147.45.169.11 but the TLS handshake fails with curl error 60, \"SSL: no alternative certificate subject name matches target host name 'samourai.io'\", and forcing the connection with -k returns HTTP 200 serving an n8n automation login page, not any Samourai product. No live Samourai frontend was reachable on any host. This is the strongest form of hard exclusion: not a judgement about privacy quality, but the absence of an operating counterparty. Ranking it would teach a reader to send bitcoin into a coordinator whose operators are in federal prison.","source":"https://www.irs.gov/compliance/criminal-investigation/founders-of-samourai-wallet-cryptocurrency-mixing-service-sentenced-to-five-and-four-years-in-prison","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/samourai-wallet-whirlpool-and-ricochet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A Whirlpool or Ricochet coordinator is operating again under an identifiable entity — concretely, samouraiwallet.com (or a successor named by that entity) resolves and serves a working coinjoin product, and a third party such as DefiLlama, L2BEAT or a public coordinator status page can size its recent round volume. Sentencing being appealed or vacated does NOT revive this: the test is a live, usable coordinator, not the founders' legal status.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Tornado Cash","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 8 (score 74) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Tornado Cash. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/tornado-cash/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Umbra","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 8 (score 61) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Umbra. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/umbra/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Wasabi Wallet (zkSNACKs / WabiSabi coinjoin)","category":"privacy_tools","kind":null,"reason":"Refused while fully alive, which is the opposite of the usual reason and the reason a reader will assume is wrong. Wasabi is not dead: on 2026-08-20 wasabiwallet.io answered, advertising \"v2.8.1\" and stating \"Wasabi integrates the WabiSabi Trustless Multi-Party Transaction Protocol, a cutting-edge mechanism for collaborative transactions.\" What changed is the thing this category weights at 25%. zkSNACKs stopped running the coordinator every Wasabi user shared: the key-dates timeline in Wasabi's own FAQ lists \"The shutdown of zkSNACKs coordinator on June 1, 2024\". The homepage now instructs you to \"Find a third-party Wasabi Coordination Service Provider and start performing multi-party transactions with Wasabi today!\" — so the anonymity set is whatever crowd happens to be on whichever coordinator you pick that day, and it is fragmented across independent operators by design. That lands on the third disjunct of the shipped hard exclusion, which covers \"shielded sets no third party can size\": there is no single set for DefiLlama or L2BEAT to measure, and the tie-break this category runs on — larger LIVE anonymity set, measured by 30-day deposit count, the rule that separates 12,300 deposits from 119 — has no figure to consume. Independent coordinators and retrospective academic measurement of the coinjoin ecosystem do exist; what does not exist is a shared, currently-sized set comparable to the mainnet pools ranked here. Wasabi is unrankable in this frame, not bad — and a reader deserves that distinction stated rather than inferred from an empty row.","source":"https://wasabiwallet.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/wasabi-wallet-zksnacks-wabisabi-coinjoin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A named Wasabi coordinator publishes third-party-verifiable round data — recent coinjoin count, participant count or shielded volume that an outside party (DefiLlama, L2BEAT, or an auditable public coordinator dashboard) reproduces — giving this category a comparable 30-day figure. Equally: zkSNACKs or a successor resumes a single default coordinator that all Wasabi clients share by default.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Zama Confidential Tokens","category":"privacy_tools","kind":"source_paused_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 8 (score 58) until 6 November 2026; not ranked right now with its category, which is no judgement on Zama Confidential Tokens. We compare privacy tools on four things. One of them, how many other people use each tool (25% of the weight), is measured by others, from DefiLlama and L2BEAT, not taken from the vendors. On 27 October 2026 we stopped using both while we ask them for written permission to republish their data, so when we read every tool again on 3 November 2026 that part could not be dated for any of them. For six of the eight tools, the other three things were also read from L2BEAT's privacy pages. We will not rank on a September measure older than our 45-day limit. Until then the tools are listed A to Z.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/datasets","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-05","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-05","ledgerKey":"privacy_tools/zama-confidential-tokens/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"L2BEAT and DefiLlama give us permission to republish their data, or we count deposits onchain, from each tool's own contracts. Then we read every tool again and rank them.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Gelato Relay","category":"relayers","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 7 (score 59) until 10 November 2026. Gelato's documentation (docs.gelato.cloud), which four of its scores and its pricing rest on, has served a TLS certificate that expired on 9 October 2026. Attempt recorded: on 10 November 2026 a plain request was refused on the certificate, and at 11:40 UTC an ordinary signed-out browser opening https://docs.gelato.cloud/gasless-with-relay/additional-resources/supported-networks showed its own security error page instead of the site; a certificate warning is never clicked through. It was the fourth failed read of that address. Its scores were last read in August. Rather than rank it on a read past the 45-day promise, Gelato Relay leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed; it stays on the list to be read again. This is not a judgement on Gelato.","source":"https://docs.gelato.cloud/gasless-with-relay/additional-resources/supported-networks","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"relayers/gelato-relay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gelato's documentation is served on a valid certificate again: then re-read its four scores, its pricing and its country statement and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Kraken ETH Staking","category":"retail_staking","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Kraken's general terms bar the use of \"any web scraping, web harvesting, or data extraction methods\" and of \"any bots, robots, parsers, spiders, scripts\" on its services and content, so Kraken's staking page and its staking support article, where the commission and the exit wait are published, are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Kraken ETH Staking is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.kraken.com/legal/global-terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"retail_staking/kraken-eth-staking/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken's staking page, its staking support article and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Blast API (Bware Labs)","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Withdrawn from the market after acquisition, with the sunset notice on its own domain rather than merely an acquisition press release. blastapi.io, fetched 2026-08-20, no longer serves a product — the page is a deprecation notice reading '📢 Blast has been deprecated' and 'Blast products are no longer available, but your journey continues with Alchemy!' There is no signup, no endpoint creation and no pricing; the only calls to action are 'Get started with Alchemy', a link to Alchemy's post on acquiring Bware Labs, and a form for customers with remaining balances to receive Alchemy Credits with a 15% bonus or request a refund (credits require a Pay as you go plan). The destination is not missing from this comparison: Alchemy is ranked.","source":"https://blastapi.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/blast-api-bware-labs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"blastapi.io restores endpoint creation or signup, or Blast RPC relaunches under Alchemy as a separately purchasable product.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Blockdaemon","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Staking. chainchoice.io/best/staking scores Blockdaemon (position 7) against Kiln, Luganodes, Figment, Chorus One, Everstake and Twinstake, its entry stamped 'Verified 2026-08-17 against the provider's own published sources.' What that pool scores is the validator business: unbonding disclosure, who writes the cheque after a slashing event, governance under custody. Its node/API product is a separate purchase and is not scored in this pool, so its absence here is a taxonomy boundary and an open coverage gap, not a judgement on the product. A reader who wants Blockdaemon compared on staking terms already has it; a reader who wants it compared on RPC terms does not yet.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/best/staking","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/blockdaemon/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Blockdaemon's RPC / node API product is scored in the rpc_nodes pool, or Blockdaemon is dropped from the staking pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Figment (DataHub)","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Two checkable reasons. First, it is ranked, but under Staking — chainchoice.io/best/staking scores Figment's validator business at position 3. Second, the RPC product a reader would be looking for is not on offer: figment.io, fetched 2026-08-20, names only staking offerings — Staking App, Restaking, Staking Data, APIs, White Label Staking, Liquid Staking and Slashing Coverage — with no RPC, node or DataHub product anywhere on the page. The old DataHub host is gone with it: datahub.figment.io does not resolve in DNS (curl returns 'Could not resolve host: datahub.figment.io'; dig returns no record), checked 2026-08-20. The DataHub name is why a reader still expects Figment in an RPC comparison.","source":"https://www.figment.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/figment-datahub/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"figment.io again lists an RPC, node or DataHub product, or datahub.figment.io resolves and serves an endpoint signup.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Google Cloud Blockchain Node Engine","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Google is exiting the business on a published date, and says so in its own documentation. The migration guide, fetched 2026-08-20, states 'Blockchain Node Engine and Blockchain RPC will be shut down on December 15, 2026' and that 'Blockchain RPC endpoints will be deleted by Google for you on December 15, 2026', with existing customers instructed to delete their own legacy nodes before that date via the Cloud console. Google also names the successor: 'Google Cloud has partnered with Quicknode to serve as the recommended RPC infrastructure provider for our customers moving forward.' Ranking a service four months from deletion would hand a reader a shortlist entry they cannot build on — and the vendor Google itself points them to, QuickNode, is already ranked here. Note the contrast with the other hyperscaler: aws.amazon.com/managed-blockchain, re-checked 2026-08-20, still actively sells AMB Access and AMB Query with no deprecation notice, so Amazon is a coverage gap rather than a refusal.","source":"https://docs.cloud.google.com/blockchain-node-engine/docs/migrate-to-quicknode","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/google-cloud-blockchain-node-engine/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Google withdraws the December 15, 2026 shutdown date and keeps Blockchain Node Engine or Blockchain RPC generally available.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Grove (Grove Portal)","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":null,"reason":"The company is winding down and the endpoint is already gone. grove.city, fetched 2026-08-20, is a farewell page, not a product page: 'Grove is winding down. After nine years, this is goodbye, and a thank you for everything we built together.' It describes the Portal in the past tense — it 'settled more than a trillion requests across 60+ blockchains' across 'more than 250 open-source repositories' — and names the departing leadership (Arthur Sabintsev, Fred Teumer, Daniel Olshansky). It also records a pivot away from RPC to x402, 'the open payment protocol for the internet', for creator payments. The Portal host confirms it independently: portal.grove.city does not resolve in DNS (curl returns 'Could not resolve host: portal.grove.city', HTTP status 000, no connection established), checked 2026-08-20. There is no plan to price and no endpoint to test.","source":"https://grove.city/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/grove-grove-portal/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"grove.city sells RPC endpoints again, or portal.grove.city resolves and accepts new signups.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"LlamaNodes (LlamaRPC)","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":null,"reason":"The endpoints are dead and the domain has been taken over — the evidence is the observed status of the hosts, not a shutdown announcement, because no announcement was found and none is claimed. Checked 2026-08-20: llamanodes.com returns HTTP 200 but does not serve LlamaNodes; the page title is 'JUDIMPO : Situs Mpo Online Terpercaya dengan Data Result Slot Gacor Tercepat' and the body is an unrelated Indonesian gambling site occupying the lapsed domain. The RPC hosts fail outright — llamarpc.com returns HTTP 526 and eth.llamarpc.com returns HTTP 521, both Cloudflare origin-unreachable codes; a JSON-RPC POST of eth_blockNumber to eth.llamarpc.com returns the body 'error code: 521' rather than a block number, and polygon.llamarpc.com does not resolve at all. The name is still widely expected because eth.llamarpc.com persists in default endpoint lists, which is exactly why a reader should be told it is gone.","source":"https://llamanodes.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/llamanodes-llamarpc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"llamanodes.com serves LlamaNodes content again, or eth.llamarpc.com answers a JSON-RPC eth_blockNumber request with HTTP 200.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pocket Network (POKT)","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Infrastructure others build gateways on, not a product a reader opens. Pocket Network Foundation's own page, fetched 2026-08-20, describes the offering as 'lightly rate limited no-key-required access to over 60 chains through our public RPC portal', with costs 'covered by the Foundation, with the support of our partner foundations, and other blockchain supporters' and sustained by POKT sent to per-chain application addresses ('New $POKT will be staked every day as it is received'). The page describes no key, no paid tier and no signup — there is nothing with published limits or an SLA to score. The Foundation itself routes commercial demand away: anyone who needs 'unlimited dedicated throughput that never goes down' is told to 'Check out our partnerships.' The relay network underneath is real and large; the thing a buyer would purchase is sold by third-party gateways, and Grove — the flagship one — has wound down.","source":"https://pocket.network/support-public-rpc/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/pocket-network-pokt/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pocket Network Foundation sells a keyed, tiered RPC plan with published limits, or a named POKT gateway with self-serve signup is added under its own brand.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"The Graph","category":"rpc_nodes","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Indexers. chainchoice.io/best/indexers is a live category comparing 8 blockchain indexers, and The Graph (decentralised network / Subgraph Studio) is one of them, alongside Goldsky, Envio (HyperIndex), Ponder, SQD, SubQuery, Sentio and Ormi 0xGraph. It is excluded here on product boundary, not availability: thegraph.com, fetched 2026-08-20, sells three products — Amp ('A database built to handle blockchain data complexity'), Subgraphs ('Query data to application frontends') and Substreams ('Stream data into custom sinks'). The page offers no general-purpose JSON-RPC endpoint, so there is nothing to compare against Alchemy or QuickNode on eth_call latency, archive access or write throughput. The Graph answers questions about indexed history; this pool compares proxies to the node itself.","source":"https://chainchoice.io/best/indexers","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"rpc_nodes/the-graph/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"thegraph.com sells a general-purpose JSON-RPC endpoint product, at which point it belongs in both pools.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Coinbase recurring buy","category":"savings_plans","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Not ranked because nothing could be read, not because anything failed. On 2026-10-28 every Coinbase page tried (help.coinbase.com recurring purchases and pricing disclosures, coinbase.com/en-de recurring buys, EEA user agreement and trading rules) answered HTTP 403 with 'cf-mitigated: challenge', a Cloudflare bot check. That is a bot wall, not a login, and it was not worked around. The ranked Simple Buy row read on 2026-09-14 records that Coinbase publishes no numeric fee or spread for a simple buy, so even a readable page would leave this plan's cost unknown. Coinbase Luxembourg S.A. is on the ESMA register (CSSF, 20/06/2025), passported to DE. Re-read when the pages answer.","source":"https://help.coinbase.com/en/coinbase/trading-and-funding/buying-selling-or-converting-crypto/recurring-purchases","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-29","ledgerKey":"savings_plans/coinbase-recurring-buy/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase's recurring-buy and pricing pages answer without a bot check.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Scalable Capital","category":"savings_plans","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Its crypto savings plan buys exchange-traded products, not crypto-assets, so it is a securities plan outside this category. Scalable's own crypto page, read 2026-10-28: 'Invest in Bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptos through ETPs', 'Set up a savings plan from €1', and 'These products are bearer bonds of the issuer'; costs are '€0 for savings plan executions' plus a 'Crypto spread surcharge 0.99%' (FREE broker) or 0.69% (PRIME+), plus each ETP's own TER (CoinShares Physical Bitcoin 'TER: 0.15% p.a.'). The ESMA interim MiCA register (CASPS.csv, read 2026-10-28) lists Scalable Capital Bank GmbH for 'h. providing advice on crypto-assets' only, DE only, so no crypto-asset buy or custody service is registered either. A reader who wants an ETP plan holds an issuer's bond, with issuer risk and exchange hours, and that is a different decision from owning the coin.","source":"https://de.scalable.capital/en/crypto","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-29","ledgerKey":"savings_plans/scalable-capital/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Scalable sells crypto-assets themselves rather than ETPs, or its ESMA entry gains an exchange or execution service.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Sparkasse (Krypto – powered by Deka)","category":"savings_plans","kind":"deferred_or_not_live_yet","reason":"No crypto savings plan is offered. DekaBank's launch release of 19 October 2026 describes one-off orders only: 'Zum Start wird der Handel mit fünf gängigen Kryptowährungen ermöglicht: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP und Polygon. Die Ordergebühr beträgt 0,99 Euro je Order.' It also says each Sparkasse decides for itself whether to offer it: 'Dabei entscheidet jede Sparkasse eigenständig, ob sie „Krypto – powered by Deka“ in ihr Angebot integrieren möchte.' DekaBank's crypto customer information, read the same day, does not mention a savings plan. DekaBank is on the ESMA register (Article 60, 01/12/2025 for services a, e and j; 25/06/2026 for service c), DE only. Re-admit when a plan ships.","source":"https://www.deka.de/deka-gruppe/media--research/aktuelle-medienmitteilungen/pressearchiv/archiv2026/september/dekabank-startet-krypto-angebot-fuer-sparkassen-kundinnen-und--kunden","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-29","ledgerKey":"savings_plans/sparkasse-krypto-powered-by-deka/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Deka or a Sparkasse publishes a crypto savings plan.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"cookie.fun (Cookie DAO)","category":"sentiment_analytics","kind":"source_unavailable_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #6 of 8 (score 58) until 10 November 2026. cookie.fun, its pricing page and its terms address now redirect to pro.cookie.fun, which presents Cookie Pro, an AI research app with a paid plan; the pricing page this row was read from no longer exists, and Cookie's documentation still describes the earlier dashboards product. On 10 November 2026 its price and what stays free could not be read, and whether the product this row described is still offered as described is not established. Rather than rank it on a price last read on 7 August 2026, past the 45-day promise, cookie.fun leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on Cookie. Read that day: Cookie's Terms of Service for Cookie Analytics, dated 9 September 2026, say it \"does not provide any Services to Users who are located in a Restricted Country, or are residents of a Restricted Country\" and list 29 restricted jurisdictions, among them the United States, China, Nigeria, the Philippines, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam.","source":"https://www.cookie.fun/pricing","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"sentiment_analytics/cookie-fun-cookie-dao/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A read by hand establishes what cookie.fun offers today, its price and what stays free: then restore the row, re-scored, or retire it if the product this row described is no longer offered.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"AltLayer SQUAD","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"No longer documented as a product. AltLayer's documentation overview still lists \"SQUAD (AVS for decentralised sequencing)\" in one line, but SQUAD's own documentation page has answered 404 at three reads (24 September, 28 October and 10 November 2026), the documentation index does not list it, and AltLayer's product and updates pages (altlayer.io/raas, altlayer.io/updates), read on 10 November 2026, do not name it. With no current page describing the product there is nothing to score. Ranked #6 of 6 (score 55) until 10 November 2026.","source":"https://docs.altlayer.io/altlayer-documentation/restaked-rollups/squad-for-decentralised-sequencing","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/altlayer-squad/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"AltLayer documents SQUAD as a product again, on a page that can be read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Espresso Network","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Last read in full on 28 October 2026. On 10 November 2026 it was read again except for one item: whether its own staking front end states a country rule, which nobody has read yet. Not ranked while fewer than five shared-sequencing products remain, which is no judgement on Espresso Network.","source":"https://www.espressosys.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/espresso-network/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A fifth shared-sequencing product with public documentation can be read and scored, or Radius or AltLayer SQUAD is offered again: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Gattaca","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":null,"reason":"excluded for lack of fetchable primary evidence rather than lack of substance. Its homepage states only \"Gattaca builds and operates the infrastructure connecting producers and consumers of blockspace. Every on-chain transaction consumes blockspace. We ensure it does so efficiently\" (gattaca.com, fetched 2026-08-06) and publishes no rollup-sequencing product page, pricing, operator documentation or named customer chain that could be scored against the four criteria. A provider with no primary documentation cannot be scored honestly, so it is named here rather than guessed at.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-06","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/gattaca/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gattaca publishes primary documentation of a shared sequencing product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Karnot (Madara)","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":null,"reason":"excluded on the category definition despite being, by a distance, the most commercially legible product examined. Its homepage publishes a real price, verified in the raw HTML on 2026-08-06: a free tier for \"// DEVNET AND TESTNETS\" including \"Sequencer, Explorer, Bridge, Faucet, Dashboard\", and \"// MAINNET — $5000 / month\" adding \"Automatic upgrades, High uptime, Detailed monitoring, On call support, Customisations\". It is excluded because it does not order transactions for many rollups at once: Karnot deploys a dedicated Madara sequencer per Starknet app chain, and the upstream project now describes itself as \"Madara: Starknet Client\" with no shared-sequencing feature in its README (github.com/madara-alliance/madara, fetched 2026-08-06). Buyers should know it exists and what it costs; scoring it against cross-rollup atomicity would have flattered the pool by adding a working mainnet product that does not attempt the thing being compared.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-06","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/karnot-madara/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Karnot sells a shared sequencer, rather than a dedicated sequencer per chain.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Radius","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"No longer a shared-sequencing product on offer, by Radius's own pages. Its blog post of 27 August 2026 describes \"Our Evolution: How we evolved from block production and MEV resistance to operating solvers and building execution systems.\", and its homepage, read 10 November 2026, says \"We operate solvers and arbitrageurs.\" and names no sequencing product; its docs address opens a sign-in screen. Radius publishes no end date for the block-building network it announced in January 2025, so none is stated here. Ranked #5 of 6 (score 57) until 10 November 2026; it leaves the table with no product to re-read.","source":"https://paragraph.com/@radius/radius-featured-in-lifi-s-solver-deep-dives","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/radius/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Radius offers a shared-sequencing or block-building product again, with documentation that can be read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Rome Protocol","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five shared-sequencing products remain, which is no judgement on Rome Protocol.","source":"https://www.rome.builders/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/rome-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A fifth shared-sequencing product with public documentation can be read and scored, or Radius or AltLayer SQUAD is offered again: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Spire (Based Stack / Pylon)","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five shared-sequencing products remain, which is no judgement on Spire (Based Stack / Pylon).","source":"https://www.spire.dev/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/spire-based-stack-pylon/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A fifth shared-sequencing product with public documentation can be read and scored, or Radius or AltLayer SQUAD is offered again: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Taiko (Taiko Alethia)","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five shared-sequencing products remain, which is no judgement on Taiko (Taiko Alethia).","source":"https://taiko.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-10","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/taiko-taiko-alethia/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A fifth shared-sequencing product with public documentation can be read and scored, or Radius or AltLayer SQUAD is offered again: then all five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Taiko Gwyneth","category":"shared_sequencers","kind":null,"reason":"excluded as a separate entry because it could not be verified as a product. The documentation URL docs.taiko.xyz/taiko-gwyneth-protocol/what-is-taiko-gwyneth/ returned HTTP 404 on 2026-08-06 and the current documentation index at docs.taiko.xyz/llms.txt contains no Gwyneth page. The multi-L2 based design is real research, but there is no live product and no current vendor documentation to score, so it is recorded inside the Taiko entry as an unmet claim rather than counted as a seventh provider.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-06","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"shared_sequencers/taiko-gwyneth/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Taiko publishes Gwyneth documentation a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Celo","category":"sidechains","kind":null,"reason":"No longer an independent chain. Celo L2 mainnet activated at block height 31,056,500 on 26 March 2025, migrating the chain from a standalone L1 to an Ethereum L2 on the OP Stack. It has an L2 security model and belongs in l2_chains.","source":"https://docs.celo.org/cel2/notices/l2-migration","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"sidechains/celo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Celo returns to running as an independent chain.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Metis Andromeda","category":"sidechains","kind":null,"reason":"Not a sidechain. L2BEAT's Metis page, fetched 2026-08-07, gives its data availability as \"Onchain\", states \"All of the data required for proofs is published on chain\" and \"Transaction data is posted to Ethereum using blobs\", and lists it under the scaling projects rather than as an independent chain. It settles to Ethereum and belongs in l2_chains.","source":"https://l2beat.com/scaling/projects/metis","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"sidechains/metis-andromeda/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Metis stops posting data to Ethereum and runs as a sidechain.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"opBNB, Polygon zkEVM, Immutable zkEVM","category":"sidechains","kind":null,"reason":"Rollups and validiums that post data or proofs to Ethereum. Their security question is proof-system integrity, not bridge custody, which is what l2_chains already scores.","source":"https://l2beat.com/scaling/projects/metis","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"sidechains/opbnb-polygon-zkevm-immutable-zkevm/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them stops posting data or proofs to Ethereum.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ronin","category":"sidechains","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"It is no longer a sidechain. Ronin hard-forked from an independent sidechain to an Ethereum Layer 2 on the OP Stack on 12 May 2026. Verified on chain on 2026-08-07 rather than from press: eth_getCode against api.roninchain.com/rpc returns 2,059 bytes of code at every OP Stack predeploy address — L1Block 0x4200000000000000000000000000000000000015, L2ToL1MessagePasser ...016, GasPriceOracle ...00F, L2CrossDomainMessenger ...007 and L2StandardBridge ...010 — and L1Block.number() returns 25,705,456, tracking the Ethereum mainnet head. The same eth_getCode probe returns 0 bytes at that address on all seven sidechains ranked here, so the test discriminates. Ronin's own network-parameters page now carries a Consensus row whose value is OP Stack, and a Block finality row whose value is roughly 12 minutes to finalize on L1; those are separate table cells rather than one sentence, so they are reported here as field-and-value pairs rather than as a quotation. Its security question is now proof-system and sequencer integrity, the questions Layer-2 Blockchains scores; Ronin itself is ranked in Appchains / L3s.","source":"https://docs.roninchain.com/protocol/validators/setup/parameters/mainnet","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-07","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"sidechains/ronin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ronin reverts to an independent sidechain.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"21bitcoin","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"A dated coverage gap, published as one rather than dressed up as a defect — on the evidence available, 21bitcoin looks good. Its own site, read 2026-08-19, states a fee structure 'starting at 0.79%', says you can 'withdraw them to your own wallet at any time' and thus switch to full self-custody, and names operator and licence: FIOR Digital GmbH, 'authorized as a crypto-asset service provider under Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCAR) by the Austrian FMA'. Nothing there fails a hard rule. It is unranked because it serves Germany and Austria only and has not been researched to this pool's bar: the tiering, the spread and the ticket at which 0.79% applies are unverified, and this pool does not rank a product on its own headline. CORRECTED: the gap is the research, not the comparison set — Bitpanda and Relai are ranked and both serve DE/AT. Because that headline sits below the ranked non-custodial comparable (Relai, 1.00%, or 0.90% with a referral code, plus an unquantified spread), 21bitcoin is the first re-admission candidate the moment a DACH tranche runs.","source":"https://21bitcoin.app/en/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/21bitcoin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"21bitcoin's per-ticket rate and spread are verified from primary sources, or a DACH tranche is researched. Read 2026-08-19.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bitpanda Fusion","category":"simple_buy","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Bitpanda's retail buy surface is already ranked here, and the brand is also ranked in Crypto Neobanks and Fiat Offramps. Fusion is the same account with an order book bolted on: the recurring-trading decision this category hands to Crypto Exchanges, not the one-off purchase scored here. It is not refused on cost: Bitpanda's own Cost Transparency — Crypto-Assets v4.0.0, dated 08 July 2026, prices Fusion 'Level 1 0 ≤ Amount ≤ 100,000' at 0.25%, so a first buyer lands in Level 1 immediately, at roughly a quarter of the 0.99% Bitcoin broker fee the ranked row is scored on. Fusion is refused on scope alone, and a reader of the ranked Bitpanda row should know the same account offers a 0.25% order-book route.","source":"https://cdn.bitpanda.com/terms-and-conditions/cost-transparency-crypto-bitpanda-en-4.0.0.pdf","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/bitpanda-fusion/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"the category's scope widens to score order-book surfaces for a first purchase, or Bitpanda merges Fusion pricing into the default retail buy flow so a first buyer gets 0.25% without opting into a separate product.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"N26","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked, but in the right category. N26 is a bank with a crypto tab, not an instant-buy app, so it is scored on deposit protection and licence strength in Crypto Neobanks. Two facts from N26's own crypto page, re-read 2026-08-19, make a second row pointless. First, N26 does not set or execute the trade: 'N26 Crypto is powered by Bitpanda Asset Management GmbH (HRB 121696), licensed by the German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority', and 'The fees and cryptocurrency prices shown on the N26 app for every transaction and including a possible spread are not determined by N26 but provided by Bitpanda Asset Management GmbH.' The executing entity is a different legal entity from the retail broker behind the ranked Bitpanda row. Second, the white-labelled schedule is materially worse than the ranked one: 'Trades are subject to a transaction fee of 1.5% for Bitcoin and 2.5% for all other coins (certain exceptions may apply). A small selection of coins, called low-liquidity coins, have a higher fee of 3.5%' — against 0.99% on Bitcoin in the Bitpanda cost-transparency document this pool scores. Same group executing, half again the price for a bitcoin buy.","source":"https://n26.com/en-eu/crypto","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/n26/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"N26 publishes a crypto fee schedule at or below the Bitpanda broker tier it is executed on, or opens a self-custody withdrawal route that changes the axis it is scored on.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pocket Bitcoin","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"Structurally identical to a product this pool already ranks, and more expensive on the axis that carries the most weight. Pocket is a Swiss non-custodial bitcoin bridge — its own site states 'Pocket sends your bitcoin to your own wallet automatically, so you always have full control over your assets' and prices it as 'Simple 1.5% fees without fixed minimum fee' (read 2026-08-19). Relai, ranked here at Simple Buy, occupies the same lane — Swiss/EU, bank-transfer DCA, never custodies, coins delivered straight to the buyer's own wallet — at a verified 1.00% service fee, or 0.90% with a referral code. Both add an unquantified spread, so the published headline is the only comparable number, and on it Pocket is 50 to 60 basis points behind. On the 22-point access axis it is narrower rather than broader, by its own FAQ: 'The Pocket App is currently available in the Swiss App Store and Google Play Store.' The 26-point withdrawal axis is a tie (both non-custodial by design), and the 20-point custody-and-supervision axis has not been researched for either product to a standard that would separate them — which is what the expiry is for. A pricing judgement, not a quality one, and it reverses the day the prices do.","source":"https://pocketbitcoin.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/pocket-bitcoin/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pocket prices at or below Relai's 1.00% headline, either provider quantifies its spread so the two can be compared all-in, or Pocket's regulatory posture is researched and separates it on the trust axis. Read 2026-08-19.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Revolut X","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"Revolut is already the ranked row in this pool — 'revolut-crypto' at Simple Buy — and ranked a second time as a bank in crypto_neobanks. Revolut X is a professional order-book interface on the same e-money account and the same KYC, not a separate first-purchase decision, so a third row would rank one company three times; the exchange category reached the identical conclusion from its side (methodologySpecs/exchange.ts, 'revolut_x'). The finding a first buyer needs is already on the ranked row and is the worst all-in profile in the pool: section 7 of Revolut's retail crypto fee schedule states 'One-sided product added spreads typically vary between 0-3% of the trade amount', stacked on a 1.49% first-tier fee — a disclosed uncertainty band wider than the entire all-in cost of Cash App, Strike or River. SOURCING NOTE: that quote is carried from the RDAEL Retail Crypto Fees PDF text-extracted 2026-08-03 and recorded in the ranked row's pricingNote; the rendered legal page returned HTTP 403 behind a Revolut 'Just a quick security check' interstitial to both WebFetch and curl on 2026-08-19, which is inconclusive and is not treated as a change.","source":"https://www.revolut.com/en-DE/legal/exchangingcryptocurrenciespersonalfees/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/revolut-x/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Revolut X moves onto its own account and KYC with a fee schedule a first-time buyer can open directly, rather than a pro surface on the ranked Revolut account.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Scalable Capital","category":"simple_buy","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Fails this category's second hard rule: no route to move the asset to a wallet you control, because there is no coin to move. Scalable's own help centre, read 2026-10-27, answers 'Can I withdraw cryptocurrencies to my private wallet?' with: 'Direct withdrawal of cryptocurrencies to a private wallet is not technically supported via the Scalable Broker, since your digital assets are held here as exchange-traded products (Crypto ETPs), rather than as physical coins.' The one exit it names runs through the ETP issuer, not Scalable, 'in exceptional cases' and with 'separate issuer fees'. A Scalable crypto buy is a security that tracks a coin: exposure, which this category separates from ownership.","source":"https://help.scalable.capital/en/trading-1541d52f/crypto-d0f5ddb9/can-i-withdraw-cryptocurrencies-to-my-private-wallet-d0dbaa11","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-27","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-29","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/scalable-capital/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Scalable's help centre stops saying that direct withdrawal of cryptocurrencies to a private wallet is not supported, or Scalable sells coins rather than crypto ETPs.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Shakepay","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"A Canada coverage decision, stated plainly instead of left as a silence. Shakepay is a Canadian-funds product — Interac e-Transfer funding, CAD pricing — and its own help centre says of its cheapest offer 'This applies only to bitcoin purchases with Canadian funds. ETH and USD, and purchases made with ETH or USD are not included' (read 2026-08-19). It is not excluded on the axes: Shakepay publishes 'How to send crypto to an external wallet using fast or normal speed?', so the self-custody exit exists, and normal-speed withdrawals are free. Coinbase is ranked here as a global row whose own note claims '100+ countries', but no CAD-funded, Interac-rail app has been researched to this pool's bar, so Shakepay's CAD ticket cannot be scored on the 32-point axis against anything verified. Strong re-admission candidate: its '$0 Spread on bitcoin recurring buys and payroll auto-buys' offer — 'regular spread will apply for the first 7 days. Starting on day 8, you'll pay $0 spread on eligible scheduled buys' — would be the cheapest recurring row in this pool if verified.","source":"https://help.shakepay.com/en/articles/14040432-0-spread-on-bitcoin-recurring-buys-and-payroll-auto-buys","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/shakepay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"a Canada tranche is researched for this category, at which point Shakepay is a ranking candidate rather than a gap. Read 2026-08-19.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"SoFi Crypto","category":"simple_buy","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"A dated coverage gap, not a judgement of the product. SoFi's own investor-relations release is titled 'SoFi Bank Becomes the First and Only Nationally Chartered Bank to Launch Crypto Trading for Consumers', so a US reader may expect it here. It is unranked because none of the terms this pool scores on could be read from SoFi itself on 2026-10-28: sofi.com/invest/crypto, the crypto fee sheet at sofi.com/crypto/legal/crypto-fee-sheet and the help centre at support.sofi.com, including its public article API, each answered with a bot challenge ('We need to confirm you’re human'; Cloudflare 'cf-mitigated: challenge'). The fee, any spread, whether coins can be sent to a wallet you control and which states are served are therefore unknown here. Search results quote a SoFi fee sheet at 1% and a third-party page describing a tiered sheet from 1.90% to 0.90%; the two disagree and neither could be read at SoFi, so neither is used. This pool does not rank a product on terms it could not read from the provider.","source":"https://www.sofi.com/invest/crypto/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-28","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/sofi-crypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"SoFi's crypto fee sheet and its help pages on sending crypto can be read without a bot challenge.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Sparkasse Krypto (powered by Deka)","category":"simple_buy","kind":"other","reason":"Fails this category's second hard rule as of 2026-10-28: coins bought here can leave only for an account at another crypto firm, never for a wallet you control. The crypto offer in the Sparkasse app is DekaBank's, not the Sparkasse's own ('Das beratungsfreie Angebot der DekaBank exklusiv für Kundinnen und Kunden der Sparkasse'), and DekaBank's offer page, read 2026-10-28, sets the limit in two sentences: 'Bei Krypto – powered by Deka ist eine Auslieferung nur an Wallet-Adressen bestimmter Kryptowerte-Dienstleister (CASPs) möglich. Eine Auslieferung an andere Wallet-Adressen ist ausgeschlossen.' In English: delivery is possible only to wallet addresses of certain crypto-asset service providers, and delivery to any other wallet address is excluded. A hardware wallet, or an app wallet whose keys you hold, is such an other address, so the only ways out are a sale for euros or a move to another custodian. The same page says the keys are held 'treuhänderisch für die Kundinnen und Kunden in einer gemeinsam verwalteten Omnibus-Wallet'. The price is not the reason, but it cannot be stated either: DekaBank's 'Preisinformation für Kryptowerte' (Fassung September 2026) charges 'Transaktionsentgelt (Kauf/Verkauf) 0,99 EUR' and nothing for custody or delivery, and prices each trade at 'einem Marktreferenzpreis (u.a. Echtzeit-Preisdaten) zuzüglich eines DekaBank-eigenen Spreads' without saying how large that spread is. DekaBank is on ESMA's register of crypto-asset service providers through two BaFin notifications: 01/12/2025 for custody, execution of orders and transfer services, and 25/06/2026 for exchanging crypto-assets for funds. Not every Sparkasse offers it: the page addresses customers 'bei einer teilnehmenden Sparkasse'.","source":"https://www.deka.de/krypto/angebot","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-28","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/sparkasse-krypto-powered-by-deka/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["Sparkasse","Krypto powered by Deka","Krypto – powered by Deka","DekaBank Krypto"],"expiresIf":"DekaBank's offer page stops limiting delivery to 'Wallet-Adressen bestimmter Kryptowerte-Dienstleister (CASPs)', so that coins can be sent to a wallet the buyer controls; it is then rankable once DekaBank states the size of its spread.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"SwissBorg","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"Named here because the exchange category refused SwissBorg to this category's axes and this category had never picked it up — an unranked, unrefused product is invisible. SwissBorg is not excluded on the scored criteria. Its own pricing policy publishes a flat 0.99% exchange fee at every loyalty rank, and crypto withdrawal to a wallet you control at a 0.1% execution fee plus real-time network gas (read 2026-08-19), so it passes both hard rules and a rank-zero buyer's headline is a stateable number. Its cashback structure is real — ranks are gated on locked BORG, 'Standard 0 Bronze 1,000 Silver 3,000 Gold 10,000 Platinum 30,000 Diamond 60,000 Elite 100,000' at swissborg.com/ranks-crypto-cashback, and 'All rewards are automatically accumulated and locked in your BORG Locking account' — but it does not obscure the base price, and this pool ranks Relai on a 1.00% headline plus an unquantified spread and Coinbase on no published retail number at all. Refusing SwissBorg on cost evidence weaker than two ranked rows would be indefensible. What remains is a coverage statement: not researched to this pool's bar. On its incident record, SwissBorg's own post-mortem (17 November 2025, Cyrus Fazel) says the 8 September 2025 breach was of Kiln, 'a third party staking service provider contracted by SwissBorg', that it 'triggered the unstaking of over 192,000 SOL', that 'the tampering of the transaction happened within Kiln's infrastructure', and that 'The malicious actor did not breach SwissBorg's wallet infrastructure or compromise our security in any way.' The '$41 million' figure and the product name 'SOL Earn' that circulate elsewhere appear nowhere in that post-mortem. Re-admission candidate, not a rejection.","source":"https://swissborg.com/legal/swissborg-app-fees","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/swissborg/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"SwissBorg is researched to this pool's evidence bar — a per-ticket all-in figure for a rank-zero buyer including any spread, per-asset withdrawal minimums, and the Kiln record carried from SwissBorg's own 17 November 2025 post-mortem. Read 2026-08-19.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Venmo","category":"simple_buy","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"The same product is already ranked here under its other brand, and Venmo's own fee page is the proof. It states 'Crypto services provided by PayPal Digital, Inc (doing business as Venmo Digital)' and publishes the buy/sell ladder this pool already scores against PayPal Crypto: '$1.00 - $74.99' 2.20%, '$75.00 - $200.00' 2.00%, '$200.01 - $1000.00' 1.80%, '>$1000' 1.50% (read 2026-08-19). The ranked row carries the identical four figures — Simple Buy, id 'paypal-crypto', extracted 2026-08-03 from PayPal's US consumer fee schedule effective 19 May 2026. Same issuer entity, same ladder, same custodian; Venmo's own line 'Transferring cryptocurrency to another Venmo or PayPal account' — 'No fee' — confirms the two surfaces are one system. A second row would score the identical purchase twice on identical numbers. If you came here for Venmo, the PayPal Crypto row is your row.","source":"https://venmo.com/about/fees/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/venmo/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"PayPal Digital, Inc. publishes a Venmo-specific crypto fee schedule that differs materially from the PayPal ladder, or the two surfaces stop sharing an issuer and a custodian.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Volksbanken Raiffeisenbanken (meinKrypto)","category":"simple_buy","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Not ranked because the first thing this category must know cannot be read on any public page: whether coins bought here can leave for a wallet you control. It is published as unknown, not as a failure. meinKrypto is the crypto wallet DZ BANK and Atruvia built into the VR Banking App; DZ BANK's release of 12.01.2026 says 'Die Entscheidung zur Einführung der Krypto-Lösung trifft jede Genossenschaftsbank individuell' and 'Für die Verwahrung der Kryptowerte sorgt die Boerse Stuttgart Digital, während die Ausführung über die EUWAX AG erfolgt.' On 2026-10-28 the meinKrypto pages of four participating banks were read (Volksbank Raiffeisenbank Würzburg, Westerwald Bank, Volksbank eG – Die Gestalterbank and VR-Bank Rottal-Inn), with each bank's price list for crypto trading. They describe buying and selling ('Sie kaufen und verkaufen ausgewählte Kryptowerte in der VR-BankingApp') and custody in pooled wallets at Boerse Stuttgart Digital Custody ('digitale Sammel-Wallets, in denen Kryptowerte mehrerer Kunden – auch von anderen Partnern – gemeinschaftlich gespeichert werden'). None of them says whether coins can be sent out or received, and no price list has a line for a transfer. On ESMA's register, read the same day, each of the four banks is notified for one service only, 'e. execution of orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients', not for transfer services; that does not settle the question, because the custody contract is with Boerse Stuttgart Digital Custody. The price is set bank by bank, so even a yes would not give one number to score: the commission is 1.5 % at Würzburg and 0,78 % at the other three, and VR-Bank Rottal-Inn's page adds 'zuzüglich eines Spreads – das ist die Differenz zwischen An- und Verkaufspreis' without sizing that spread.","source":"https://www.vr-bank-wuerzburg.de/privatkunden/geldanlage-und-sparen/produkte/geldanlage/kryptowerte-handeln.html","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-28","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/volksbanken-raiffeisenbanken-meinkrypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":["Volksbank","Volksbanken","VR Banking","VR Banking App","meinKrypto"],"expiresIf":"DZ BANK, Atruvia or a participating bank publishes whether meinKrypto coins can be sent to a wallet the buyer controls: a yes makes it rankable bank by bank once a spread is stated, a no makes it a failure of the same rule.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Wealthsimple Crypto","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"The same Canada coverage decision, and the same honesty about it. Wealthsimple's own page describes the product as 'Canada's first regulated crypto trading platform' and states 'Wealthsimple Crypto is offered by Wealthsimple Investments Inc., a member of the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO)' (read 2026-08-19) — a Canadian regulated entity serving Canadian residents. It is unranked because no CAD-funded Canadian app has been researched to this pool's bar, not because it failed an axis; that is a gap in our coverage rather than a finding against the product. Two things a Canadian buyer should know while it stays unranked: the advertised floor of the published fee range applies to the top volume tier (the 0.05% end is reached at $10M of trailing 30-day volume, not on a first purchase), and we have not verified the withdrawal route or its cost to this pool's standard — the page speaks only of transfers 'to or from Wealthsimple' without pricing an external-wallet withdrawal.","source":"https://www.wealthsimple.com/en-ca/product/crypto","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/wealthsimple-crypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"a Canada tranche is researched, or Wealthsimple's external-wallet withdrawal route and per-ticket rate are verified from primary sources. Read 2026-08-19.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Webull","category":"simple_buy","kind":null,"reason":"Fails the same hard rule, and Webull says so itself. Its help centre, re-read 2026-08-19, answers 'How do I coin in/coin out of my crypto account?' with: 'Coin transfers are temporarily unavailable. Once this feature returns, we will provide a full list of supported transferable cryptocurrencies. We are currently working with our updated crypto provider to enhance the transfer experience and will notify all customers when this feature becomes available again.' Until it returns the only exit is to sell and move cash, and the same page prices that exit in steps: 'Residents of New York, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands: Sale proceeds can be withdrawn back to your bank immediately through either the Webull Pay app or the Webull app. Residents of all other states: Funds must first be transferred from your crypto account to your brokerage account before you can initiate a withdrawal. Once transferred, the funds are available for withdrawal the following business day.' That is exposure with a two-step cash exit — precisely what the 26-point withdrawal axis exists to separate from ownership. Note the word Webull chose: temporarily.","source":"https://www.webull.com/help/faq/11085-Fund-Transfer","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"simple_buy/webull/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Webull restores coin-out transfers and publishes the promised list of supported transferable cryptocurrencies.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fireblocks","category":"smart_accounts","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked under Institutional Custody, and named by our own published methodology spec for this category as a hard exclusion alongside Copper, BitGo and Coinbase Prime — so this refusal restates a decision the spec already makes, rather than inventing one. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching fireblocks.com and grepping the raw HTML: the headline is \"Infrastructure that powers financial possibility\", and the page carries \"Fireblocks is the world's most trusted digital asset and stablecoin infrastructure company\" (apostrophe HTML-encoded in the source, which is why a naive string match misses it). It addresses trading firms, fintechs and exchanges, payments companies and financial institutions, lists Qualified custody and treasury management as product lines, and offers \"Talk to sales\" and \"Book time with an expert\" as the routes in — no self-serve signup. That is an operator-run key-share platform sold under enterprise contract: a counterparty question, not a contract question, and not comparable on criteria about a deployed contract's audit depth and upgrade authority. Fireblocks is the first name corporate treasuries reach for, so saying nothing would be indistinguishable from ignorance.","source":"https://www.fireblocks.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/fireblocks/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fireblocks releases a permissionless, self-custodial smart contract account whose owners and threshold live on-chain and which is usable without an enterprise custody agreement, or the smart_accounts spec drops its custodial/MPC hard exclusion.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fordefi","category":"smart_accounts","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on architecture — by its own marketing, and Fordefi appears nowhere else in our catalog, so this is a genuine exclusion rather than a cross-category redirect. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching the cited page and grepping the raw HTML. It is headlined \"Why leading institutions choose MPC over multisig\" (no trailing period, contrary to the submitted quote), its comparison table lists \"No smart contract deployment required per network\" as the property exclusive to its approach, and it sells \"Rotate signers without redeployment\" with the line \"Update thresholds, swap signers, and adjust permissions at the platform level without touching wallet addresses or redeploying contracts.\" A product whose central pitch is the absence of the deployed contract is not a smart account: ranking it here would score it on this pool's heaviest criteria — audit depth of the deployed contract version and upgrade control over that contract — which it deliberately does not implement, misrepresenting an intentional design choice as a deficiency.","source":"https://fordefi.com/solutions/mpc-vs-multi-sig","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/fordefi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fordefi ships a deployed smart contract account (ERC-4337/7579, or a Safe module) as a first-class product, or this category is widened to score MPC key management alongside on-chain accounts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Multis","category":"smart_accounts","kind":null,"reason":"No live product to score — established by status code, not by inference. Multis was a well-funded, widely covered multisig business account (a Safe-style crypto business bank account for companies), so its absence would otherwise read as an oversight. Checked directly against the company's own domains on 2026-08-20 with curl: https://multis.co/ returns HTTP 301 Moved Permanently redirecting to https://multis.com/, and https://multis.com/ returns HTTP 404 Not Found. Correction applied: the submitted reason claimed the 404 came \"with no body\" — it does not. The 404 serves a 6,873-byte default hosting placeholder titled \"Site Not Found | Framer\", which is stronger evidence than an empty response: the domain now points at an unclaimed Framer site, with no product page, no wind-down notice and no successor. With no reachable primary source describing a current product, there is nothing to price, rank or link.","source":"https://multis.co/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/multis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"multis.co or multis.com returns HTTP 200 with a live multisig or treasury product again, or the product reappears under a named successor domain with its own primary documentation.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Nunchuk","category":"smart_accounts","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Key Recovery & Inheritance. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching nunchuk.io and grepping the raw HTML. Nunchuk is unambiguously multisig — the page carries \"Secure Your Bitcoin for Generations\", \"the world's first multi-user multisig\" and \"Eliminate single points of failure with our state-of-the-art multisig wallet\" — so its absence from a pool with \"Multisig\" in the title would read as an oversight, not a judgement. It is Bitcoin-native collaborative custody built on on-chain timelocks and hardware-wallet co-signers; the same fetch returned zero occurrences of Ethereum, EVM or ERC-4337 anywhere on the page. Because there is no deployed, versioned, upgradeable account contract, the two criteria carrying 60% of this pool's weight — audit depth of the deployed contract version plus its exploit history (35%), and upgrade control and key holders (25%) — have nothing to score. Correction applied: the submitted reason listed criteria (ERC-4337/7579 module support, gas sponsorship, session keys) that this category's published spec does not use, and framed the test as EVM-only when our own pool already ranks a non-EVM entry (Squads, a Solana program); the operative line is a deployed contract, not an EVM one.","source":"https://nunchuk.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/nunchuk/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nunchuk ships a deployed smart contract account on any programmable chain, or this category is widened to score Bitcoin-script multisig alongside deployed contract accounts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pimlico","category":"smart_accounts","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Account Abstraction Infrastructure — our catalog carries Pimlico in that pool, not this one. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching pimlico.io and grepping the raw HTML for every quoted string; all appear. The page carries verbatim: \"Pimlico is the gas sponsorship engine for onchain apps. Sponsor transactions, accept USDC, USDT, or 300+ other tokens for gas, or set policy rules.\" Its products are \"Sponsor gas so users transact for free\", \"Let users pay gas in USDC, USDT, or any ERC20\" and \"Reliable execution with <2s inclusion on L2s\". Decisive for the layer split is Pimlico's own line \"Whatever smart account or signer you build on, it works with Pimlico out of the box\" — paymaster and bundler infrastructure that other people's accounts call, with no deployed account of its own whose owner set, threshold or upgrade authority this pool could score. It is the most recognisable ERC-4337 name after Safe, so silence would read as ignorance; the layer split is the reason, not obscurity.","source":"https://www.pimlico.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/pimlico/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pimlico ships its own deployed smart contract account or multisig signing product that a team configures directly (rather than gas/execution infrastructure for third-party accounts), or we merge Account Abstraction Infrastructure into this category.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Rhinestone","category":"smart_accounts","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A complement to this pool, not a competitor in it — it plugs into accounts we already rank. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching rhinestone.dev and grepping the raw HTML for the headline, the module names and the provider names; all are present. The headline is \"Intent-powered wallet infrastructure, for your users\", and the page states \"Build on top of any smart account. Integrate any KMS provider.\", naming Safe, Biconomy, ZeroDev and Thirdweb among the accounts it builds on — Safe and Biconomy are already scored in this pool. What it sells is a module layer, \"Configure your smart account with modules\" (Passkeys, Multisig, Scheduled Orders, Social Recovery, Session Keys, EOA Signer, ZK Email, Policies), plus ModuleKit and Smart Sessions. Scoring Rhinestone against Safe and Biconomy would double-count the same underlying account and the same audit and upgrade-authority facts, since a Rhinestone deployment is always some other provider's account with modules attached.","source":"https://rhinestone.dev/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/rhinestone/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rhinestone ships a standalone smart account of its own that a team can deploy and operate without another provider's account underneath.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Stackup","category":"smart_accounts","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Explicitly NOT a shutdown — the company is live, but it has left this category. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching both cited pages. stackup.fi returns HTTP 200 and serves the headline \"Supercharge your onchain finances\", and its raw HTML carries \"Our ERC-4337 smart accounts deliver military-grade security through Face ID\", so any claim that Stackup is dead would be false. What it no longer offers is a smart account platform other teams build on: its open-source ERC-4337 bundler carries the GitHub banner \"This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 20, 2024. It is now read-only.\" Today Stackup is a business payments and treasury application — invoicing, vendor payments, bank transfers — that uses a smart account internally as an implementation detail, not an account a reader selects, deploys and configures a signer set and threshold on, which is what this pool compares.","source":"https://www.stackup.fi/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/stackup/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Stackup again offers its smart account or bundler as a product third parties can deploy on and configure, or unarchives the stackup-wallet/stackup-bundler repository and resumes a hosted bundler/paymaster service.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Turnkey","category":"smart_accounts","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under MPC Wallets. Verified 2026-08-20 by fetching turnkey.com and grepping the raw HTML for each quoted string, including the sentence's opening word: the headline is \"Secure, flexible, and scalable wallet infrastructure\", and the page states \"Turnkey takes a different approach from MPC- or HSM-providers by running signing inside TEEs, making key operations completely isolated and verifiable.\" and \"Unlike custodial providers that hold user keys, Turnkey is fully non-custodial.\" Signing policy lives in hardware enclaves behind an API, so there is no deployed account contract — nothing for this pool's two heaviest criteria, audit depth of the deployed contract version with its exploit history and upgrade control and key holders, to bite on. It belongs in the comparison, one category over. Correction applied: the submitted reason invoked a \"module standard\" criterion this category's spec does not use.","source":"https://www.turnkey.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_accounts/turnkey/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Turnkey ships its own deployed on-chain smart contract account with configurable on-chain owners and threshold, or we merge MPC Wallets into this category.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Code4rena","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":null,"reason":"The best-known competitive-audit platform of the 2021-2025 cycle is closing. Its own homepage carries the notice verbatim: \"Code4rena is winding down.\" and \"After 5 years of securing DeFi, Code4rena is closing its doors.\", qualified only by \"Active competitions and bounties are being seen through to completion.\" Its own /audits index confirms the practical effect — every other entry is marked \"Completed\", and the single remaining one (Rujira) is itself marked \"Submissions closed\", so no competition is open to new submissions and the site offers no intake to commission one. A buyer cannot commission work here, so there is nothing to rank. Not a duplicate of Zellic, which acquired the platform and is ranked separately on its own bench: Code4rena kept its own brand, management and warden community rather than being folded into Zellic's.","source":"https://code4rena.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/code4rena/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"code4rena.com removes the wind-down notice and opens a new audit competition to submissions, or the brand relaunches under Zellic with a live intake.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Gauntlet","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":null,"reason":"Gauntlet's risk reviews are routinely cited in governance forums alongside audit reports, which invites the confusion — but Gauntlet does not review code. Its own site leads with \"Fuel your growth with onchain yield\" and sells \"Crypto Yield Strategies for Institutions\": lending vaults, restaking vaults, Levered RWA, the Gauntlet USD Alpha vault and Aera vault infrastructure, underpinned by \"Quantitative, model-driven frameworks with human oversight that have protected capital through every market cycle.\" Nothing on the page offers a smart-contract code audit or security code review. What Gauntlet sells is economic and market-risk modelling plus vault curation — it reviews parameters and market structure, not contract logic — so none of this category's criteria (post-audit exploit record, commit-pinned scope, method depth for a language bench) can be applied. It is also now a counterparty a buyer takes economic exposure to, not an independent reviewer of their code.","source":"https://www.gauntlet.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/gauntlet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"gauntlet.xyz lists a smart-contract code audit or security code review service and publishes commit-scoped audit reports under its own name.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Immunefi","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #5 of 9 (score 70) until 5 November 2026. Its post-audit score asks what happened to code it reviewed; Immunefi publishes find and payout totals, not outcomes, and no primary page records them, so the score could not be re-read (3 and 4 November 2026). Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking. This is not a judgement on Immunefi.","source":"https://immunefi.com/audits/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/immunefi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A primary record of post-review outcomes appears, or the owner rules how a confirmed absence is scored: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Olympix","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":null,"reason":"One of the most visible of the AI/automated 'audit replacement' vendors sells software, not an audit. Its own site positions the product as \"Pre-deployment security for systems that can't afford to fail\" — teams \"Identify and remediate real vulnerabilities during development by deterministically analyzing smart contracts — before audits, before deployment, before exploits\" — delivered as \"Enterprise-Grade Static Analysis\", automated unit testing, mutation testing and a \"BugPOCer Internal Auditor\" that the team runs itself: \"Olympix transforms security into a continuous, in-house, proactive process.\" The vendor's own framing is explicitly pre-audit and developer-run, so there is no engagement, no named accountable auditor and no published report to score. (Note for re-checkers: olympix.ai 301-redirects to olympix.security.)","source":"https://olympix.security/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/olympix/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Olympix begins selling human-delivered, scoped review engagements with named auditors and published reports rather than developer-run tooling.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Secureum","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":null,"reason":"Secureum is one of the most recognised names in smart-contract security, which is exactly why its absence needs explaining — it trains auditors rather than selling audits. Its own site consists of a single product line, the \"Secureum Bootcamp\", described as \"The Flagship community event dedicated to Ethereum security\", with navigation limited to BOOTCAMP, TRUSTX and Secureum. TrustX is likewise not a service but \"a first-of-its-kind technical event dedicated to the Ethereum security ecosystem\" — talks, workshops and networking. There is no intake through which a protocol can commission a review, no engagement scope and no client reports anywhere on the site. It is education and certification infrastructure that the ranked firms hire out of, not a vendor a buyer can compare on post-audit record.","source":"https://www.secureum.xyz/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/secureum/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"secureum.xyz adds a page through which a protocol can commission a paid security review, or Secureum publishes client audit reports under its own name.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Slither","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"The most-installed smart-contract security tool in the industry is not a provider a buyer engages. Its repository describes it as \"a Solidity & Vyper static analysis framework written in Python3\" that \"runs a suite of vulnerability detectors, prints visual information about contract details, and provides an API to easily write custom analyses\", distributed under AGPL-3.0 and installed via uv, pip, Homebrew or Docker, then run by the developer as `slither .`. There is no counterparty, no scoped engagement, no named accountable engineer and no report — which means none of this category's four criteria can be applied to it. It is also not an independent name: the repository sits in the Crytic organisation, which describes itself as \"Blockchain Security, by @trailofbits\" and also publishes Echidna and Medusa. Trail of Bits is already ranked here, so ranking Slither would double-count a ranked firm.","source":"https://github.com/crytic/slither","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/slither/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Slither is separated from Trail of Bits/Crytic and sold as a commissioned review service with a named accountable auditor and a deliverable report.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Solodit","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Buyers and researchers reach Solodit constantly when comparing auditors, but it performs no reviews. The site describes itself as offering access to \"the largest open source database of blockchain and smart contract security vulnerabilities, exploits, and mitigations\" — an index of findings other firms produced. It is also not an independent brand: the page carries \"Powered by Cyfrin\", and Cyfrin / CodeHawks is already ranked in this pool, so listing Solodit would rank the same counterparty twice under a second name. There is no intake through which a protocol can commission a review from Solodit itself. It belongs in this category as the research surface a buyer uses to check the firms below, not as one of them.","source":"https://solodit.cyfrin.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/solodit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Solodit adds an intake through which a protocol can commission a scoped review from Solodit itself, or is spun out from Cyfrin as a separate audit provider.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Trail of Bits","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 9 (score 71) until 5 November 2026. Its scheduled re-read (3 and 4 November 2026) found that Trail of Bits publishes no terms of service: every address its terms would sit at answers 404 and its site links only a privacy policy, so the cells resting on them could not be read from a primary source. Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on Trail of Bits.","source":"https://trailofbits.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/trail-of-bits/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A primary source for the missing cells appears, or the owner rules that a confirmed absence is scored as such: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Zellic","category":"smart_contract_audits","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 9 (score 79) until 5 November 2026. Its scheduled re-read (3 and 4 November 2026) found that Zellic publishes no record of what happened to code it reviewed (its post-audit score rested on a find rate and on absence from third-party hack lists), and no terms of service, so the cells resting on them could not be read from a primary source. Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking and is listed as not confirmed. This is not a judgement on Zellic.","source":"https://www.zellic.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"smart_contract_audits/zellic/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A primary source for the missing cells appears, or the owner rules that a confirmed absence is scored as such: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bluesky the app, as distinct from AT Protocol","category":"socialfi","kind":null,"reason":"MERGED INTO ONE ENTRY, NOT DROPPED. Splitting bsky.social from the atproto spec would score the same custody, exit and key-hierarchy answers twice, since every scoreable fact — handle portability, PDS self-hosting, the did:plc trust concession — lives in the protocol spec. Held as bluesky_atproto with the app named in the fact rows.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/bluesky-the-app-as-distinct-from-at-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bluesky's app diverges from AT Protocol on custody, exit or key hierarchy.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Drakula","category":"socialfi","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD — DOMAIN DOES NOT RESOLVE. Two independent resolvers fail: `host drakula.app` returns SERVFAIL and `nslookup drakula.app 8.8.8.8` returns 'server can't find drakula.app: SERVFAIL'; curl returns no HTTP status at all (2026-08-17). Same evidence class as asyncart.com in specs/creator_mint_platforms.scope.json.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/drakula/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"drakula.app resolves and serves a live product again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Interface (interface.social)","category":"socialfi","kind":null,"reason":"LIVE BUT UNSCOREABLE, AND THE WRONG GRAIN. interface.social 307s to https://www.interface.social/ 200, and the rendered document contains one word: 'Interface'. docs.interface.social does not resolve and /manifesto 404s (2026-08-17). All four criteria would score on silence alone, which makes it a blank row rather than a comparison; and as a client over someone else's protocol its custody, exit and key-hierarchy answers would be that protocol's, not its own.","source":"https://www.interface.social/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/interface-interface-social/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Interface publishes documentation or product pages a reader can assess.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Lens Usernames (as a second entry)","category":"socialfi","kind":null,"reason":"PARTIALLY RANKED ELSEWHERE, AND THE SIBLING PENALISES IT RATHER THAN RANKING IT. Naming Services carries lens_usernames with ownershipDurability 5, registryDecentralisation 4, resolutionReach 2, costTransparency 1 — but its watchout disclaims the comparison outright ('This is not really an address-naming service and should not be compared to ENS on price — it is an in-protocol social identity') and its second watchout invalidates the costTransparency score of 1 as 'CONTRADICTED BY FIRST-PARTY DOCUMENTATION'. That is a mark-down, not a ranking. Lens is therefore pooled here as lens_protocol scoring the ACCOUNT, graph, earnings and admin authority, with name expiry, renewal and resolution reach explicitly barred in the criteria.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/lens-usernames-as-a-second-entry/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Lens Usernames becomes a product separate from the Lens protocol entry, with its own terms.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Mirror (mirror.xyz)","category":"socialfi","kind":null,"reason":"ABSORBED, ON THE ACQUIRER'S WORD ONLY. paragraph.com states 'Mirror is merging into Paragraph, uniting both platforms to create the best home for writers and readers.' (verified 2026-08-17). No first-party statement could be obtained from mirror.xyz itself: it returns 403 with server: cloudflare and cf-mitigated: challenge to curl and to a Googlebot UA alike. No death claim is made in either direction, following the coinbase-nft precedent in specs/creator_mint_platforms.scope.json. Represented by paragraph.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/mirror-mirror-xyz/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"mirror.xyz serves its own first-party statement, or it remains a product separate from Paragraph.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Phaver","category":"socialfi","kind":null,"reason":"PIVOTED AWAY, PRODUCT NO LONGER SERVED. phaver.com returns 301 to http://socialdao.ai/, which serves a 'Social DAO Terminal' with a wallet connect, a Meme mode switch and a board of AI projects, and mentions no Phaver, no social app, no migration path and no wind-down (2026-08-17). Per rule 5 a 301 to a different product is positive evidence of a pivot, not proof of death. There is no Phaver left to score on any of the four axes.","source":"http://socialdao.ai/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/phaver/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Phaver serves its social app again, or publishes a migration path.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Warpcast","category":"socialfi","kind":null,"reason":"A RENAME, NOT A PRODUCT. warpcast.com returns 301 to https://farcaster.xyz/ (2026-08-17) with the onchain FID registry unchanged. Listing both would rank one operator twice. Represented by farcaster; the clean rename is retained as a fact row, not as an axis, because a failure-history criterion would restate wind_down_evidence in specs/creator_mint_platforms.scope.json.","source":"https://farcaster.xyz/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/warpcast/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"warpcast.com stops redirecting to farcaster.xyz and serves a product of its own.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zora Network (the chain)","category":"socialfi","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"ALREADY RANKED, DIFFERENT QUESTION. zora_network is Appchains / L3s, scored on settlement security, permissionless exit window and liquidity on arrival — an infrastructure comparison, not an audience one. Zora the social product is pooled here as zora_social and runs on Base, not on Zora Network, per that same entry's own verification note: 'Documentation for the ZORA Coins Protocol — a protocol for creating and trading ERC-20 media coins on Base.' Separately, creator_mint_platforms already excluded zora-creator as legacy, which frees the current product rather than conflicting with it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"socialfi/zora-network-the-chain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zora Network is offered as a social product separate from zora_social.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Agora Finance","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":null,"reason":"excluded as pre-product for this buyer, and the case is stronger than when the scoping model runs ruled. www.agora.finance/product/white-label now returns HTTP 308 to /product/ausd (checked 2026-08-27): the white-label product page has been removed from the marketing site, whose sitemap lists /product/ausd and /product/stablecoin-api and no white-label page at all. The developer docs still ship a placeholder rather than a product — docs.agora.finance/whitelabels: \"Agora enables custom stablecoin creation by using an ERC4626 vault architecture with AUSD (Agora Dollar) as the underlying asset\", with every worked example on a hypothetical \"newUSD\" and no named customer anywhere in the docs index (docs.agora.finance/llms.txt, fetched 2026-08-27). Agora also holds no US issuance charter yet, by its own account: \"This week, Agora filed its application for Agora National Trust Bank with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)\" and \"Agora is currently operating in Bermuda with a full license\" (www.agora.finance/blog/occ-national-trust-bank-charter, dated Apr 24, 2026). AUSD itself is live, but AUSD is a TOKEN and belongs to the Stablecoins instrument. Re-open only on a named live white-label customer on an Agora-owned surface.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/agora-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Agora restores a white-label issuance product page, or a named brand issues its own stablecoin through Agora.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Circle","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because it does not sell branded white-label issuance, established by enumeration rather than assertion. www.circle.com/sitemap.xml (HTTP 200, fetched 2026-08-27) contains 5,381 entries; the only URLs matching /white-?label|branded/ are four locale variants of a blog post about branded NFTs, and there is no white-label or branded-stablecoin product page in the tree. Circle Mint mints USDC and EURC — Circle's own coins. The white-label route to a Circle dollar is Coinbase Custom Stablecoins, which IS in the pool and whose own documentation says \"Each custom stablecoin is backed 1:1 by USDC held with Coinbase.\"","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/circle/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle publishes a branded or white-label stablecoin issuance product on its own site.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"M0","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":null,"reason":"excluded as the infrastructure layer BENEATH this pool rather than a competitor in it, and the re-open condition set by the scoping model runs (a named customer that bought M0 directly as issuer of record, with no intermediary) is still not met. M0's own issuer documentation says who it sells to: \"M0 is built for institutions that already operate - or are ready to operate - in the digital asset space with the appropriate licenses and charters\", listing \"SIaaS providers (Stablecoin Issuance as a Service) - companies like Bridge (Stripe), MoonPay, and Anchorage who want to offer issuance to their clients at scale\" (docs.m0.org/raw/issuers/overview.md, fetched 2026-08-27) — two of those three are rows on this page. The three case studies M0 puts on its own homepage are MoneyGram, MetaMask and KAST, and the first two resolve to an intermediary: M0's own press release of June 2, 2026 states \"Bridge (a Stripe company) is the regulated, GENIUS Act-ready issuer\" of MoneyGram's MGUSD, and mUSD is issued by Bridge. LIMIT PUBLISHED RATHER THAN HIDDEN: the issuer of record for KAST Dollar was not established in this session, so the re-open test is unmet rather than disproved.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/m0/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A named customer is shown buying M0 directly as issuer of record, with no intermediary between them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Quantoz Payments, StraitsX and Membrane Finance","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because they issue their OWN e-money tokens rather than selling issuance to a third-party brand, which is the purchase this page ranks. quantoz.com (fetched 2026-08-27) lists under Tokens \"EURQ/USDQ\", \"PLNQ\" and \"GBPQ\" — Quantoz's own coins. straitsx.com (fetched 2026-08-27) lists under Stablecoins \"XUSD\", \"XSGD\" and \"XIDR\" and is \"licensed & regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore MPI License PS20200475, PS20200656, PS20200657, PS20200658\"; its product called \"Issuance\" is CARD issuance (\"Launch stablecoin-backed cards in Asia\"), not stablecoin issuance-as-a-service. Membrane Finance is now Paxos Issuance Europe Oy (Finnish business ID 3236886-2; prior name ended 2025-02-19) and its coin is being switched off — see discontinued. TWO CAVEATS PUBLISHED RATHER THAN BURIED: Quantoz does sell a platform (\"Quantoz Nexus... our API-powered platform for compliant tokenization, stablecoins, and payments\") and simply names no third-party issuer on it; and excluding all three is what leaves this page with no euro-denominated option at all.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/quantoz-payments-straitsx-and-membrane-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of the three starts selling issuance of a stablecoin under another brand's name.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Tether Hadron","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":null,"reason":"excluded on scope, and this is the weakest call on the page, so the evidence that undercuts it is published here rather than buried. Hadron publishes no machine index (hadron.tether.to/llms.txt and /sitemap.xml both return HTTP 404, checked 2026-08-27), so the site was enumerated from its own link graph and read in full: 16 distinct live pages — the product page at /en, the blog index, all 7 live blog posts, and the 7 legal/policy documents (cookies-notice, end-user-terms, law-enforcement, privacy, terms-of-use, terms-of-use-api, website-terms). Two further slugs found in the served HTML, /en/blog/2025-in-review-and-our-predictions-for-2026 and /en/blog/chainalysis-tether-hadron-rwa, return a \"404 Page Not Found\" body under HTTP 200 and are recorded as such. Across those 16 pages: \"issuer of record\" 0, \"charter\" 0, \"NMLS\" 0, \"money transmitter\" 0, \"bps\" 0, \"basis point\" 0, \"reserve yield\" 0, \"revenue share\" 0, \"fee schedule\" 0, \"rate card\" 0; the single occurrence of \"pricing\" is about bond pricing in a Liquid Network post. The price is deferred entirely to an unpublished document — HADRON BY TETHER TERMS OF USE, \"Last updated: December 3, 2025\", §6.1: \"The User shall pay Tether Hadron the fees (\"Fees\") as set forth in the Order Form without offset or deduction\", with §6.4 \"Tether Hadron reserves the right to change the Fees at any time\" — and the contracting entities carry no financial authorisation at all: \"Each of Tether Hadron NA, S.A. de C.V. and Tether Hadron, S.A. de C.V. are an El Salvador Sociedad Anónima de Capital Variable\". THE SCOPING MODEL RUNS' STATED GROUND (T6: \"names no third-party brand stablecoin\") IS NOW FALSE. hadron.tether.to/en/blog/case-study-how-quantoz-issued-mica-compliant-digital-money-on-hadron-by-tether-with-chainalysis-monitoring, dated January 19, 2026 on a vendor-owned surface, names a customer, two live coins and a supervisor: \"Quantoz Payments B.V., a Dutch Electronic Money Institution supervised by the Dutch Central Bank and the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets... Quantoz issues fully-backed e-money tokens\", \"Quantoz selected Hadron by Tether to serve as the secure issuance and governance layer for its stablecoins\", \"Tokens issued: EURD (June 2024; closed-loop) EURQ (November 2024) USDQ (November 2024)\", \"Over $50 million USDQ minted via Hadron by Tether to reserve accounts\". What survives is a scope judgement, not an evidentiary one: Hadron sells general tokenization tooling (\"tokens can represent anything from commodities and corporate equity to government debt, corporate bonds, stablecoins and practically any other valuable asset, even loyalty points\"), brings no issuance authority of its own, and requires the customer to arrive holding one. That last point is NOT a valid ground on this page, because it is precisely BitGo's SoFiUSD model, which is ranked. Recorded as an open scope question that should be re-litigated at pool 7, not as a settled exclusion.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/tether-hadron/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hadron publishes a white-label issuance programme a third-party brand can buy and issue its own stablecoin through, on its own pages.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Visa Stablecoin Platform","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":"deferred_or_not_live_yet","reason":"excluded because it sells access to somebody else's dollar, not a branded issuance programme, and because it is gated and incomplete. www.visa.com/en-us/products/visa-stablecoin-platform (HTTP 200, fetched 2026-08-27, after developer.visa.com/capabilities/visa-stablecoin-platform, usa.visa.com/solutions/crypto/stablecoin-platform.html and corporate.visa.com/en/products-services/stablecoin.html each returned HTTP 404): \"VSP is launching with limited availability. Open USD access is in beta, with volume and geographic limits, and Wallet-as-a-Service is currently offered alongside Open USD access.\"; \"VSP is the access point for Open USD. Eligible clients can mint, burn and manage Open USD through VSP.\"; \"A valid Visa Access ID and a Business Identification (BID) number issued by Visa are required.\"; \"The front-end portal and documentation are available now. API access is coming soon.\" Minting Open USD under Visa's controls is not launching your own dollar, and a buyer cannot even attempt it without an existing Visa BID.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/visa-stablecoin-platform/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Visa opens the platform to a brand issuing its own stablecoin, with public terms and no gated access.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zero Hash and Fireblocks Tokenization Engine","category":"stablecoin_issuance","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"excluded as adjacent product lines already ranked elsewhere in this catalog, not as failures. Zero Hash's product is settlement and brokerage and is ranked as zero_hash in Stablecoin Settlement. Fireblocks sells custody and generic tokenization with no named stablecoin issuer on its own tokenization page, is ranked as fireblocks_custody in Institutional Custody, and appears in this category as a CUSTODY layer underneath somebody else's issuer: M0's MoneyGram release states \"MoneyGram holds MGUSD in Fireblocks wallets\" while \"Bridge (a Stripe company) is the regulated, GENIUS Act-ready issuer.\"","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_issuance/zero-hash-and-fireblocks-tokenization-engine/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zero Hash or Fireblocks publishes a stablecoin issuance product separate from the records already ranked, with a named issuer.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Celsius Earn","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"The product and the company that ran it are both wound down, stated on Celsius's own domain. https://celsius.network/ (read 2026-08-20; the same URL returns HTTP 403 to WebFetch's user agent and HTTP 200 to a browser user agent, so the block is anti-bot rather than a dead host) is a single creditor-notice page reading verbatim: \"Celsius was a global cryptocurrency platform and Bitcoin mining company that emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy on January 31, 2024.\" and \"On February 29, 2024, the Celsius mobile and web apps were shut down, as a part of the winding down of its business operations\". What remains is distribution plumbing — \"Beginning on February 1, 2024, claim distributions to Eligible Creditors are being made in cryptocurrency and US dollars.\" — alongside a claims-portal login, a Stretto case reference, and a registered-agent address at 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, DE 19801. There is no deposit surface and no published rate. Celsius is named rather than passed over in silence because its 8-10% stablecoin Earn account is the yield most retail readers still measure this category against, and an unexplained absence would read as an oversight rather than a judgement. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: I reproduced the user-agent asymmetry directly — WebFetch on this URL returned \"HTTP 403 Forbidden\", while curl with a browser user agent returned 200 — so mode A is satisfied by a real read of the product's own site, not by a bot wall. Every quoted sentence is present in that 200 response, as are the Stretto reference, the Claims Portal login and the Orange Street address. The no-rate claim is a count, not an impression: on the rendered text \"APY\" appears 0 times, \"APR\" 0 times, \"deposit\" 0 times and \"Earn\" 0 times.","source":"https://celsius.network/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/celsius-earn/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"celsius.network again offers a deposit product with a published stablecoin rate, or the Celsius brand relaunches an earn product under new ownership.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Elixir deUSD / sdeUSD","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Sunset by its own issuer, in the imperative. https://docs.elixir.xyz/deusd-deprecated (read 2026-08-20, HTTP 200) states verbatim: \"deUSD holds no value and the asset has been sunset.\" and \"Please do not buy or make investments into deUSD, including through AMMs\". What replaced the yield is a claims process, not a rate: \"We're effectuating 1-1 USDC claims for any deUSD or sdeUSD holders, which for the purpose of this communication includes LPs who supplied sdeUSD/deUSD collateral on lend/borrow platforms, AMM LPs, Pendle LPs, etc.\" and \"The claim page is now live, access it via the link here: elixir.xyz/deusd/claims/\". One trap for anyone re-checking: the docs root at https://docs.elixir.xyz/ is stale marketing whose body prose still describes deUSD as \"a fully collateralized, yield-bearing synthetic dollar\" and carries no sunset language at all (case-insensitive counts on the rendered text: \"sunset\" 0, \"no value\" 0), its only pointer to the deprecation being a sidebar nav link labelled \"deUSD - Deprecated\". The deprecation page is the authority. All three pages were checked on 2026-08-20: the quotes are on the deprecation page, and https://docs.elixir.xyz/deusd redirects to it (HTTP 307).","source":"https://docs.elixir.xyz/deusd-deprecated","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/elixir-deusd-sdeusd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"docs.elixir.xyz/deusd-deprecated stops carrying the sentence \"deUSD holds no value and the asset has been sunset.\", or Elixir relaunches a redeemable, yield-bearing deUSD/sdeUSD with published deposit terms.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Huma Finance","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Private Credit — Private Credit scores \"Huma Finance\" on published default and loss history, named underwriter and first-loss capital, depositor's legal claim, and redemption terms and gating. It advertises a permissionless stablecoin deposit at a headline that looks like a savings rate, which is exactly why it earns a named refusal rather than silence. https://docs.huma.finance/products/huma-2.0/modes.md (read 2026-08-20) shows a modes table with Classic mode at \"8% APY\" against Maxi mode at \"0% APY\", asterisked to the footnote \"Subject to monthly adjustments based on market conditions.\" But the 8% is not interest on a dollar: https://docs.huma.finance/about-huma/what-is-huma.md describes Huma as \"powering real-world payment financing with T+0 on-chain settlement\", connecting capital to assets it enumerates as \"cross-border settlements, card payments, and payroll advances\". That is receivable credit risk on off-chain counterparties. The questions that decide it — who underwrote the receivable, who absorbs first loss, what the depositor's claim is when a payer does not pay — are the private-credit criteria, and none of them appear on this page. The quotes were checked on 2026-08-20, and the Private Credit row quotes the same 8%/0% modes table.","source":"https://docs.huma.finance/products/huma-2.0/modes.md","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/huma-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"\"Huma Finance\" is removed from privateCreditPool.ts, or docs.huma.finance stops sourcing the Huma 2.0 yield from payment receivables such as cross-border settlements, card payments and payroll advances.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hyperliquid HLP","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Perp House Vaults — Perp House Vaults scores \"Hyperliquid HLP\" on verifiable loss record and loss-waterfall position rather than on rate. It takes USDC and publishes an APR, which is exactly why readers look for it on a stablecoin-yield page, and its own documentation is what disqualifies it. https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/hypercore/vaults/protocol-vaults (read 2026-08-20) says HLP \"provides liquidity to Hyperliquid through multiple market making strategies, performs liquidations, supplies USDC in Earn, and accrues a portion of trading fees\", and that \"The community can provide liquidity for the vault and share its pnl.\" Sharing a market maker's PnL is a directional exposure whose advertised APR has printed negative; it is not a rate on a dollar. The same page also imposes an exit term this category does not carry: \"The deposit lock-up period is 4 days. This means you can withdraw 4 days after your most recent deposit.\" A pool built to compare on-demand par redemption cannot score that honestly. The quotes were checked on 2026-08-20; the Perp House Vaults row records the same negative advertised APR and 4-day lock-up.","source":"https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/hypercore/vaults/protocol-vaults","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/hyperliquid-hlp/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"the protocol-vaults page stops describing the HLP return as a share of PnL from market making and liquidations, or \"Hyperliquid HLP\" is removed from perpHouseVaultsPool.ts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ondo OUSG","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Tokenised T-Bills — Tokenised T-Bills carries \"Ondo OUSG\" and scores it on who can actually buy it, legal claim quality, redemption reality and total fee load. It is kept out of this pool because the buyer is a different buyer, not because the yield is uninteresting. https://ondo.finance/ousg (read 2026-08-20) describes the \"Ondo Short-Term US Treasuries Fund\" as available to \"Accredited Investor Qualified Purchasers\", states \"For instant transactions, the minimum amount is $5K for both investments and redemptions.\", and showed \"3.45% APY\" with a 7-day yield of \"3.44%\" on the date read. A qualified-purchaser gate is a securities-law status test, not a KYC step: it is the wall that keeps most of this page's readers out of a tokenised money-market fund entirely. Scoring OUSG here against permissionless savings wrappers would flatter it on yield-source quality — Treasuries are the cleanest source in the category — while burying the fact that decides the reader's actual outcome, which is whether they are eligible to buy it at all. On the page, \"Accredited Investor Qualified Purchasers\" sits under the heading \"Eligibility\", so it is the eligibility gate rather than marketing copy (checked 2026-08-20).","source":"https://ondo.finance/ousg","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/ondo-ousg/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ondo.finance/ousg drops the \"Accredited Investor Qualified Purchasers\" eligibility language and opens OUSG to non-accredited buyers, or \"Ondo OUSG\" is removed from tokenisedTbillsPool.ts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pendle","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Fixed-Rate Yield — Fixed-Rate Yield carries \"Pendle\" as that category's documentation reference, scored on maturity handling, rate-lock integrity, early-exit cost and fixed-leg obligor. Pendle is where a reader goes to lock a stablecoin rate, so the absence needs saying out loud, but it answers a structurally different question than this page does. https://docs.pendle.finance/pendle-v2/ProtocolMechanics/YieldTokenization/PT (read 2026-08-20) defines the instrument: \"Principal Token (PT) represents the principal portion of an underlying yield-bearing asset — essentially a zero-coupon bond on the underlying asset.\" and \"Upon maturity, PT can be redeemed at 1:1 for the accounting asset, which appears in brackets at the end of each PT name.\" Par redemption is available at a date, not on demand; before that date the holder exits at a market price set by an AMM. This pool's criteria assume the reader can leave at par whenever they want, so applying them to a dated instrument would score Pendle on a promise it never made, and the price of leaving early — which the fixed-rate pool weighs as a criterion of its own — would go unmeasured. The \"accounting asset\" wording matters: 1 PT-ezETH pays 1 ETH worth of ezETH, not 1 ETH.","source":"https://docs.pendle.finance/pendle-v2/ProtocolMechanics/YieldTokenization/PT","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/pendle/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pendle ships a stablecoin product redeemable at par on demand with no maturity date, or \"Pendle\" is removed from fixedRateYieldPool.ts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Stream Finance (xUSD / sxUSD)","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"There is no product left to compare, and the evidence is the domain itself. Read 2026-08-20: https://streamdefi.com/ and https://www.streamdefi.com/ both return HTTP 200 and land on https://www.streamdefi.com/xml/index.html, whose is verbatim \"AS DeFi — A New Way to Enter the Era of the Crypto Digital Economy, an Intelligent Cloud Mining Platform Designed for Global Users.\" — an unrelated cloud-mining page. A case-insensitive grep for the string \"stream\" in the served HTML returns zero hits. Both operational subdomains are gone from DNS: nslookup app.streamdefi.com returns \"server can't find app.streamdefi.com: NXDOMAIN\", and docs.streamdefi.com fails identically (curl exit 6, \"Could not resolve host\"). The method matters here and is stated deliberately: this host serves HTTP 403 to WebFetch's user agent, so the 403 on its own would have proved nothing — a bot wall is not a shutdown. The HTTP 200 above was read with a browser user agent, and it is the 200, not the 403, that carries the finding. We assert nothing about xUSD's residual redemption value or any wind-down terms, because Stream controls no fetchable page that states them; we assert only that the domain a depositor would type no longer serves Stream, which alone disqualifies it from a pool whose first requirement is a live deposit surface. VERIFIED 2026-08-20: I re-fetched all four URLs myself with a browser user agent and reproduced every element — the two 200s and their redirect to /xml/index.html, the title string character-for-character, the zero-hit grep for \"stream\", and NXDOMAIN on both subdomains via nslookup while the apex still resolves (104.21.55.111 / 172.67.171.29, i.e. the domain is alive and simply no longer Stream's).","source":"https://streamdefi.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/stream-finance-xusd-sxusd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"streamdefi.com (or a successor domain Stream publicly designates) again serves a Stream-operated stablecoin deposit product with live xUSD terms, or Stream publishes redemption/claim terms on a fetchable page it controls.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Yearn (yvUSDC / yvUSDS / yUSD)","category":"stablecoin_yield","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked twice already — as \"Yearn (v3)\" in Yield Vaults and as \"Yearn Finance\" in Yield Aggregators. Its stablecoin vaults compete directly for a USDC balance, so the omission here is a decision rather than an oversight: Yearn's product is a discretionary allocator over other people's venues, and what a buyer has to judge is the allocator, not a rate. https://docs.yearn.fi/getting-started/products/yvaults/overview (read 2026-08-20): \"You deposit your assets, and Yearn's smart contracts put them to work within the DeFi ecosystem, returning the earned yield back to you.\", with v3 vaults that \"can now be made out of a single strategy for your assets, or a collection of multiple strategies which balance your funds between them.\" The fee shape is an allocator's too — \"Performance Fee: Deducted from yield earned every time a vault harvests a strategy.\" and \"Management Fee: Flat rate taken from vault deposits over a year.\" — and https://yearn.fi/ markets the whole thing as \"DeFi's most battle tested yield aggregator\" whose \"Vaults utilize DeFi opportunities to give you the best risk-adjusted yields\". This page's criteria ask what generates the rate and who can change it; against a fund-of-funds the honest answer is \"whatever the strategist allocated to this week\", which is a mandate question, and mandate accountability is what the Yield Vaults pool exists to score. One caution carried from the Yield Aggregators record: Yearn's documented governance lacks a timelock.","source":"https://docs.yearn.fi/getting-started/products/yvaults/overview","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoin_yield/yearn-yvusdc-yvusds-yusd/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Yearn is removed from both yieldVaultsPool.ts and yieldAggregatorsPool.ts, or ships a stablecoin savings product with a single named, non-discretionary yield source.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BUSD (Binance USD) and TerraUSD (UST/USTC) — the two household stablecoin names deliberately absent from the pool","category":"stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Both are excluded as structurally unscoreable and both are RETAINED BY NAME inside the rubric as the reference cases for the 0-2 bands, which is why they are named here rather than silently dropped. BUSD is a wind-down, not a product: dfs.ny.gov/consumers/alerts/Paxos_and_Binance (read 2026-08-19) states NYDFS 'has ordered Paxos to cease minting Paxos-issued BUSD', with Paxos notified 2023-02-13, while holders 'redeem their Paxos-issued BUSD tokens for U.S. dollars through Paxos at a 1:1 exchange rate pursuant to compliance protocols for customers in good standing.' A token that can only be redeemed and never minted has no live answer to criteria 1-3; the research pass must confirm the redemption cut-off from Paxos's own BUSD page before this ships. UST has no counterparty at all: no entity owes a holder anything, so criterion 1 has no subject, criterion 2 no path, criterion 3 no reserve and criterion 4 no admin whose disclosure means anything. cdp_stablecoins already excludes the same class in the same words — 'Purely algorithmic or seigniorage-style stablecoins with no posted collateral' — so this class is orphaned across the whole family by design rather than by oversight, a fact worth stating rather than hiding.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoins/busd-binance-usd-and-terrausd-ust-ustc-the-two-household-sta/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BUSD is reissued or UST relaunched with a reserve and par redemption, either of which would be assessed as a new coin.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Commodity-referenced tokens — PAXG (Paxos), XAU-T (Tether Gold)","category":"stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked in tokenised_commodities. A claim on allocated metal has no par-redemption-in-dollars axis at all, and its assurance artefact is a gold reserve report against ounces rather than a reserve attestation against a dollar liability. Named explicitly because Tether and Paxos issue both, so a reader scanning by issuer would expect them on this page.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoins/commodity-referenced-tokens-paxg-paxos-xau-t-tether-gold/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"PAXG or XAU-T adds par redemption in dollars against a dollar reserve.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"LUSD and BOLD (Liquity), RAI (Reflexer)","category":"stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Coins minted against posted collateral, not against an issuer's reserve: ranked in cdp_stablecoins on liquidationMechanics 35 / collateralIntegrity 25 / borrowCostPredictability 20 / pegResilience 20. None has an issuing entity that owes a holder a dollar, a reserve report to compose, an attestation to open or a par-redemption policy — three of this page's four criteria would score them on documents they do not have.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoins/lusd-and-bold-liquity-rai-reflexer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Liquity or Reflexer issues a coin with an issuing entity, a reserve and par redemption.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Stablecoin settlement and payout platforms — Bridge (Stripe), BVNK, Circle Payments Network, Conduit, dLocal, Rain, Zero Hash","category":"stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Not stablecoins. Ranked in stablecoin_settlement on float_custody 30 / wholesale_price_published 25 / licence_perimeter 25 / settlement_finality 20. The buyer there is a platform asking whose name its operating float sits in while it waits to convert; the buyer here is a bearer asking who owes them a dollar. Different balance, different contract, different creditor. Circle appears in both families correctly — here as the ISSUER of USDC and EURC, there as the operator of a payments network.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoins/stablecoin-settlement-and-payout-platforms-bridge-stripe-bvn/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these issues its own stablecoin to bearers, with a reserve and par redemption.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"USDT0, bridged and wrapped deployments, and chain-specific representations (USDC.e, USDT-on-Tron as a separate entry)","category":"stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as pool ENTRIES because on a wrapped representation the bridge, not the issuer, is the counterparty — which would score criterion 1 against the wrong entity and criterion 4 against the wrong admin key. Chain coverage and canonical-versus-bridged status are shown as dated facts on each issuer's card and graded nowhere; wrapped-asset risk is wrapped_assets' subject.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoins/usdt0-bridged-and-wrapped-deployments-and-chain-specific-rep/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A wrapped or bridged deployment becomes a direct issuer obligation with par redemption from the issuer.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Yield-bearing wrappers and tokenised fund shares — sUSDe, sUSDS / Sky Savings Rate, sFRAX, scrvUSD, stkGHO, BUIDL (BlackRock), USDY (Ondo), USYC (Circle), OUSG (Ondo), BENJI (Franklin Templeton), USTB, VBILL, mTBILL, JTRSY, Spiko, Coinbase USDC Rewards, PayPal PYUSD Rewards","category":"stablecoins","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked in stablecoin_yield on yieldSource 30 / redemption 26 / access 24 / conditions 20, and in tokenised_tbills (circle_usyc, franklin_benji_fobxx, invesco_superstate_ustb, wisdomtree_wtgxx, anemoy_jtrsy, ondo_ousg, openeden_tbill, vaneck_vbill, midas_mtbill) on access 30 / legalClaim 28 / redemption 24 / feeLoad 18. A savings receipt is a claim on a rate that can be switched off; a fund share is a claim on a floating NAV gated by jurisdiction, investor class and minimum. Neither promises a bearer par redemption on demand, and scoring one here would grade a security as a payment instrument — the same category error cdp_stablecoins names in its own second exclusion. Circle and PayPal appear on both sides legitimately and deliberately: the COIN is scored here, the rewards programme layered on top is scored there.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"stablecoins/yield-bearing-wrappers-and-tokenised-fund-shares-susde-susds/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these drops its yield wrapper and is issued as a plain par-redeemable stablecoin.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Chorus One","category":"staking","kind":"operator_changed_reread_pending","reason":"Chorus One's own site says \"Chorus One is now a part of Bitwise\", and its validators now run under the name Bitwise Onchain Solutions. Its staking offer, fees and terms are being re-read on Bitwise's own pages; until that read is made, Chorus One is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://chorus.one/terms-of-service","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"staking/chorus-one/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Its staking offer, commission, slashing cover and terms are read on the operator's own pages (Bitwise Onchain Solutions): then it returns to the ranking on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Bridge, BVNK, Circle, Conduit, dLocal, Rain, Zerohash","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"Ranked in stablecoin_settlement, whose criteria score where a platform's own float legally sits (30) and how a payout settles or returns (20). Wholesale settlement rails, not recurring mandates. Note for the build: stablecoin_settlement is the RESCOPED merchant_tools, so 'merchant_tools' must not be referenced as a live sibling anywhere in this category's copy.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/bridge-bvnk-circle-conduit-dlocal-rain-zerohash/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these publishes a recurring-mandate product beyond wholesale settlement.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbase Commerce recurring","category":"subscriptions","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Not a product in 2026. docs.cdp.coinbase.com/commerce 404s and the CDP sitemap carries no payment-acceptance subscription or recurring page; the only recurring-payment documentation Coinbase publishes is the Base Account guide, and Base Pay Subscriptions is ranked here. The 2018 'Coinbase launches subscription payments' blog post describes no product on sale today. Coinbase Commerce itself is compared in Crypto Payment Gateways, for merchants in the United States and Singapore, the two markets it still serves.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/coinbase-commerce-recurring/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinbase publishes a Commerce subscription product separate from Base Pay Subscriptions, which is ranked here.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Dialect","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"Solana notification and Blinks infrastructure — a delivery surface for a prompt, not a standing payment mandate. It holds no customer authorisation, charges nobody and has no renewal, so it would score nothing on the mandate instrument, nothing on dunning and nothing on counterparty risk. A messaging-layer entry masquerading as a payments one.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/dialect/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Dialect ships a product that holds a customer's standing payment authorisation and charges it.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Hypersub (Fabric Subscription Token Protocol)","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"Deferred, with nothing to rank yet. hypersub.xyz resolves and served 200 on 2026-08-17, but its prepaid model has members buy time up front: no allowance, no renewal charge and nothing to revoke, which puts it in the bottom band of three of this category's four criteria by construction, and the fourth has no documentation to read, since docs.withfabric.xyz now documents an execution and routing product. It would be reconsidered when a subscription-specific vendor document can be found.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/hypersub-fabric-subscription-token-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hypersub publishes documentation for a recurring, revocable payment mandate a merchant can charge.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Loop Crypto / LoopCrypto","category":"subscriptions","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"DEAD, and the reason this category exists. Verified 2026-08-17 with dig @8.8.8.8: loopcrypto.xyz returns registrar nameservers (dns1/dns2.registrar-servers.com) and NO A record, and www, docs and app return neither A nor NS. loopcrypto.com resolves only via ns1/ns2.afternic.com — a domain-brokerage parking service. Its own docs had told merchants 'we are providing our merchants 60 days to wind down your usage of Loop, ending on February 13, 2026'. Every allowance it held had to be re-signed elsewhere. Belongs in the scope note as the category's casualty, quoted on the page, never ranked as a product.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/loop-crypto-loopcrypto/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"loopcrypto.xyz or loopcrypto.com resolves again and serves a live merchant subscription product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"NOWPayments, BitPay, CoinGate, BTCPay Server, OpenNode, Triple-A, Plisio, Crypto.com Pay, Strike","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"All ranked in payment_gateway, where the scored event is one completed checkout. None publishes a standing-mandate product, so importing them would re-rank the same pool on the same axes — a residue, not a category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/nowpayments-bitpay-coingate-btcpay-server-opennode-triple-a/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of these publishes a standing-mandate subscription product beyond one-off checkout.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Pay.sh","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"Written for the wrong buyer, on its own evidence. pay.sh resolves and pay.sh/docs/using-pay/subscriptions serves real content, but every sentence is written to the payer: 'active subscriptions can drain your wallet quietly. Audit them with pay subscriptions list regularly' and 'No further action on your side until you want to inspect or cancel.' This category's buyer is a merchant collecting from someone else. It is also a thin wrapper over the Solana Subscriptions Delegation Program, which is ranked here, so ranking both would score one mechanism twice. It would be reconsidered if a merchant-facing collection reference appeared.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/pay-sh/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pay.sh documents a merchant-side product for collecting recurring payments.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Rotki","category":"subscriptions","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Wrong category. Rotki is a self-hosted portfolio and crypto-accounting application, ranked in Crypto Portfolio Tracking and DeFi Dashboards. It takes recurring money from nobody; it charges a subscription, which is not the same as processing one. It holds no mandate and has no renewal to fail.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/rotki/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rotki ships a product that processes recurring payments for merchants.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups)","category":"subscriptions","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in incentive_distribution as sablier_airdrops, scored on recomputable_allocation, budget_control_after_publication, incident_and_operator_record and sybil_defence_in_writing — a one-off distribution to many recipients. Only Sablier Flow enters this pool, a different product line answering the recurring-mandate question, and it must carry the distinct id sablier_flow.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/sablier-airdrops-merkle-lockups/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Sablier Airdrops gains a recurring-mandate surface distinct from Sablier Flow.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Sphere Pay","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"Pivoted away from subscriptions. docs.spherepay.co/introduction navigation covers How it works, Authentication, Customers & KYC/KYB, Transfers, Onramper Accounts, Offloader Wallets, Payroll, Payment acceptance, Trading and Cross-border trade finance — no subscriptions or recurring section. Its remaining surface overlaps crypto_payroll and stablecoin_settlement.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/sphere-pay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Sphere Pay adds a subscriptions or recurring-billing section to its documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Spritz / Spritz Finance","category":"subscriptions","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in bill_pay as spritz_finance, and the direction of money is wrong: Spritz is a consumer paying their own bills, not a merchant collecting from a customer. Its recurring behaviour is already scored by bill_pay's posted_by_due_date (32) and named_biller_reachability (26).","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/spritz-spritz-finance/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Spritz launches a merchant-side product for collecting recurring payments from customers.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Streamflow and LlamaPay","category":"subscriptions","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Wrong direction of money. Both are payer-funded escrowed streams pointed at workers; Streamflow is already ranked in incentive_distribution and its recurring surface is Payouts, which pays contributors. The payer is the operator's own treasury, so neither can answer this category's central question — whether a CUSTOMER can revoke without telling the merchant. That is crypto_payroll's territory (floatCustody, 26).","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/streamflow-and-llamapay/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Streamflow or LlamaPay ships a customer-funded recurring mandate a merchant can charge and a customer can revoke.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Subscrypt","category":"subscriptions","kind":null,"reason":"No vendor surface exists. dig +short subscrypt.io returns no A record and no NS record (2026-08-17) and no alternative domain could be established. Rule 2 forbids scoring a product from listicles or secondary summaries and rule 5 requires liveness established positively with a date; there is nothing to establish.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/subscrypt/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"subscrypt.io, or a domain it names, resolves and serves a live product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Zebec","category":"subscriptions","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Pivoted away from the category. docs.zebec.io documents Cards, Yield, fiat off-ramps, Streaming payments and Payroll, and carries an explicit 'Zebec Network (Archive) — deprecated legacy content' label; zebec.io is Cards, Payroll, DePIN and a consumer Super App. No merchant subscription or recurring-mandate surface remains. The payroll product is crypto_payroll's territory and the card product is crypto_card's.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"subscriptions/zebec/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Zebec restores a merchant subscription or recurring-mandate product in its documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Bitwave, Cryptio, Lukka, Integral and SoftLedger; and Ledgible's institutional TaxPro tier","category":"tax_software","kind":null,"reason":"Enterprise crypto sub-ledger and accounting infrastructure sold to finance teams by sales call, with no published per-tax-year price and no consumer purchase path. Their buyer is a controller closing books, not a person filing a return, so they fail structurally rather than substantively. Ledgible's consumer path is listed here (not ranked while a person re-reads its pages): its record publishes 'paid crypto-tax reports start at $49 per tax year' (verified 2026-07-27), a self-serve purchase path; only the institutional tier is excluded.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tax_software/bitwave-cryptio-lukka-integral-and-softledger-and-ledgible-s/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them publishes a per-tax-year price and a consumer purchase path.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Blockpit","category":"tax_software","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Blockpit's terms (section 10.1.9) bar reading its data \"with technical aids (e.g. crawlers or bots)\", which is how this site reads a provider, so this site does not read its prices and terms that way. Until a person reads them, Blockpit is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://www.blockpit.io/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/blockpit/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Blockpit's pricing page and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"CoinLedger","category":"tax_software","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto tax software products remain, which is no judgement on CoinLedger.","source":"https://coinledger.io","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/coinledger/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read one more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission, or Summ's help centre allows this site's declared reader. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CoinTracker","category":"tax_software","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"CoinTracker's own pages answered automated reads with a block page on 10 November 2026, and its terms bar \"any data mining, robots, scraping, or similar data gathering or extraction methods\", so this site does not read its pages the way it reads a provider. Until a person reads them, CoinTracker is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://www.cointracker.com/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/cointracker/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CoinTracker's pages and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"CoinTracking.info","category":"tax_software","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto tax software products remain, which is no judgement on CoinTracking.info.","source":"https://cointracking.info","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/cointracking-info/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read one more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission, or Summ's help centre allows this site's declared reader. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Crypto Tax Calculator (Australian listing)","category":"tax_software","kind":null,"reason":"The same product as Summ (formerly Crypto Tax Calculator), which is listed here while its pages cannot be read by this site. The Australian listing pointed to the same site, https://cryptotaxcalculator.io, and the same help.summ.com pricing article, so one product held two rows; the two were joined into one.","source":"https://cryptotaxcalculator.io","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-10-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tax_software/crypto-tax-calculator-australian-listing/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Summ and the Australian listing become separate products with their own sites and prices.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Divly","category":"tax_software","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto tax software products remain, which is no judgement on Divly.","source":"https://divly.com","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/divly/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read one more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission, or Summ's help centre allows this site's declared reader. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Koinly","category":"tax_software","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Koinly's pricing and terms pages answered automated reads with a bot-check page on 10 November 2026, and its terms bar the use of \"bots, web crawlers, or any similar devices or online tools to access or index data from Koinly\", so its prices and terms could not be read in the way this site reads a provider. Until they are read, Koinly is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://koinly.io/legal/terms/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/koinly/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Koinly's pricing page and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Ledgible","category":"tax_software","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Ledgible's terms bar using \"any robot, spider, scraper or other automated means to access\" its services, so this site does not read its pages the way it reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Ledgible is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://ledgible.io/terms-of-service.pdf/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/ledgible/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ledgible's pages and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Pekuna","category":"tax_software","kind":null,"reason":"Not software. Pekuna is a German crypto-tax advisory firm that delivers a bespoke written tax opinion (Steuergutachten), with a mandatory EUR 1,900 Einstiegspruefung before any report exists and the opinion quoted case by case afterwards. A bespoke human engagement has no named-form output, no disclosed cost-basis default, no export format and no lapse state, so three of the four criteria are inapplicable, and ranking a EUR 1,900 advisory retainer against a $49 licence would be a category error. DACH depth is carried by CoinTracking, which we read in full, and by Blockpit, which is listed here while its pages cannot be read by this site.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tax_software/pekuna/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Pekuna ships software with a named-form output and a published price.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Pure portfolio trackers and dashboards: CoinStats, Delta, Kubera, Zerion, DeBank, CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap portfolios","category":"tax_software","kind":null,"reason":"Wrong instrument: their output is a balance, not a filing, so all four criteria here would be moot, and they are compared where a balance is the point. Kubera, Delta and CoinStats are ranked in Crypto Portfolio Tracking, and Zerion and DeBank in DeFi Dashboards. rotki is the closest case: it runs locally, which is what this category's criterion on a portable record rewards, and it would be ranked here only if its own documentation named a country-specific tax form.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tax_software/pure-portfolio-trackers-and-dashboards-coinstats-delta-kuber/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them produces a tax filing output, such as a Form 8949 or a named national form.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Summ (formerly Crypto Tax Calculator)","category":"tax_software","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Summ's help centre, where the documentation its four scores rest on is published, tells automated readers other than a list of named bots not to read any of its pages (its robots.txt sets \"Disallow: /\" for every other agent), and this site reads under its own declared name, so this site does not read those pages the way it reads a provider. Until they can be, Summ is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://help.summ.com/robots.txt","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/summ-formerly-crypto-tax-calculator/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Summ's help centre allows this site's declared reader in its robots.txt, or a person reads the pages by hand: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"TaxBit (consumer)","category":"tax_software","kind":null,"reason":"Was the household name in this category and is no longer purchasable: the consumer platform closed on 30 October 2023 and historical data was downloadable only until 30 April 2024, after which TaxBit sells enterprise and public-sector 1099 compliance infrastructure under contract with no self-serve price. Excluded as unbuyable, but RETAINED inside portable_record_and_prior_year_access as its 0-2 exemplar, which is worth more to a reader than a pool slot. The two shutdown sentences must be re-loaded and quoted character-exact before publication.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tax_software/taxbit-consumer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TaxBit reopens a consumer product a person can buy at a published price.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TokenTax","category":"tax_software","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 10 November 2026; not ranked while fewer than five crypto tax software products remain, which is no judgement on TokenTax.","source":"https://tokentax.co","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/tokentax/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We read one more of them by hand, or with the provider's permission, or Summ's help centre allows this site's declared reader. Then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TurboTax and TurboTax Investor Center (Intuit), H&R Block, TaxAct, FreeTaxUSA and Cash App Taxes","category":"tax_software","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"General-purpose filers, not crypto cost-basis engines — and the DESTINATION of this category's output rather than competitors to it. They accept an 8949 or a CSV that something else computed; none reads a chain, matches lots across wallets under Rev. Proc. 2024-28, or classifies an LP exit, so all four criteria are inapplicable rather than merely weak. ZenLedger, listed here, lists 'strongest TurboTax integration' as a feature, the cleanest proof they sit downstream. TurboTax Investor Center is a free consumer tracker and belongs with Crypto Portfolio Tracking. Named because these are the first names a reader searches.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tax_software/turbotax-and-turbotax-investor-center-intuit-h-r-block-taxac/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them begins reading chains and computing crypto cost basis itself.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Waltio","category":"tax_software","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Waltio's terms say a user must not \"scrape or reverse engineer the Service\", so this site does not read its prices and terms the way it reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Waltio is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://www.waltio.com/2024-terms-conditions/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/waltio/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Waltio's pricing page and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"ZenLedger","category":"tax_software","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"ZenLedger's terms of use bar using \"any robot, spider, site search/retrieval application, or other manual or automatic device or process to retrieve, index, “data mine”\" its services, so this site does not read its prices and terms the way it reads a provider. Until a person reads them, ZenLedger is not read in full here and its earlier results are not shown.","source":"https://zenledger.io/terms-of-use/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-10","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-12","ledgerKey":"tax_software/zenledger/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ZenLedger's pricing page and terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then we read it in full again.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Meteora Dynamic Bonding Curve (DBC)","category":"token_launch_platforms","kind":null,"reason":"excluded because it is the rail two of the nine ranked venues run on, not a venue this buyer purchases. Verified rather than assumed on 2026-08-27: docs.meteora.ag/core-products/dbc/what-is-dbc.md (HTTP 200) describes DBC as a template layer sold to launchpads, not to issuers — 'DBC is built for launchpads that want repeatable token launch templates. A partner can define the curve, fees, migration target, LP distribution, and creator economics once, then let many creators launch from that configuration.' — with the lifecycle table stating 'Create config | A launchpad or partner defines the quote mint, curve, fees, token type, migration target, and liquidity distribution.' and the permissions table splitting every fee claim between the config's `fee_claimer` (the partner) and the pool creator. It runs at program dbcij3LWUppWqq96dh6gJWwBifmcGfLSB5D4DuSMaqN. Jupiter Studio and Bags both launch on it, and Boop's graduation lands on its DAMM v2 sibling, so ranking DBC alongside them would rank one program three times over. CORRECTION TO THE SCOPING MODEL RUNS: the sentence the brief quoted for this exclusion ('allows any launch partners to enable their users to launch tokens') is not on the current page, which has been rewritten; the quotations above are what the vendor publishes today.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_launch_platforms/meteora-dynamic-bonding-curve-dbc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Meteora sells DBC directly to token issuers as a launch venue.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Virtuals Protocol","category":"token_launch_platforms","kind":null,"reason":"excluded on instrument mismatch, confirmed at the vendor's own surfaces on 2026-08-27. The thing you launch is an agent, not a fungible token you keep: whitepaper.virtuals.io/about-virtuals/capital-formation-layer/virtuals-launch-mechanics.md (HTTP 200) opens 'Founders initiate a launch by creating their agent on the Virtuals platform at no cost', the protocol describes itself as 'a society of AI agents, a coordinated, onchain ecosystem where autonomous agents have identity, capital, jobs, markets, governance', and app.virtuals.io's own meta description states 'These agents are tokenized through Agent Tokens'. The whitepaper is explicit that the design target is not this buyer at all: 'Virtuals is a protocol designed and optimized from first principles for autonomous economic actors rather than for human users.' Separately, TRAP 3 checked and upheld: a case-insensitive search of whitepaper.virtuals.io/llms.txt (HTTP 200, the vendor's complete documentation index) returns ZERO occurrences of 'Genesis' and ZERO of 'Unicorn' — the Genesis parameters that still circulate on secondary sites have been removed from the vendor's own corpus, so any figure carrying them is barred here twice over.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-27","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_launch_platforms/virtuals-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Virtuals lets a founder launch a fungible token they keep, rather than an agent.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Circle Bridged USDC Standard","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"PROMOTED BY PROPOSAL A, EXCLUDED HERE. It fails the buyer test: the party who adopts it is a chain operator or bridge deploying USDC, not a token issuer choosing a standard for their own asset, and keeping it would put two non-adoptable Circle entries in an eight-entry pool. Its quotes are verified on www.circle.com/bridged-usdc (200, 2026-08-17) — 'Circle and third-party team jointly elect to securely transfer ownership of the bridged USDC token contract to Circle' and 'grants Circle the option, but not the obligation, to obtain ownership of the token contract' — and are retained as the CALIBRATION DOCUMENT for the mint_authority_and_revocation rule that a pre-agreed ownership transfer counts against a standard, not for it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/circle-bridged-usdc-standard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle Bridged USDC Standard becomes adoptable by a token issuer for its own asset.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Circle Gateway","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"A user-facing unified USDC balance product: it changes where a holder's balance lives, not who holds the mint. It fails the buyer test outright, and none of the four criteria would separate it from CCTP.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/circle-gateway/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle Gateway gives issuers control of mint authority over their own token.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"ERC-7802 as a separate entry","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"The crosschainMint/crosschainBurn interface inside SuperchainERC20, not a separable product an issuer picks. Scoring both would double-count one design. Its merged status is recorded as a fact on the SuperchainERC20 entry.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/erc-7802-as-a-separate-entry/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ERC-7802 becomes a product an issuer adopts separately from SuperchainERC20.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"IBC ICS-20 denom traces","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"The mint authority is the receiving chain's light client, so every criterion here would collapse into the verification model that cross_chain_messaging's message_trust_model already scores and that this page is barred from re-scoring. Excluded on the guardrail, not on merit.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/ibc-ics-20-denom-traces/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ICS-20 gives the issuer, rather than the receiving chain's light client, control of mint authority.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"LayerZero v2, Axelar, Chainlink CCIP, Hyperlane, Wormhole guardians, deBridge and Union as messaging protocols","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"All seven are ranked in Cross-Chain Messaging, on message trust model (35%), application-configurable security (25%), forged and stuck message record (25%) and cost per message (15%). This category compares the token standards five of them offer issuers (LayerZero OFT, Axelar ITS, Chainlink CCT, Hyperlane Warp Routes and Wormhole NTT), scored on who can mint the token, who can deploy it, how much a compromised minter can print and whether an issuer can leave; scoring the messaging layer here as well would rank the same protocols twice. Union and deBridge offer issuers no token standard and do not enter at all.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/layerzero-v2-axelar-chainlink-ccip-hyperlane-wormhole-guardi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A protocol's token standard is offered separately from its messaging product and is not already among the eight entries.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Multichain / Anyswap anyTokens","category":"token_standards","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Wound down: multichain.org returned HTTP 522 on 2026-08-17, and an operator that has stopped cannot be ranked against live standards.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/multichain-anyswap-anytokens/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"multichain.org serves a live operator again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Native per-chain issuance (deploy your own contract on each chain and mint natively)","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"The absence of a standard rather than a standard. It would score a vacuous 10 on mint authority with nothing to compare on the other three axes. Shown as the baseline fact against which the eight entries are read.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/native-per-chain-issuance-deploy-your-own-contract-on-each-c/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A chain ships a native issuance arrangement with its own mint-authority rules an issuer adopts, which would make it a standard to compare.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Polygon AggLayer unified bridge and OptimismMintableERC20 (legacy OP Stack StandardBridge token)","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"Both are the same shape as SuperchainERC20 — a cluster or bridge predeploy holds mint on every attached chain, the issuer cannot revoke it, neither ships a cap, and consent belongs to the chain. They would re-score one arrangement with the same answer. AggLayer is additionally a chain operator's choice, not the token issuer's.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/polygon-agglayer-unified-bridge-and-optimismmintableerc20-le/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Either gives the issuer revocable mint authority or a cap, which would separate it from SuperchainERC20.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Router Protocol","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"Already hard-excluded in cross_chain_messaging because its trust model could not be established from its own documentation. It publishes no issuer-facing token standard with a readable mint-authority arrangement, so all four criteria would score on silence with nothing to separate it.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/router-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Router publishes an issuer-facing token standard with a readable mint-authority arrangement.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"USDT0 / XAUt0 (Everdawn Labs Limited, the Legacy Mesh)","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"A deployment, not a standard an issuer can choose — one issuer's OFT instance. What it shows belongs with the LayerZero OFT row, ranked here; on 2026-08-17 the contracts read: Arbitrum USDT 0xFd086bC7CD5C481DCC9C85ebE478A1C0b69FCbb9 owner() = 0x4DFF9b5b0143E642a3F63a5bcf2d1C328e600bf8; the Ethereum OFT Adapter locking the real USDT 0x6C96dE32CEa08842dcc4058c14d3aaAD7Fa41dee owner() = the same Safe (getThreshold() 3, five owners); Ink USD₮0 0x0200C29006150606B650577BBE7B6248F58470c1 owner() = 0xc95de55ce5e93f788A1Faab2A9c9503F51a5dAE2; against Ethereum USDT 0xdAC17F958D2ee523a2206206994597C13D831ec7 owner() = Tether's 0xC6CDE7C39eB2f0F0095F41570af89eFC2C1Ea828. usdt0.to states 'USDT0 is part of Everdawn Labs Limited', its Terms are BVI-governed and never mention Tether, and Tether's own newsroom describes itself as an investor in LayerZero Labs rather than the operator.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/usdt0-xaut0-everdawn-labs-limited-the-legacy-mesh/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"USDT0 or XAUt0 becomes a standard other issuers can adopt for their own assets.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"WBTC, cbBTC, tBTC, LBTC, kBTC, solvBTC, FBTC and BTCB (ranked in Wrapped Assets)","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"Compared in Wrapped Assets, where all of them but kBTC are ranked (kBTC waits for a person to read Kraken's pages), on who can move the bitcoin, who may redeem it, how tightly the reserve is proven and published cost: assets with a reserve behind them, judged from the holder's side. This category scores a token standard from the issuer's side, and no criterion overlaps.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-10-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/wbtc-cbbtc-tbtc-lbtc-kbtc-solvbtc-fbtc-and-btcb-ranked-in-wr/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them offers issuers a token standard of its own, which would be assessed here separately from the reserve-backed asset.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Wormhole Token Bridge (Portal), Stargate and the eighteen bridges ranked in Bridges","category":"token_standards","kind":null,"reason":"All eighteen are ranked in Bridges. They answer 'how do I move my funds', the user's question, not 'who may create my supply', the issuer's. Stargate specifically is a liquidity application built on OFT, not a standard an issuer adopts. Ranking any of them here would rank the same products twice on neighbouring questions.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-10-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"token_standards/wormhole-token-bridge-portal-stargate-and-the-eighteen-bridg/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A bridge ships an issuer-facing token standard that defines who may mint the issuer's supply.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"DigiFT","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":null,"reason":"Considered as a seventh licensed-venue candidate and rejected on the liveness rule, not on merit: digift.sg returned HTTP 403 to this session on 2026-08-19, so neither its MAS licence numbers nor any term-debt product could be established from a primary source. Its published flagship products are tokenised T-bill and money-market funds, which would collide with tokenised_tbills in any case. Revisit only if the site becomes fetchable AND a term instrument is evidenced.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/digift/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"digift.sg loads for a reader, so its MAS licence and term-debt products can be read.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Franklin Templeton BENJI / FOBXX","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A registered 1940 Act government money market fund - cash equivalent with no maturity, coupon or credit exposure for this page to score. Already ranked as franklin_benji_fobxx in tokenised_tbills and franklin_benji_fobxx-money_market_funds in money_market_funds. Its 21X listing (grBENJI) is evidence FOR 21X's venue record, not grounds for an entry here.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/franklin-templeton-benji-fobxx/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Franklin Templeton issues a term-debt instrument with a maturity and coupon.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Janus Henderson Anemoy JAAA","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A tokenised AAA CLO fund - a fund share over floating-rate credit, already ranked as jaaa_anemoy_centrifuge in tokenised_funds, whose claimDistance and feeVsAlternative axes are built for feeder-and-SPV fund wrappers. Nothing is left over that this page asks and that page does not.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/janus-henderson-anemoy-jaaa/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Anemoy issues a bond rather than a fund share.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Mercado Bitcoin tokenised fixed income","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"STOPPED: on 2 November 2026 attackers drained Mercado Bitcoin's hot wallets and about 36,000 customer deposit addresses (about $48.6 million across 11 blockchains), and \"Deposits and withdrawals were suspended as a precaution.\" When accounts reopened on 9 and 10 November, customers could see balances but not withdraw: \"Trading, withdrawals, deposits, transfers, Pix and card services remained unavailable\", Pix withdrawals return only after account revalidation and crypto transfers in a later phase, and the exchange says it is replacing the affected assets with its own funds (rekt.news, 10 November 2026, read 11 November 2026). Do not send crypto to a Mercado Bitcoin deposit address until transfers are back. A genuinely interesting retail emerging-market term-debt route and a real orphan - the brand was listed in the exchange pool for an entirely different product, where it is held as a pending re-read. Excluded solely because mercadobitcoin.com.br returned HTTP 403 on 2026-08-19 and no primary page could be read. Recorded as unresolved rather than fabricated; first candidate for admission if a fetchable primary source appears.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/mercado-bitcoin-tokenised-fixed-income/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"mercadobitcoin.com.br loads for a reader, so its tokenised fixed income can be read.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ondo OUSG (ondo_ousg_bonds_tok)","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Short-duration US government fund-of-funds, already ranked as ondo_ousg in tokenised_tbills (grep verified) on the identical four axes - access, legal claim, redemption, fees. Pure duplicate; the T-bill page owns the cash-equivalent story. Evict from the live pool.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/ondo-ousg-ondo-ousg-bonds-tok/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Ondo issues a term-debt instrument separate from OUSG.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Securitize, Steakhouse Financial, Bitbond","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":null,"reason":"Infrastructure and advisory rather than instruments. Securitize is an issuance platform ranked as securitize_tokeq in tokenised_equities with BUIDL in money_market_funds; Steakhouse is an adviser to RWA vaults with no buyable instrument of its own; Bitbond held the first BaFin-approved security-token bond prospectus in 2019 but that instrument matured and the company pivoted to token tooling. Including any of them would score infrastructure, not a claim a buyer can hold.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/securitize-steakhouse-financial-bitbond/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Securitize, Steakhouse or Bitbond sells a term-debt instrument of its own.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Societe Generale FORGE (EUR digital bonds)","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"region_or_audience_locked","reason":"Genuine EUR digital bonds in law, but issued only into institutional primary placements with no public tariff and no onboarding route. It fails the CONJUNCTIVE availability test this pool applied - no public tariff AND no onboarding route of any kind. Stated as a conjunction on purpose: BondbloX, ranked first here, is also institutional-only, so a bare 'a reader cannot buy one' would be a rule the #1 row visibly violates. BondbloX clears the tariff prong (a published tiered schedule headed 'Applicable Fees relevant to non-institutional members') and is reachable through a Direct Agent Member Participant; Societe Generale FORGE publishes no price at all - rather than failing on evidence quality. Show as a fact in the category intro, not a ranked row. Same disposition for SIX Digital Exchange (SDX) digital bonds, which are real Swiss DLT Act ledger-based bonds reachable only through member banks.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/societe-generale-forge-eur-digital-bonds/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"FORGE publishes a public tariff or an onboarding route for its EUR digital bonds.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Spiko (spiko_bonds_mmf_tok)","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"An AMF-approved money market fund of sub-one-year T-bills - a cash equivalent, not term debt. Already ranked as spiko_ustbl in money_market_funds and as spiko in stablecoin_yield (grep verified). Keeping it re-ranks the same product on weaker versions of the sibling's purpose-built axes. Evict from the live pool.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/spiko-spiko-bonds-mmf-tok/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Spiko issues term debt beyond sub-one-year T-bills.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Superstate / Invesco USTB and Opening Bell","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":null,"reason":"USTB is short-duration government securities, ranked as invesco_superstate_ustb in tokenised_tbills and in money_market_funds; Opening Bell is equities, ranked as superstate_opening_bell_tokeq in tokenised_equities. Superstate publishes no term-debt bond product this category could score.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/superstate-invesco-ustb-and-opening-bell/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Superstate publishes a term-debt bond product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Swarm SwarmX TBONDS01 (swarm_bonds_tok)","category":"tokenised_bonds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Fails the category's own sub-USD-1M hard exclusion and the liveness rule: TAV '$< 0.001' across 16 holders, swarm.com returning HTTP 403, Swarm Markets acquired by Inveniam (closed 2026-02-24). Its fee schedule has never been tested against real float, and the only data is third-party. The brand is already ranked as swarm_tokeq in tokenised_equities. Unrankable.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_bonds/swarm-swarmx-tbonds01-swarm-bonds-tok/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TBONDS01 exceeds USD 1M and swarm.com loads for a reader.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinbase / Deribit Abu Dhabi FSRA tokenized securities","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on evidence, not on merit. The FSRA framing is promising, but the primary page would not load on 2026-08-19, so liveness cannot be established positively and no conveyance language can be quoted from a page actually read. Re-check next pass.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/coinbase-deribit-abu-dhabi-fsra-tokenized-securities/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The FSRA primary page loads for a reader.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Equity perpetual futures (Kraken xStocks perps, Hyperliquid, Ostium) and equity CFDs","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Hard exclusion #1 in the live spec and excluded by the brief: leveraged synthetic price exposure with funding rates, no share, no custodian, no redemption, no corporate action. A perp on a stock is a trading instrument. It belongs to perp_dex, whose axes must not be rebuilt here.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/equity-perpetual-futures-kraken-xstocks-perps-hyperliquid-os/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them is restructured to hold the underlying share with a custodian and pass on corporate actions.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Exodus (EXOD), Forward Industries (FWDI) and other self-tokenized issuers","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Issuers whose shares ride Superstate's Opening Bell rails, not sellers a buyer chooses between. Scoring them separately would score the same infrastructure repeatedly under different tickers, and every criterion would resolve to Superstate's answer.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/exodus-exod-forward-industries-fwdi-and-other-self-tokenized/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"An issuer tokenises its shares on its own rails rather than Superstate's.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Jarsy, PreStocks and other pre-IPO 'access' trackers","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Hard exclusions #2 and #3: offshore SPV claims on private shares without documented issuer consent, so the '1:1' claim is unfalsifiable and the SPV's own claim may be unenforceable — a claim on a claim that may not exist. Not a public equity and not scoreable on corporate actions.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/jarsy-prestocks-and-other-pre-ipo-access-trackers/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A tracker documents issuer consent and a 1:1 share claim.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kalshi, Polymarket and other prediction-market equity contracts","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Event contracts referencing share prices: no issuer, no custodian, no corporate action, nothing for share_or_promise or corporate_actions_record to grade. Already ranked in Prediction Markets on axes this category does not ask.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/kalshi-polymarket-and-other-prediction-market-equity-contrac/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A prediction market issues a share-backed token with a custodian and corporate actions.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kraken and Bybit as tokenised-stock venues","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Distributors of Backed issuance whose upstream terms already supply this category's binding evidence — kraken.com/legal/xstocks is cited AS the Backed record's source. Ranking them as members would re-score Exchanges's own entries on evidence they do not control; venue cost, incident record and country licence map are the exchange category's questions (personal_all_in_cost, withdrawal_incident_record, licence_coverage_map). Gemini is the deliberate exception and only because its own binding page describes the instrument DIFFERENTLY from its manufacturer, which is a conveyance fact, not a venue fact.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/kraken-and-bybit-as-tokenised-stock-venues/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken or Bybit issues tokenised stocks under its own terms rather than distributing Backed's.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Mirror Protocol mAssets, Binance Stock Tokens, FTX (CM-Equity / Digital Assets AG) tokenised stocks","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"All dead. Binance wound its stock tokens down in 2021; FTX's equity tokens froze inside the 2022 bankruptcy; mAssets were algorithmic synthetics that collapsed with Terra in May 2022 and never held shares. Liveness cannot be established positively for any of them. They are calibration material for the share_or_promise floor, not pool members.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/mirror-protocol-massets-binance-stock-tokens-ftx-cm-equity-d/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them relaunches a tokenised stock backed by held shares, which would be assessed as a new product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Oasis Pro Markets (Ondo's US broker-dealer)","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Not a separate buyable product. The July 2026 announcement is forward-looking with no live retail product and no register number on the page. It is evidence for Ondo's who_is_on_the_paper score, not a pool member.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/oasis-pro-markets-ondo-s-us-broker-dealer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Oasis Pro opens a live retail product with a register number on its page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ondo OUSG, Backed bTokens, Swarm bond tokens, WisdomTree Digital Funds, Apollo ACRED, Bitwise/Superstate USCC","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Same issuers or same rails, different asset class — already ranked in tokenised_tbills, tokenised_bonds and tokenised_funds on the questions those categories ask. Only the equity products belong here. Conversely backed_xstocks and ondo_stocks_global_markets must be REMOVED from Tokenised Funds: a single-stock tracker is not a 'Registered fund share, feeder interest, or SPV note', and that pool currently marks them down (claimDistance 3 and 2) for failing a definition they were never meant to meet.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/ondo-ousg-backed-btokens-swarm-bond-tokens-wisdomtree-digita/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them issues tokenised equities, which only then belong here.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Republic Mirror Tokens (republic_mirror_tokeq — CURRENT POOL MEMBER, REMOVED)","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Both proposals agree and the repo confirms the defect: pricingSourceUrl is cryptobriefing.com, a secondary crypto news site, in direct breach of the primary-source rule, and the record's own watchout admits '$1 price and the Solana chain must be dropped or re-sourced'. republic.com/mirror returned HTTP 403 on 2026-08-19, so no primary source is reachable. Substantively it is an unsecured Republic note on private-company valuations with no public share, no possible dividend, split or vote, and payout only on a liquidity event — unscoreable on two of four criteria and caught by the spec's own hard exclusion on pre-IPO SPV access tokens. Belongs in a future private-markets category.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/republic-mirror-tokens-republic-mirror-tokeq-current-pool-me/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Republic re-sources its Mirror Tokens record from a primary page.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Swarm","category":"tokenised_equities","kind":null,"reason":"Removed from the ranking because its evidence could not be loaded when checked on 2026-08-19. The record's pricing source was https://docs.swarm.com/readme.md?ask=...&goal=..., a query to the documentation site's AI assistant rather than a document. docs.swarm.com/readme.md itself (HTTP 200) contains none of the quoted text: no '$100k in aggregate', no '0.25%, paid by the Maker only if the offer is successfully taken', no monthly reserve disclosures, no BaFin, no US-person wording, no issuer name. swarm.com returns HTTP 403, so it cannot be shown to be live either, and a source that cannot be loaded cannot support a score.","source":"https://docs.swarm.com/readme.md?ask=...&goal=","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-08-19","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_equities/swarm/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Swarm publishes a primary document for its tokenised equities that a reader can load.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL)","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Money-Market Funds — a reader cannot see our taxonomy, so its absence here reads as an oversight. (Verified in our own catalog: Money-Market Funds carries id 'blackrock_buidl-money_market_funds', name 'BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL)'.) BUIDL is a cash vehicle, not a strategy fund: Securitize's own site calls it \"the world's largest tokenized treasury fund\", and Ondo's OUSG page answers \"How is OUSG backed?\" with \"The significant majority of this portfolio is currently in the BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL), with the remainder in BlackRock's FedFund (TFDXX), bank deposits, and USDC for liquidity purposes.\" — i.e. BUIDL is the cash layer other products feed into. Its own SEC Form D/A (CIK 0002013810, accession 0002013810-26-000002, filed 2026-07-27) names the issuer \"BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund Ltd.\", jurisdiction \"VIRGIN ISLANDS, BRITISH\", industry group \"Pooled Investment Fund\", checks Rule 506(c) and \"Section 3(c)(7)\", answers \"Is the issuer registered as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940?\" with \"No\", reports \"Minimum investment accepted from any outside investor\" of \"$ 100,000\", and lists \"Securitize Markets, LLC\" (Recipient CRD Number 283256) as the sales-compensation recipient. Graded here it would be scored on strategy risk it does not run; graded in Money-Market Funds it is scored on the cash rules it actually lives by. Fetched to satisfy myself: the Form D/A XSL primary_doc (HTTP 200, 38,894 bytes, curl with a UA — WebFetch is 403-walled on sec.gov), own.securitize.io, ondo.finance/ousg, and data.sec.gov's submissions JSON for the 2026-07-27 filing date (the document itself is signed 2026-07-23).","source":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2013810/000201381026000002/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/blackrock-usd-institutional-digital-liquidity-fund-buidl/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BUIDL is removed from our Money-Market Funds pool, or BlackRock issues a tokenised fund under the BUIDL name that holds something other than cash, Treasury bills and repo (credit, equity or multi-asset).","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BNY and Goldman Sachs tokenised money market funds (GS DAP mirror tokens)","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":null,"reason":"The largest tokenised-fund headline of 2025 that you cannot actually buy as a token, so it is named rather than left out. BNY's own release (\"NEW YORK Jul 23, 2025\") states \"Mirror tokens of the MMF shares are created utilizing GS DAP ® , an award-winning technology platform developed by Goldman Sachs Digital Assets, which leverages solutions developed by Digital Asset.\" and, decisively, \"BNY will continue to maintain the official books, records, and settlements for the funds within currently approved guidelines while also enabling mirror tokens on GS DAP ®\" — the token mirrors a register that stays with the transfer agent, so the token is not the share of record, which is the first test this category applies. Distribution is closed too: the release is subtitled \"Designed to meet the evolving needs of sophisticated institutional investors in digital capital markets\" and states \"Investors can subscribe and redeem MMF shares through BNY's market-leading LiquidityDirect SM platform\", with \"BlackRock, BNY Investments Dreyfus, Federated Hermes, Fidelity Investments, and Goldman Sachs Asset Management\" named as launch managers. There is no self-serve subscription outside that institutional cash portal, and therefore no purchasable product for a comparison to rank. Fetched to satisfy myself: the BNY release as raw HTML (HTTP 200) and grepped — all four strings present; the earlier draft's \"no public chain, no wallet\" claim was cut because the page contains neither word, and a domain-restricted search of bny.com/goldmansachs.com/digitalasset.com surfaced no later release changing the mirror-token structure.","source":"https://www.bny.com/corporate/global/en/about-us/newsroom/company-news/bny-and-goldman-sachs-launch-tokenized-money-market-funds-solution.html","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/bny-and-goldman-sachs-tokenised-money-market-funds-gs-dap-mi/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BNY or Goldman states that the GS DAP token is the official record of ownership rather than a mirror, or the mirrored MMF shares become subscribable or transferable outside LiquidityDirect institutional accounts.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Circle USYC","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Money-Market Funds and Tokenised T-Bills — verified as 'Circle USYC (Hashnote International Short Duration Yield Fund Ltd)' in Money-Market Funds and 'Circle USYC' in Tokenised T-Bills. Circle's own page states verbatim \"USYC is a tokenized money market fund designed to provide institutional-grade, yield-bearing collateral with near-instant liquidity onchain\" and, in its FAQ, \"Each USYC token serves as a digital representation of a share of the Hashnote International Short Duration Fund Ltd. (the “Fund”), a Cayman Islands registered mutual fund.\" Hashnote is not a second, missing answer — the Hashnote fund IS the underlying of the ranked Circle entry, which carries both names. Note also the access wall the tile would otherwise hide: \"Shares of the Fund and USYC are only available to non-U.S. Persons, as defined under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.\", with the page's own copy reading \"USYC offers yield-bearing exposure with a $100,000 minimum\". A T-bill-and-repo collateral instrument belongs with the cash funds, not with the credit and strategy funds ranked here. Fetched to satisfy myself: circle.com/usyc as raw HTML (HTTP 200, 311,130 bytes) — the defining sentence is carried in the page's JSON-LD FinancialProduct description and the Hashnote/non-U.S.-Persons/$100,000 strings appear in both the FAQPage schema and the rendered body copy.","source":"https://www.circle.com/usyc","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/circle-usyc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Circle issues a tokenised fund that is not a money market fund, or USYC is removed from our Money-Market Funds pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Enzyme (Enzyme Onyx)","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":null,"reason":"Not a fund — it is the software other people's funds run on. Enzyme's own homepage headlines \"The global infrastructure for tokenized finance\", its product nav lists \"Enzyme Onyx — Issue, structure and administer tokenized funds and instruments.\", and its white-label section reads \"The white-label engine powering your tokenized business\" over \"The tech stack to issue and administer tokenized funds and instruments\". The buyer is an issuer deploying vehicles, not an investor subscribing to a share class, so the things this category actually compares — who the investment manager is, the fee against the fund's yield, the redemption window, the legal claim on the underlying — have no counterpart on the page. It is included in this refusal list rather than dropped silently because \"onchain asset management\" is the phrase most likely to send a reader looking for it here. Fetched to satisfy myself: enzyme.finance as raw HTML (HTTP 200, 132,909 bytes) — the \"tech stack\" line sits under the Vault-as-a-Service heading rather than beside the Onyx name, so the Onyx attribution has been re-sourced above to the nav string the page actually carries.","source":"https://enzyme.finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/enzyme-enzyme-onyx/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Enzyme launches a fund of its own with a named investment manager, published NAV and subscription/redemption terms, rather than white-label infrastructure sold to issuers.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Franklin Templeton BENJI / Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX)","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Money-Market Funds and Tokenised T-Bills — verified in our own catalog as 'Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX / BENJI)' in Money-Market Funds and 'Franklin Templeton BENJI (FOBXX)' in Tokenised T-Bills. Franklin's own Benji site states verbatim \"BENJI is the World's First U.S.-Registered Money Market Fund, Onchain.\" and \"1 share of FOBXX = 1 BENJI token\", and describes the underlying as \"We tokenized a traditional money market fund to leverage the efficiencies of blockchain technology for mutual fund record keeping, known as the Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX).\" A U.S.-registered government money market fund is answerable to a different set of questions than the funds ranked here — registration, board, portfolio and liquidity rules, stable NAV — which is exactly the criteria set our Money-Market Funds pool applies. Comparing it against JAAA's CLO exposure or USCC's futures-basis strategy on one scorecard would flatter the MMF and misprice the strategy funds. Fetched to satisfy myself: digitalassets.franklintempleton.com/benji/ pulled as raw HTML (HTTP 200, 184,991 bytes) and grepped — the headline is present with a typographic apostrophe (\"World’s First\") and the fund name is split across an inline FOBXX link in the markup; the page carries no \"1940 Act\" string, so that framing has been dropped from this reason.","source":"https://digitalassets.franklintempleton.com/benji/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/franklin-templeton-benji-franklin-onchain-u-s-government-mon/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Franklin Templeton issues a tokenised fund under the Benji brand that is not a money market fund (a credit, equity or alternatives strategy), or FOBXX/BENJI is dropped from our Money-Market Funds pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) and the spot crypto ETF complex","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":null,"reason":"A crypto fund, but not a tokenised one: the fund holds bitcoin, while its shares — the thing you would actually own — never touch a chain. Grayscale's FY2025 Form 10-K (period ended 2025-12-31, accession 0001193125-26-071956, filed 2026-02-25) states verbatim \"DTC will act as the securities depository for the Shares.\" and, under the heading \"Book-Entry Form\", \"Shares are held primarily in book-entry form by the Transfer Agent.\", with the class registered under Section 12(b) as \"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF Shares | GBTC | NYSE Arca, Inc.\" That is the exact inverse of this category's entry test, where the token is the share of record and settlement is onchain — the reason JAAA, ACRED and USCC are comparable to each other at all. The same reasoning excludes the wider spot ETF and ETP complex: crypto exposure in a conventional wrapper is a different purchase from a fund interest issued as a token, and mixing them would make the ranking meaningless. Fetched to satisfy myself: the 10-K primary document via curl with a UA (HTTP 200, 2,870,807 bytes) and grepped for each quoted string in context, plus data.sec.gov's submissions JSON for the 2026-02-25 filing date; I also confirmed GBTC is not scored in our catalog — the only occurrence in src/ is explanatory prose about US spot ETFs in complianceHubs.ts, not a pool entry.","source":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1588489/000119312526071956/gbtc-20251231.htm","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/grayscale-bitcoin-trust-etf-gbtc-and-the-spot-crypto-etf-com/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Grayscale (or another spot ETF issuer) registers a share class whose transfer-agent record is maintained on a blockchain rather than in DTC book-entry form.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ondo OUSG (Ondo Short-Term US Treasuries Fund)","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Tokenised T-Bills — verified as id 'ondo_ousg', name 'Ondo OUSG' in Tokenised T-Bills. Ondo's own product page heads it \"Ondo Short-Term US Treasuries Fund\" and states \"OUSG provides Qualified Purchasers with exposure to short-term US Treasuries and money market funds with 24/7 stablecoin mints and redemptions.\"; its FAQ answers \"How is OUSG backed?\" with \"The significant majority of this portfolio is currently in the BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL), with the remainder in BlackRock's FedFund (TFDXX), bank deposits, and USDC for liquidity purposes.\" So OUSG is largely a feeder into another tokenised cash fund — a duration and access wrapper, not an investment strategy. The page's own fact table gives \"Eligibility: Accredited Investor Qualified Purchasers\" and \"Primary Assets: BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL)\", with the minimum stated as \"For instant transactions, the minimum amount is $5K for both investments and redemptions.\" Ranking a Treasury sweep against ACRED's private credit or BCAP's venture book would compare a cash instrument with a risk asset. Fetched to satisfy myself: ondo.finance/ousg twice — once via WebFetch and once as raw HTML (HTTP 200, 741,756 bytes), where the $5K sentence appears as an aria-label on the Minimum Mint tooltip and the FAQ answer appears both as rendered text and in the page's Next.js payload.","source":"https://ondo.finance/ousg","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/ondo-ousg-ondo-short-term-us-treasuries-fund/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"OUSG's published portfolio ceases to be predominantly Treasuries/BUIDL and takes on credit, equity or strategy exposure, or OUSG is dropped from our Tokenised T-Bills pool.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Securitize","category":"tokenised_funds","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Not a fund — it is the issuance and transfer rail under funds this very category ranks, and its own tokenised equity is already ranked, under Tokenised Equities as \"Securitize (tokenized SECZ)\" (verified: id 'securitize_tokeq' in Tokenised Equities). Its site states \"Securitize is building the infrastructure that makes real-world investing accessible to everyone\", and its case studies read \"Securitize partnered with Apollo to launch ACRED, bringing the firm's Diversified Credit Fund onchain for the first time — one of the first tokenized private credit products from a top-tier alternative manager.\" — ACRED is one of the ranked entries here — and \"Securitize tokenized BlackRock's USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL), the world's largest tokenized treasury fund\". BUIDL's Form D/A confirms the role: \"Securitize Markets, LLC\" appears under \"12. Sales Compensation\" with \"Recipient CRD Number\" 283256, not as the issuer, which the form names as \"BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund Ltd.\" Scoring Securitize here would score the landlord against its tenants on the tenants' criteria: there is no NAV, no management fee and no redemption window to grade. Fetched to satisfy myself: own.securitize.io as raw HTML (HTTP 200, 122,829 bytes) — all three strings present, the Apollo line with a spaced em dash as reproduced above — plus the SEC Form D/A via curl.","source":"https://own.securitize.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_funds/securitize/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Securitize sponsors a fund of its own — its own NAV, fee schedule and subscription/redemption terms — rather than acting as transfer agent, tokenisation agent and placement agent for third-party managers.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"BlackRock BUIDL","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Ranked, but under Money-Market Funds rather than here. BUIDL is the largest tokenised Treasury product and a reader opening this page expects it, so its absence would otherwise read as an oversight. It is a registered money market fund share sold through Securitize, which is where our taxonomy places it; this category ranks direct short-dated Treasury exposure. Franklin BENJI appears in both because it is offered in both shapes.","source":"https://securitize.io/blackrock/buidl","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/blackrock-buidl/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BUIDL is offered as direct short-dated Treasury exposure rather than as a money market fund share, or our taxonomy merges the two categories.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Delta Wellington Ultra Short Treasury On-Chain Fund (ULTRA) — Libeara / FundBridge Capital / Standard Chartered","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":null,"reason":"A genuine short-duration US Treasury fund with Wellington as sub-advisor, Standard Chartered Bank as custodian, and tokenisation by Libeara — a name a reader tracking institutional tokenisation would expect. It is excluded because it has no public subscription front door: Libeara's own launch release scopes the ULTRA Fund to \"accredited and institutional investors\", constituted under \"the Delta Master Trust structure set up by FundBridge\", described as \"an established Singapore MAS-regulated platform provider for fund managers\", with the subscription, issuance, transfer and redemption of tokenised units handled through Libeara's platform. The fund is initially deployed on Ethereum Mainnet, but no minimum, fee schedule or eligibility test is published for a reader to check before relationship onboarding — the pool ranks institution-only products, but only ones that state their terms in public.","source":"https://libeara.com/libeara-partners-with-wellington-and-fundbridge-capital-to-launch-a-u-s-treasuries-fund-tokenised-on-public-blockchain/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/delta-wellington-ultra-short-treasury-on-chain-fund-ultra-li/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Libeara or FundBridge publishes a public ULTRA product page with a stated minimum, fee schedule and a subscription route open beyond accredited and institutional investors.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Goldman Sachs / BNY tokenised money market funds (GS DAP × LiquidityDirect)","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":null,"reason":"The bank-rail answer to tokenised T-bills, and the most conspicuous institutional launch in the category — BNY's release, dated Jul 23, 2025, names BlackRock, BNY Investments Dreyfus, Federated Hermes, Fidelity Investments and Goldman Sachs Asset Management as initial participants. It is excluded because there is no self-serve access of any kind: the release scopes the solution to \"sophisticated institutional investors in digital capital markets\", and states that \"Investors can subscribe and redeem MMF shares through BNY's market-leading LiquidityDirect℠ platform\" — a bank cash platform you must already be onboarded to as an institution. What sits on GS DAP is a mirror token of the share record, with BNY continuing to \"maintain the official books, records, and settlements for the funds within currently approved guidelines while also enabling mirror tokens on GS DAP\"; it is not an instrument a reader can hold in a wallet. The products ranked here, institution-only ones included, publish a subscription route and its terms.","source":"https://www.bny.com/corporate/global/en/about-us/newsroom/company-news/bny-and-goldman-sachs-launch-tokenized-money-market-funds-solution.html","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/goldman-sachs-bny-tokenised-money-market-funds-gs-dap-liquid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"BNY or Goldman Sachs opens subscription beyond institutional LiquidityDirect clients, or the GS DAP mirror tokens become transferable to an investor's own wallet outside the platform.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"J.P. Morgan Kinexys (Tokenized Money Market Funds / Tokenized Collateral Network)","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":null,"reason":"Infrastructure other institutions build on, not a product a reader opens. Kinexys presents itself under the headline \"Enterprise Bank-Led Blockchain Solutions\" for institutional clients, spanning a Blockchain Deposit Account, JPM Coin, Advanced Programmable Payments, a Tokenized Collateral Network and \"Tokenized Money Market Funds\" — described as the ability to \"Tokenize assets like money market funds to enable fractional ownership, 24/7 trading, near real-time settlement and programmable automation\". That is a capability sold to clients, not a fund with its own ticker, NAV, minimum or subscription page: the page names no J.P. Morgan-issued Treasury or money market share class an investor could buy. There is no instrument here to rank on access, legal claim, redemption or fee load; the tokenised fund shares that move over Kinexys are issued by third-party managers.","source":"https://www.jpmorgan.com/kinexys","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/j-p-morgan-kinexys-tokenized-money-market-funds-tokenized-co/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"J.P. Morgan issues its own tokenised Treasury or money market share class with a published ticker, minimum and subscription route that an investor can buy directly.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Midas mTBILL","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #9 of 9 (score 47) until 5 November 2026. Its fee cells rest on mTBILL’s Final Terms, listed in Midas’s docs; midas.app and its legal-documentation pages answered HTTP 403 behind a Cloudflare challenge on 3 and 4 November 2026, which we never get around. It leaves the ranking until the Final Terms are read.","source":"https://docs.midas.app/resources/legal-product-documentation/mtbill","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/midas-mtbill/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"The mTBILL Final Terms are read live or by hand: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Mountain Protocol USDM","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Appeared on essentially every tokenised-Treasury leaderboard as a T-bill-backed yield token, but there is no longer a primary market to rank. Mountain Protocol's own site carries a wind-down notice: \"USDM will conclude Phase 2 of its orderly wind down process on Aug 22, 2025\", after which \"the primary market for USDM will be closed and all remaining USDM holders will be required to redeem via secondary markets\". The issuer's own wind-down documentation (docs.mountainprotocol.com/wind-down-documentation/usdm-wind-down-overview) states that \"minting has been disabled and primary customers will no longer be able to buy USDM\", and that in Phase 3 the remaining reserves are \"deposited on a Uniswap pool against another stablecoin\", so that USDM tokens \"will no longer be backed by US Treasury products held in USDM Reserves, redeemable at $1 by Mountain Protocol, and are instead backed by the correspondent stablecoin (USDC) and honored by the Uniswap protocol\". A product you cannot subscribe to, whose backing is no longer T-bills, cannot be compared on access, legal claim, redemption or fee load.","source":"https://mountainprotocol.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/mountain-protocol-usdm/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Mountain Protocol removes the wind-down notice from mountainprotocol.com and reopens USDM primary minting and redemption against a Treasury-backed reserve.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Ondo OMMF","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Announced by Ondo on Apr 13, 2023 as a tokenised US government money market fund, in forward-looking terms — the post says \"OMMF will be minted and redeemed for exactly $1 on any business day, and interest will be distributed to OMMF holders daily in the form of new tokens\" (https://ondo.finance/blog/tokenizing-money-market-funds). It never became a product a reader can open: OMMF appears nowhere on ondo.finance today, and Ondo's own site navigation lists only USDY, OUSG, Bridge, Convert and Ondo Stocks. An announced-but-unlaunched token has no access terms, no legal claim to assess and no fee schedule, so there is nothing to score. Ondo's live short-dated Treasury product, OUSG, is ranked in this pool.","source":"https://ondo.finance/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/ondo-ommf/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"OMMF appears as a live, subscribable product on ondo.finance or in Ondo's documentation with published eligibility and fee terms.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"UBS uMINT (UBS USD Money Market Investment Fund Token)","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":null,"reason":"A tokenised money market fund from one of the largest asset managers in the world, launched 1 November 2024 using \"Ethereum distributed ledger technology\" — exactly the kind of name a reader expects to see. It is excluded on access, not on quality: UBS's own launch release states only that the fund is \"available through authorized distribution partners\", and publishes no direct subscription route, no minimum, and no eligibility terms a prospective investor can check before contacting an intermediary. Access runs entirely through intermediated distribution. That is categorically different from the ranked set, all of which expose a public front door with stated terms — Franklin's Benji app, WisdomTree Connect, Midas, OpenEden, Ondo, and Securitize for VanEck VBILL.","source":"https://www.ubs.com/global/en/media/display-page-ndp/en-20241101-first-tokenized-investment-fund.html","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/ubs-umint-ubs-usd-money-market-investment-fund-token/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"UBS publishes a direct subscription route for uMINT, or names a distributor with public self-serve onboarding and disclosed minimum and eligibility terms.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"VanEck VBILL","category":"tokenised_tbills","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #7 of 9 (score 53) until 5 November 2026. Securitize’s page shows a 0.20% fee beside a generic 0.5% management-fee figure; VanEck’s own VBILL page redirects in a loop to a cookie check and the offering memorandum sits behind a login, so the fee could not be settled from the issuer (3 and 4 November 2026). It leaves the ranking until VanEck’s terms are read.","source":"https://www.vaneck.com/us/en/investments/treasury-fund-vbill/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"tokenised_tbills/vaneck-vbill/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"VanEck’s VBILL page or fact sheet is read: settle the fee and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"AlgoTrader (now Wyden)","category":"trading_bots","kind":"region_or_audience_locked","reason":"Renamed and enterprise-only, and ChainChoice already ranks it under its current name in a different category. Checked 2026-08-20: algotrader.com and www.algotrader.com both return HTTP 301 to https://www.wyden.io/. Wyden's own site states that \"Wyden provides the unified trading and operating layer for digital assets, covering all front-, middle-, and back-office workflows\", sold to banks and brokers; the site's only call to action is \"Talk to an Expert\" (plus a separate request-a-demo page), with no self-serve signup and no published price — wyden.io/pricing returns 404, as our institutional_execution research already recorded. A self-directed trader cannot obtain it, so it fails this category's access premise; it is scored in institutional_execution as Wyden (ex-AlgoTrader), not left unranked.","source":"https://www.wyden.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/algotrader-now-wyden/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Wyden opens a self-serve tier a retail or prosumer trader can sign up for and price without contacting sales.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bitfinex Honey","category":"trading_bots","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Deprecated by its own vendor, with a dated notice on the vendor's own repository. bitfinexcom/bfx-hf-ui — the client that shipped Bitfinex's Honey algorithmic-order suite (Accum/Dist, Ping/Pong, Iceberg, TWAP, OCOCO, plus strategy backtesting) — is archived read-only on GitHub and its README opens with: \"REPOSITORY DEPRECATION NOTICE — As of March 25, 2025 this repository and other associated repositories, as well as the associated releases are no longer maintained. This repository is made available for historical, archival and other informational purposes. The use of any information in this repository could lead to unexpected results, including unexpected trading behaviors.\" A vendor warning that its own bot may produce unexpected trading behaviour is disqualifying on the reliability criterion regardless of how the category is scoped.","source":"https://github.com/bitfinexcom/bfx-hf-ui","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/bitfinex-honey/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitfinex un-archives Honey with the deprecation notice removed, or ships a maintained successor algorithmic-order client.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Bitsgap","category":"trading_bots","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #4 of 9 (score 63) until 5 November 2026. Its reliability score asks about uptime, maintenance and what happens when it breaks; Bitsgap publishes no status page (its status host does not answer) and no incident record, so the score could not be re-read (3 and 4 November 2026). Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking.","source":"https://bitsgap.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/bitsgap/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Bitsgap publishes a status or incident record, or the owner rules how a confirmed absence is scored: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"CCXT","category":"trading_bots","kind":null,"reason":"Infrastructure the ranked products build on, not a product a reader opens. Its own documentation site describes it as \"A unified trading library for 100+ cryptocurrency and prediction-market exchanges — one API in JavaScript, Python, PHP, C#, Go and Java. Made for developers and AI agents\", with installation by package manager (\"npm install ccxt\"). There is no strategy engine, no scheduler, no interface and no account anywhere on the site — it is the exchange-connector layer that self-hosted bots consume. It is actively developed, so this is a scope refusal, not a liveness one: ranking a library against the bots that import it would double-count the same connector quality.","source":"https://docs.ccxt.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/ccxt/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"CCXT ships a hosted, self-serve bot product — strategies, scheduling and an account a non-developer can sign up for — rather than a developer library.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Coinrule","category":"trading_bots","kind":"no_primary_record_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #9 of 9 (score 49) until 5 November 2026. Its reliability score asks about uptime, maintenance and what happens when it breaks; Coinrule publishes no status page (its status host does not answer) and no incident record, so the score could not be re-read (3 and 4 November 2026). Rather than rank it on a September read past the 45-day promise, it leaves the ranking.","source":"https://coinrule.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/coinrule/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Coinrule publishes a status or incident record, or the owner rules how a confirmed absence is scored: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Gekko","category":"trading_bots","kind":null,"reason":"Frozen open-source project. GitHub shows askmike/gekko as read-only with the banner \"This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 16, 2020. It is now read-only.\" — over six years untouched, on a codebase whose entire job is keeping exchange connectors current. At 10.2k stars it is one of the two most-recognised open-source crypto bots ever published, which is exactly why its absence needs naming rather than assuming. The README points to no maintained successor, noting only that \"there might be other forks of Gekko out there that are being maintained\". The self-hosted slot in this pool is held by Freqtrade and Hummingbot, both of which still receive commits.","source":"https://github.com/askmike/gekko","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/gekko/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"the repository is un-archived and resumes receiving commits, or a maintained fork becomes the project's canonical distribution.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kryll (kryll.io)","category":"trading_bots","kind":null,"reason":"Still operating, but no longer a trading-bot product — this is a pivot, not a shutdown, and the distinction matters. Fetched 2026-08-20: kryll.io's navigation and headline products are now \"SmartFolio\", \"X-Ray\", \"Gem Detector\" and \"Harpoon\", under the headline \"Your Web3 AI sidekick\" / \"Bring Blockchain Intelligence to the masses\" — portfolio tracking, token analysis and smart-money wallet tracking. app.kryll.io returns HTTP 200 with the title \"Kryll³ | Web3 Tracking & DYOR made simple with AI\". The legacy path https://kryll.io/trading-bots-marketplace/ still returns 200 but serves that same AI-tools homepage, not a bot marketplace. The company is live (site footer: \"Copyright © 2018 - 2025 Cryptense SAS\"), so the refusal is scope, not death: there is no strategy editor or bot that executes on a connected exchange account left to score.","source":"https://kryll.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/kryll-kryll-io/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"kryll.io or app.kryll.io again ships a strategy editor or bot marketplace that places orders on a user-connected exchange account.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pionex","category":"trading_bots","kind":"source_walled_reread_pending","reason":"Ranked #2 of 9 (score 68) until 5 November 2026. Its fee, custody, capability and country cells rest on Pionex Global’s fee schedule and terms on www.pionex.com, which answered HTTP 403 behind a Cloudflare challenge on 3 and 4 November 2026; we never get around one. It leaves the ranking until those pages are read again.","source":"https://www.pionex.com/en/fees","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-04","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-04","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/pionex/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"www.pionex.com answers a plain read, or the fee schedule and terms are read by hand: re-read and restore the row.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Shrimpy","category":"trading_bots","kind":null,"reason":"The product is unreachable at its own domain. Re-checked 2026-08-20: https://shrimpy.io 302-redirects to https://www.shrimpy.io/, which returns HTTP 404; app.shrimpy.io has no DNS record at all (NXDOMAIN); and api.shrimpy.io's CNAME target (shrimpyapiloadbalancer-677917559.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com) is itself NXDOMAIN, so the API that drove the rebalancing engine is down as well. No shutdown date is asserted here, because Shrimpy never published one — the sign-in surfaces simply stopped answering. (The live site at shrimpy.com is an unrelated food-ordering app, not this product.) A category whose second-heaviest criterion is true cost of operation cannot rank a platform a reader cannot sign into.","source":"https://www.shrimpy.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/shrimpy/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"www.shrimpy.io serves the product again rather than a 404, or app.shrimpy.io resolves and accepts logins.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Trality","category":"trading_bots","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Discontinued — the company is gone, not just quiet. Its own site carried the standing banner \"Trality has been discontinued as of 31.7.2023. Thank you to all our users\", and the announcement post by founder Moritz Putzhammer (bylined 06 July 2023) states: \"Trality will be winding down its consumer-facing product suite on July 31, 2023\" and \"While Trality as a standalone product will be shutting down…\", pointing users to CryptoHopper, 3Commas and Coinrule as alternatives. Re-checked 2026-08-20: trality.com and www.trality.com both answer NXDOMAIN — no DNS record at all — so the archived capture of the company's own blog cited here is the only readable copy of its own announcement. No successor was ever named: the post says only that talks with potential partners were ongoing and that it was \"still too early to give specifics\".","source":"http://web.archive.org/web/20230927223946/https://www.trality.com/blog/trality-winding-down-product","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/trality/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"trality.com resolves again and serves a working platform — accounts, the Python code editor or Rule Builder, and live exchange connections — instead of a discontinuation notice.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Zenbot","category":"trading_bots","kind":null,"reason":"Frozen open-source project. GitHub shows DeviaVir/zenbot as archived and read-only since February 2022, with no commits since. Its own README still documents the product as \"Zenbot is a command-line cryptocurrency trading bot using Node.js and MongoDB\", listing connector support for venues of that era (GDAX, Poloniex, Bittrex, Quadriga). 8.3k stars makes it a name readers still search for; an unmaintained connector layer cannot be scored on operational reliability, which is 20% of this category's weight.","source":"https://github.com/DeviaVir/zenbot","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_bots/zenbot/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"the repository is un-archived and actively maintained again, or the maintainers designate a supported successor distribution.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Amberdata","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Market-data APIs. Same reasoning as Kaiko — a developer feed priced per call and governed by a redistribution licence, scored on the axes market_data_apis was built for rather than on what a monthly terminal tier withholds from a human reader.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/amberdata/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Amberdata sells a self-serve monthly terminal tier a human reader buys.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Arkham","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked twice — Block Explorers and 'arkham-analytics' in On-chain Analytics, where its unpublished pricing and paid-bounty Intel Marketplace attribution model are already documented in detail from a 2026-08-04 verify pass. An entity-attribution explorer, not a market-data seat.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/arkham/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Arkham sells a market-data seat with published pricing, separate from its explorer and analytics records.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"bookmap, exocharts, tradinglite, aggr","category":"trading_tools","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"Out of scope as a group, and unverifiable individually. Bookmap's /pricing and /plans both return HTTP 404, exocharts.com/pricing returns an nginx 404, tradinglite.com/pricing collapses to a shell, and aggr.trade is an open-source hobby aggregator published at github.com/Tucsky/aggr. These are order-flow execution front-ends and a free tool rather than the monthly market-and-onchain data subscription this buyer's exposure comes from. Material Indicators is admitted in their place because it is the one order-flow product in this class with a served tier table and a real monthly price.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/bookmap-exocharts-tradinglite-aggr/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Their pricing pages load and they sell analytics seats rather than order-flow tools.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Checkonchain","category":"trading_tools","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on what the product is. Read on 2026-08-17, www.checkonchain.com sells a newsletter ('frequent written reports and video updates that explain why things happen in the Bitcoin market'), consulting and training, with an 'Orange Plan' in its navigation and no price, no tier table and nothing listed as left out of a tier, so this category's question about what an affordable tier refuses would have nothing to score. charts.checkonchain.com still serves its free chart library.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/checkonchain/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Checkonchain publishes a priced tool tier a reader can buy.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinalyze","category":"trading_tools","kind":"unverifiable_evidence","reason":"A genuine fit as a free derivatives terminal, excluded as unverifiable rather than dead. coinalyze.net and coinalyze.net/pricing/ answered HTTP 403 behind a Cloudflare challenge to every read on 2026-08-17. This site scores only pages it can load, and a product whose primary evidence cannot be read would be scored on nothing. Re-check next pass.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/coinalyze/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"coinalyze.net loads for a reader, so its pricing can be read.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinigy, 3Commas, Cryptohopper and similar execution platforms","category":"trading_tools","kind":"out_of_scope","reason":"Out of scope: these platforms place trades on exchanges for you. 3Commas and Cryptohopper are ranked in Crypto Trading Bots, on key custody (30%), true cost of operation (26%), strategy capability (24%) and operational reliability (20%). This category compares market-data and analytics tools on whether their numbers can be derived, what they cover and what a tier withholds, and an execution platform would be scored here on questions it is not built to answer.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-10-11","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/coinigy-3commas-cryptohopper-and-similar-execution-platforms/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Any of them sells a market-data or analytics tool separate from its execution product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"DefiLlama Pro","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in DeFi Dashboards and present in several other pools. Its open-source adapter methodology is scored there under 'Valuation Auditability' (30), the closest sibling question to this page's first criterion; re-ranking it here on metric construction would duplicate that judgement. onchain_analytics also hard-excludes free public dashboards with no commercial tier.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/defillama-pro/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"DefiLlama sells a market-data terminal separate from its dashboards.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Dune","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in On-chain Analytics and as 'dune_api' in Market-data APIs. A SQL query platform where the buyer authors the work, scored there on query portability and cost at volume — a different product from a read-only terminal, and adding it here would rebuild the sibling pool.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/dune/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Dune sells a read-only terminal separate from its query platform.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Glassnode","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in On-chain Analytics, where it is scored on query portability, attribution and methodology auditability, chain and data coverage, and published pricing; this category's first and third criteria would ask two of those again. Its point-in-time data does answer this category's fourth question, which no other category asks: its documentation describes 'a consistent, immutable view of data as it was known at a specific moment in the past', with a per-datapoint computed_at that 'has been tracked since 2024 and is omitted from earlier PIT datapoints'. One unduplicated question out of four does not justify ranking the product a second time on the other three, so it is instead the reference point that fourth criterion is described against.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/glassnode/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Glassnode sells a terminal product separate from the analytics record ranked in On-chain Analytics.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"IntoTheBlock / Sentora","category":"trading_tools","kind":null,"reason":"Checked as a possible seventh member and excluded on positive evidence of a pivot, verified 2026-08-17: intotheblock.com/pricing returns HTTP 301 to sentora.com (the root, not a pricing path), and sentora.com sells 'Institutional-grade intelligence for capital deployment across DeFi, covering yield strategies, risk, and cover in one platform' with no price table, no self-serve tier and 'Contact Us' as the only route. A sales-gated institutional DeFi deployment platform is not the monthly research seat this page scores, and the redirect is evidence of a pivot rather than of death.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/intotheblock-sentora/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Intotheblock's pricing page is restored, or Sentora publishes a self-serve market-data terminal.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Kaiko","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Market-data APIs. It sells an institutional feed licensed by contract to developers; market_data_apis' 'Published cost at production call volume' (30) and 'Redistribution and licensing rights' (28) are the axes it competes on, and this page deliberately scores neither. It is not a seat a human sits in front of.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/kaiko/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kaiko sells a self-serve monthly terminal tier a human reader buys.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Messari","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in On-chain Analytics, as 'messari_api' in Market-data APIs and again in On-chain Monitoring. A research-and-data subscription rather than a live market-data terminal, and its self-serve tiers were retired outright per its own docs — both siblings already carry that correction.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/messari/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Messari reopens self-serve tiers with a live market-data terminal.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Nansen","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in On-chain Analytics and DeFi Dashboards. Nansen's defining claim is its Smart Money wallet label, and On-chain Analytics' 'Attribution & methodology auditability' (25%) already grades whether that label can be checked; its record there notes that Nansen's own 'Data Methodology and Technical Reference' discloses no Smart Money criteria. Nothing this category asks is unasked there.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/nansen/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Nansen sells a market-data terminal separate from the records already ranked.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Santiment","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in Sentiment Analytics, where 'Published predictive evidence' (30) and 'Documented bot filtering' (25) grade its social-signal construction far more precisely than a general terminal page could. Social-signal manufacture is a different failure mode from a derivatives aggregate's constituent set.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/santiment/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Santiment sells a derivatives or market-data terminal separate from its sentiment product.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Token Terminal","category":"trading_tools","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Already ranked in On-chain Analytics. A fundamentals-and-revenue dataset for research and valuation, whose methodology documentation is already the object of attributionAuditability there; it publishes no derivatives surface and would sit unscored on two of this page's four criteria.","source":null,"sourceFrom":null,"checkedOn":"2026-08-17","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"trading_tools/token-terminal/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Token Terminal publishes a derivatives surface.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Alchemy Transaction Simulation APIs","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Vendor-published end-of-life. Alchemy's own documentation puts a deprecation notice at the top of the Transaction Simulation reference: \"The Transaction Simulation APIs will be deprecated on September 30th 2026.\" This is not an exclusion for being a developer product — Tenderly is ranked on exactly that basis. It is an exclusion because vendor survival and continuity carries 25% of this category's weight, and a simulation service whose vendor has already dated its own shutdown cannot be scored against tools that will still answer next quarter.","source":"https://www.alchemy.com/docs/reference/simulation","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/alchemy-transaction-simulation-apis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Alchemy withdraws the September 30th 2026 deprecation notice, or ships a general-availability replacement simulation API with a published support commitment.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Blockaid","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Blockaid's terms of use say users shall not \"use or launch any automated system (including without limitation, 'robots' and 'spiders') to access the Website\", and its product, about and terms pages are part of that website, so they are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Blockaid is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://blockaid.io/legal/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/blockaid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Blockaid's product, about and terms pages are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Blocknative","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":null,"reason":"Winding down, on the vendor's own say-so. Blocknative's homepage announcement \"Blocknative joins Deloitte\" states: \"The Blocknative API services will be winding down. Services will continue to operate through June 19, 2026. After that date, the APIs will stop responding.\" The same notice says Gas Network will cease operations on the same schedule, and tells integrators to transition providers with enough time to test and cut over before that date. As of this fetch (2026-08-20) the date has passed, so the mempool and simulation APIs that made Blocknative a fixture of this category are past their own vendor's stated end of service.","source":"https://www.blocknative.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/blocknative/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Blocknative or Deloitte republishes a live, supported simulation or mempool API with its own docs and status page, replacing the wind-down notice.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Fireblocks","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":null,"reason":"Priced and packaged for institutions, not for a reader who wants to point a tool at a wallet they hold themselves. \"Transaction simulation\" does appear as an included feature on Fireblocks' own pricing page, but the page routes a prospective buyer to \"Talk to sales\" rather than publishing a self-serve tier. We quote no price here because the page states none.","source":"https://www.fireblocks.com/pricing/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/fireblocks/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fireblocks publishes a simulation product an individual can buy self-serve at a retail price and run against an externally held wallet of their own.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"GoPlus Security","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five transaction simulation products remain, which is no judgement on GoPlus Security.","source":"https://gopluslabs.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/goplus-security/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Blockaid, MetaMask Transaction Shield, Phantom, Rabby Wallet and Webacy in a browser, or a fifth transaction simulation product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Harpie","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":null,"reason":"The vendor's own domain no longer serves the product. Fetched 2026-08-20: harpie.io returns HTTP 200 with the page title \"ORA78 | Game Online Modern dengan Teknologi Proteksi Digital Berbasis Blockchain\" — an unrelated Indonesian online-gaming storefront, last-modified 2026-08-02. There is no Harpie product surface, download or documentation left at the address the product was operated from. We assert only what the fetch shows and deliberately repeat no shutdown date, because no primary Harpie page states one. Auditor note: the host returns 403 to generic fetchers; a standard browser user-agent returns the 200 described above.","source":"https://harpie.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/harpie/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"harpie.io serves the Harpie firewall again under the original team, with a documented, reachable RPC endpoint or extension.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hypernative (Transaction Guard)","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"region_or_audience_locked","reason":"Enterprise-only, with no self-serve path and no published price. The Transaction Guard page describes precisely the mechanism this category ranks — \"Every transaction is simulated to reveal its true onchain outcome in plain language, surfacing hidden risks, unexpected transfers, and malicious logic before anyone signs\" — but the only calls to action on it are \"Request a Demo\" and \"Sign In\", the page carries no pricing language of any kind, and it names the buyer as an institution: \"Over 350 organizations trust Hypernative for end-to-end security.\" A reader cannot acquire this; at best they use a wallet that licenses it.","source":"https://www.hypernative.io/product/transaction-guard","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/hypernative-transaction-guard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hypernative ships a self-serve extension or app an individual can install and pay for at a published price, without a sales conversation.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kerberus (Pocket Universe)","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five transaction simulation products remain, which is no judgement on Kerberus (Pocket Universe).","source":"https://www.kerberus.com/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/kerberus-pocket-universe/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Blockaid, MetaMask Transaction Shield, Phantom, Rabby Wallet and Webacy in a browser, or a fifth transaction simulation product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"MetaMask Transaction Shield","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"MetaMask's terms of use, which govern its websites, bar users to \"use scraping techniques to mine or otherwise scrape data except as permitted by a Plan\", so MetaMask's Transaction Shield page and its help article are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, MetaMask Transaction Shield is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://consensys.io/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/metamask-transaction-shield/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"MetaMask's Transaction Shield page, its help article and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Phantom","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Phantom's terms of use, which cover its website and its help centre, say users will not \"use scraping techniques to mine or otherwise scrape data (including but not limited to Content) from the App or Site or Functionality\", so Phantom's security posts and help articles are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Phantom is not ranked here for transaction simulation and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://phantom.com/terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/phantom/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Phantom's security posts, its help articles on scams and swap fees and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Rabby Wallet","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Rabby's terms of service, which govern its website and its sub-domains, say no user will \"use scraping techniques to mine or otherwise scrape data except as permitted by a Paid Plan\", so Rabby's help-centre articles on simulation, refunds and swap fees are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Rabby Wallet is not ranked here for transaction simulation and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://rabby.io/docs/terms-of-use/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/rabby-wallet/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Rabby's help-centre articles on simulation, refunds and swap fees and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser, and its survival score is read on a source that is not paused: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Scam Sniffer","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five transaction simulation products remain, which is no judgement on Scam Sniffer.","source":"https://www.scamsniffer.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/scam-sniffer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Blockaid, MetaMask Transaction Shield, Phantom, Rabby Wallet and Webacy in a browser, or a fifth transaction simulation product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Tenderly","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"read_not_ranked_too_few_products","reason":"Read in full on 22 October 2026; not ranked while fewer than five transaction simulation products remain, which is no judgement on Tenderly.","source":"https://tenderly.co/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-22","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/tenderly/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A person reads the pages of one of Blockaid, MetaMask Transaction Shield, Phantom, Rabby Wallet and Webacy in a browser, or a fifth transaction simulation product can be read and scored: then five are read and the category is ranked again, this row with them.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Wallet Guard","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Discontinued by its own vendor. walletguard.app carries a banner across the top of the page: \"Wallet Guard has been sunset as of March 31, 2025.\" Everything below it is unchanged marketing for a dead extension — \"Add to Browser\" links into the Chrome Web Store, a \"100K+ wallets protected while browsing web3\" counter and a \"10M+ transactions simulated\" counter — which is exactly why it keeps resurfacing on comparison listicles. Re-fetched on the product's own live site 2026-08-20: the sunset banner is still the first thing on the page, and no maintained release is claimed anywhere on it.","source":"https://www.walletguard.app/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/wallet-guard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"walletguard.app removes the sunset banner and a maintained extension is installable again from the Chrome/Firefox stores under an active publisher.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Webacy","category":"transaction_simulation","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Webacy's terms of service say users will not \"navigate or search the Service with any tool, software, agent, engine, or other means other than through Webacy's provided interfaces\", and its website and documentation are part of that service, so they are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, Webacy is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/62ab904eb25ad28e366d83a1/69bd47cb4106de48a1c44716_2026.03.10%20-%20Webacy%20Terms%20of%20Service.docx.pdf","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"transaction_simulation/webacy/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Webacy's documentation on pricing, transaction monitoring and data quality, its homepage and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Chainalysis","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Also blockchain intelligence, and in this category it appears as a component INSIDE other people's Travel Rule products rather than as one. Its page sitemap on 2026-09-03 lists sixteen /product/ pages — kyt, address-screening, reactor, sentinel, rapid, hexagate, alterya, wallet-scan, vasp-risking, vasp-data-flat-file and others — none of which is a Travel Rule messaging product, and the chainalysis.com homepage contains zero occurrences of \"travel rule\". Where it does appear is inside two pool members: VerifyVASP documents \"Risk Assessment Via Chainalysis Sanction API\" and \"Risk Assessment Via Chainalysis KYT API\" as sub-calls of its own Travel Rule flow (docs.verifyvasp.com/llms.txt), and 21 Analytics lists Chainalysis first among its five selectable Risk Score Providers. Scoring it here would compare a risk feed against the messaging layer that consumes it. (https://www.chainalysis.com/page-sitemap.xml)","source":"https://www.chainalysis.com/page-sitemap.xml","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/chainalysis/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Chainalysis publishes a Travel Rule product of its own, rather than a component inside other vendors' products.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"CipherTrace Traveler (Mastercard)","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as defunct, not merely renamed. Both ciphertrace.com and www.ciphertrace.com failed DNS resolution entirely on 2026-09-03 — curl exit code 6, \"Could not resolve host\" — so the product's documentation, its VASP directory and its integration guides no longer exist at any address that can be cited or checked. Traveler was a genuine household name in this category and is named here for exactly that reason; it must not be linked from any ChainChoice surface. (https://ciphertrace.com)","source":"https://ciphertrace.com","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/ciphertrace-traveler-mastercard/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ciphertrace.com resolves and serves Traveler's documentation again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Coinfirm","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a retired brand. www.coinfirm.com redirected to lukka.tech, which returned HTTP 200 at the redirect target when followed on 2026-09-03. No Coinfirm Travel Rule product page or documentation survives at the original domain, so there is no published material to score and no vendor at that name to buy from. (https://www.coinfirm.com)","source":"https://www.coinfirm.com","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/coinfirm/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A Coinfirm Travel Rule product page or its documentation is served again.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Elliptic","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Publishes an explainer, not a product. On 2026-09-03 the only travel-rule URL anywhere in elliptic.co's sitemap set was the glossary page /blockchain-basics/what-is-the-travel-rule/, and the solutions index carried a single passing occurrence of the phrase. There is no Travel Rule transfer API, no protocol page, no counterparty VASP directory and no unhosted-wallet proof flow to score, so every criterion here would return null for the wrong reason — absence of a product rather than absence of documentation. (https://www.elliptic.co/blockchain-basics/what-is-the-travel-rule/)","source":"https://www.elliptic.co/blockchain-basics/what-is-the-travel-rule/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/elliptic/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Elliptic publishes a Travel Rule product page, beyond its glossary explainer.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Fireblocks","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a distribution channel, not a vendor: it resells a pool member. The Fireblocks developer reference for this capability is titled \"Travel Rule with Notabene - Validate Travel Rule\" and states \"The Fireblocks API allows you to send your transactions to Notabene to ensure they comply with the Travel Rule.\" (fetched 2026-09-03). The same page warns that the substantive material sits behind someone else's login — \"This guide contains links to Notabene API documentation, which is password protected.\" Scoring Fireblocks would score Notabene twice, the second time through a surface a buyer cannot read. (https://developers.fireblocks.com/reference/validate-travel-rule)","source":"https://developers.fireblocks.com/reference/validate-travel-rule","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/fireblocks/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Fireblocks ships a Travel Rule product of its own rather than reselling Notabene.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Merkle Science","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Same shape, same reason, and the vendor's own URL space settles it: www.merklescience.com/travel-rule returned HTTP 404 on 2026-09-03, and of the 488 URLs in its sitemap every \"travel rule\" match is a blog post, not a product page. The public documentation index at docs.merklescience.com/llms.txt covers Compass — address, transaction and customer risk assessment, cases, rules, webhooks — with no transfer endpoint, no IVMS 101, no VASP directory and no protocol interoperability page. Like Chainalysis it appears inside a pool member rather than beside one: 21 Analytics lists Merkle Science as one of five selectable Risk Score Providers in its 8.3.0 deployment chapter. (https://docs.merklescience.com/llms.txt)","source":"https://docs.merklescience.com/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/merkle-science/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Merkle Science publishes a Travel Rule product page; its travel-rule URL stops returning 404.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"OpenVASP Association","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a non-profit standards body, not a supplier. openvasp.org, fetched 2026-09-03, titles itself \"Non-Profit Association for Tooling and Standards around the Travel Rule\" and says it supports implementation of the Travel Rule for VASPs \"with free tools and open standards\". There is no commercial product, no support contract and no VASP-facing SKU, so nothing here could be bought, priced or held to a service level — the three things this category exists to compare. (https://www.openvasp.org/)","source":"https://www.openvasp.org/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/openvasp-association/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"OpenVASP sells a supported product with terms a VASP contracts for.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TRISA (Travel Rule Information Sharing Architecture)","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a protocol and reference implementation, not a purchase. trisa.dev, read 2026-09-03, presents itself as the developer documentation for \"the TRISA protocol and reference implementation\", defined as a gRPC API by the TRISA Working Group with a Go implementation on GitHub; its own landing page points readers at a separately-sold node rather than at TRISA itself. Ranking it beside Sumsub or Notabene would rank a specification against the products that speak it — the same category error as ranking IVMS 101. It stays in scope as a criterion INPUT: Ospree publishes a dedicated TRISA interoperability page, and that page is scoreable evidence about Ospree. (https://trisa.dev/)","source":"https://trisa.dev/","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/trisa-travel-rule-information-sharing-architecture/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A vendor sells TRISA as a product a VASP buys, which would be assessed as that vendor.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TRM Labs","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Blockchain intelligence, not a Travel Rule vendor. The product index at trmlabs.com/products, fetched 2026-09-03, names Entity Due Diligence, Wallet Screening, Forensics, Know-Your-Asset, Transaction Monitoring, Bulk Data and Deconflict, and contains ZERO occurrences of the string \"travel rule\" (case-insensitive count run on the fetched body). The public documentation index at docs.trmlabs.com/llms.txt lists exactly two APIs — the Chainabuse Public API and the TRM Sanctions API — with no transfer endpoint, no IVMS 101 payload, no counterparty-VASP directory and no protocol page. There is nothing in this category to score it against. (https://docs.trmlabs.com/llms.txt)","source":"https://docs.trmlabs.com/llms.txt","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/trm-labs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TRM Labs publishes a Travel Rule product page or documentation.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TRP (Travel Rule Protocol)","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded on the same ground: an open standard, not a vendor. 21 Analytics' own concept page (read 2026-09-03) describes TRP as one of the solutions created to meet the requirement, distinguished by the fact that — quoting the page's own line, which wraps after the word \"completely\" — \"it is an open standard, and participation in the protocol is completely\" permissionless, and notes that the 21 Analytics team contributes to its development. TRP is what several pool members speak; a VASP does not buy it, it buys software that implements it. (https://docs.21analytics.ch/8.1.0/core-concepts/trp_flow.html)","source":"https://docs.21analytics.ch/8.1.0/core-concepts/trp_flow.html","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/trp-travel-rule-protocol/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"A vendor sells TRP as a product a VASP buys, which would be assessed as that vendor.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"TRUST (Travel Rule Universal Solution Technology)","category":"travel_rule_compliance","kind":null,"reason":"Excluded as a membership network reached through a vendor, not a vendor. The 21 Analytics concept page (read 2026-09-03) opens — on a line that wraps after \"messaging\" — with \"TRUST (Travel Rule Universal Solution Technology) is a Travel Rule messaging\" framework used by participating VASPs, states that participation requires being onboarded with the TRUST organisation, and describes how \"The TRUST organisation maintains and runs a bulletin board where the\" counterparty of a transaction can be discovered. The bulletin board is infrastructure; the software that talks to it is the product, and two pool members already document that path (21 Analytics natively, Notabene via a TRUSThub connector marked beta). (https://docs.21analytics.ch/8.3.0/core-concepts/trust_flow.html)","source":"https://docs.21analytics.ch/8.3.0/core-concepts/trust_flow.html","sourceFrom":"reason","checkedOn":"2026-09-03","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"travel_rule_compliance/trust-travel-rule-universal-solution-technology/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"TRUST is offered as a product a VASP buys directly, rather than a network reached through a vendor.","expiresFrom":"review"}, {"name":"Ledger Wallet (formerly Ledger Live)","category":"wallet","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A hardware signing device's companion app, the case the first scope rule names. Ledger's own page says the app keeps keys off the phone or computer: \"Ledger Wallet™ keeps keys in the Secure Element of a Ledger signer, which approves every transaction.\" and \"Transactions are approved on a Ledger device, which is bought separately.\" (https://www.ledger.com/ledger-wallet, read 2026-10-28). Without a Ledger device it holds no key, so the four criteria here would score the device, not the app. The devices are ranked in hardware_wallet as Ledger (graded on the Nano S Plus) and Ledger Nano X.","source":"https://www.ledger.com/ledger-wallet","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-10-28","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-10-28","ledgerKey":"wallet/ledger-wallet-formerly-ledger-live/refusal","pointer":"hardware_wallet","aliases":["Ledger Live","Ledger Wallet"],"expiresIf":"Ledger Wallet can create or hold a key without a Ledger device (a software-only account), at which point it competes here as a software wallet.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"Chainabuse","category":"wallet_screening","kind":null,"reason":"A free crowd-sourced registry, not a screening product. TRM Labs' own launch post describes it as a 'multi-chain reporting tool that allows crypto users to report illicit activity to a public forum where others can upvote, downvote or leave comments to contribute additional information', with reports on the same addresses 'consolidated and housed in a searchable database, which anyone can use to proactively check addresses or projects before engaging with them.' The same page states 'The free tool enables crypto users, victims of financial crimes, and crypto businesses to take an active role in making the crypto ecosystem a safer place to operate', and that the 'community-driven platform is operated by TRM Labs and backed by crypto industry leaders including Circle, Solana Foundation, The Aave Companies, Hedera, Binance.US and Civic.' Two disqualifiers follow: the risk signal is unverified user submissions with voting rather than a proprietary attribution graph and exposure score, and the operator is TRM Labs, which is ranked here on its own merits. Comparing a free report forum against paid KYT engines on coverage, false-positive rate or SLA would be a category error.","source":"https://www.trmlabs.com/resources/blog/announcing-the-launch-of-chainabuse-the-multi-chain-scam-reporting-tool-that-empowers-crypto-users-against-fraud","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"wallet_screening/chainabuse/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Chainabuse begins selling a paid screening API carrying its own risk scores and coverage guarantees, or ceases to be operated by TRM Labs.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Coinfirm (AML Platform / AMLT)","category":"wallet_screening","kind":null,"reason":"Acquired and rebranded away. Lukka's own announcement, dated 21 May 2024, states 'Lukka, the global leader in enterprise digital asset data and software solutions, proudly announces its acquisition of Coinfirm, a top-tier European based blockchain analytics software company' and describes 'the integration of the Coinfirm team and products with Lukka' as extending its range of on-chain and off-chain data solutions. The brand is now retired in practice: as of 2026-08-20, https://www.coinfirm.com/ returns HTTP 301 with location: https://lukka.tech, and the lukka.tech homepage (fetched same day) carries no Coinfirm branding anywhere — it markets 'Lukka Enterprise Data SaaS', 'Lukka Insights', 'Lukka Reference Data' and 'Lukka Crypto Benchmarks', with on-chain risk appearing only as capability headings, 'Blockchain Analytics & Compliance' and 'Blockchain Forensics & Investigation'. There is no Coinfirm SKU to rank, and Lukka's stated core business is 'The Digital Asset Data Operating System' for institutional digital finance, not wallet screening.","source":"https://lukka.tech/lukka-acquires-coinfirm-bringing-audited-data-to-blockchain-analytics-compliance-and-investigations/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"reason","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"wallet_screening/coinfirm-aml-platform-amlt/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"coinfirm.com stops 301-redirecting to lukka.tech and serves its own product, or Lukka launches a separately purchasable Coinfirm-branded address-screening SKU.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Notabene","category":"wallet_screening","kind":null,"reason":"Travel Rule infrastructure, which is a different regulatory obligation from wallet screening. Notabene's homepage tagline is 'The open trust layer for global payments', and its named products are Notabene Flow ('The first open stablecoin payments platform for businesses'), Notabene Transact ('Transaction authorization for real-world digital asset flows') and the Transaction Authorization Protocol ('The open protocol for trusted blockchain payments'); the homepage makes no mention of wallet screening, address risk scoring or blockchain attribution. What it solves is counterparty VASP data exchange — verifying who the receiving institution is and passing originator/beneficiary information before funds move — not building an attribution graph that scores an arbitrary address's exposure to illicit activity. ChainChoice's own EU-TFR compliance hub already places it there, noting that 'EU-TFR-compliant CASPs typically integrate Travel Rule messaging via shared protocols like Notabene, Sumsub TravelRule, or Trisa.' A CASP typically buys both a Travel Rule protocol and a screening vendor; they are not substitutes and should not be ranked against each other.","source":"https://notabene.id/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"wallet_screening/notabene/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Notabene publishes its own blockchain address attribution dataset and sells standalone wallet risk screening decoupled from Travel Rule message routing.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Solidus Labs","category":"wallet_screening","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"A customer of this category, not a competitor in it. Solidus's own transaction-monitoring page states that 'Solidus Transaction Monitoring is vendor-agnostic and integrates with leading blockchain intelligence providers such as Chainalysis, TRM Labs, and Elliptic' and that 'these integrations provide wallet intelligence, and onchain risk signals that Solidus correlates with behavioral analytics and proprietary risk scoring.' The address attribution it surfaces is bought from three vendors already ranked here — ranking Solidus would score the same underlying attribution twice, once as the source and once as the reseller. Its own product is venue-side market integrity: the homepage headline is 'Multidimensional Market Integrity for Modern Markets' around the HALO platform, and its trade-surveillance page ('Trade Surveillance — Detect, prevent, and report suspicious trading patterns through multidimensional surveillance') lists what it actually detects as 'spoofing, layering, wash trading, front-running, insider trading, pump-and-dump schemes, cross-venue manipulation, and other sophisticated market abuse strategies', for buyer segments spanning trading venues and exchanges, broker-dealers and prime brokers, prediction market platforms, and regulators and market supervisors. That is a market-abuse purchase, not an AML address-screening purchase.","source":"https://www.soliduslabs.com/solutions/transaction-monitoring","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"wallet_screening/solidus-labs/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Solidus Labs ships its own blockchain attribution dataset and address risk score that is not sourced from third-party blockchain intelligence providers.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Balancer","category":"web3_apps","kind":null,"reason":"Co-founder Fernando Martinelli announced on 24 March 2026 that Balancer Labs, the entity that built and funded the protocol, is winding down, citing \"real and ongoing legal exposure\" from the 3 November 2025 exploit that drained roughly $128M through a rounding flaw in V2's swap logic. TVL has fallen ~95%, from nearly $3.5B at peak to about $157M. BAL emissions end and veBAL unwinds; core staff are expected to move to a successor, Balancer OpCo, which was still pending a governance vote at announcement. We do not rank a venue whose maintaining company dissolved mid-remediation.","source":"https://unchainedcrypto.com/balancer-labs-shuts-down-its-corporate-entity-after-128-million-exploit-unchained/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"web3_apps/balancer/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Balancer OpCo is approved by governance and demonstrably maintains the front end with a funded security budget, with post-exploit TVL and audit coverage restored.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Chainlink","category":"web3_apps","kind":"duplicate_of_ranked_record","reason":"Chainlink's homepage describes it as \"the industry-standard oracle platform powering the majority of decentralized finance,\" and lists Aave and Lido — two apps already ranked in this pool — among the organizations that have \"adopted Chainlink's standards and infrastructure,\" beside Swift and Mastercard. The page routes developers to documentation and institutions to \"Talk to an expert\"; there is no Chainlink app a reader opens, connects a wallet to and transacts in. Access is always indirect, through someone else's product.","source":"https://chain.link/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"web3_apps/chainlink/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Chainlink ships a consumer-facing application under its own brand that a reader opens and transacts in directly, rather than infrastructure other apps embed.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Hyperliquid","category":"web3_apps","kind":null,"reason":"Hyperliquid's Terms of Use classify anyone residing, located or incorporated in the United States — plus U.S. citizens wherever they are — as Restricted Persons, and the app.hyperliquid.xyz front end geofences US IPs: load it from a US address and you are told your jurisdiction is barred (source last audited 18 June 2026; still accurate at 20 August 2026). A venue that turns away an entire core readership at the door cannot be compared against apps every reader can open.","source":"https://www.datawallet.com/crypto/is-hyperliquid-available-in-the-usa","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"web3_apps/hyperliquid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Hyperliquid opens a compliant US-accessible front end and removes US persons from the Restricted Persons clause in its Terms of Use — the CFTC-side work reported in August 2026 has not yet changed either.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"MetaMask","category":"web3_apps","kind":null,"reason":"MetaMask's homepage sells it as an \"all in one self-custody crypto wallet\" offering \"Total control over your assets.\" It does now advertise in-app trading — \"Buy, sell, swap, earn, and spend,\" \"Long or short perps,\" a Money Account and a card — but the product it sells is custody of your keys, and it is the credential layer you connect to Uniswap, Aave and ENS alike. Ranking it here would compare a login against the things you log into; it belongs in the wallets pool.","source":"https://metamask.io/","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"web3_apps/metamask/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"We begin ranking wallet-native trading surfaces as standalone venues, or the Web3 Apps scope is widened to include key managers.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Nifty Gateway","category":"web3_apps","kind":"dead_or_discontinued","reason":"Gemini announced on 23 January 2026 that Nifty Gateway was moving to withdrawal-only mode immediately and closing entirely on 23 February 2026, with holders of USD, ETH and NFTs sent \"instructions for moving their assets off of the Nifty platform and onto the larger Gemini ecosystem.\" It fails this pool twice over: the venue no longer exists, and while it did, balances sat on the platform to be moved off rather than in the reader's own wallet.","source":"https://www.gemini.com/blog/announcing-nifty-gateways-closure","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"web3_apps/nifty-gateway/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Gemini relaunches Nifty Gateway, or a successor under that brand, as a live self-custody marketplace users connect their own wallet to.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Pump.fun","category":"web3_apps","kind":null,"reason":"On 6 December 2024, three days after the FCA warned that the firm \"may be providing or promoting financial services or products without our permission,\" pump.fun geoblocked Britain and posted that \"this site is currently unavailable to users in the United Kingdom.\" Co-founder Alon confirmed to Decrypt that \"the decision was made by Pump.fun\" and that it was not forced, calling the restriction permanent. A venue that voluntarily excludes a core English-language market is not comparable against apps our whole readership can open; the block still stands.","source":"https://decrypt.co/295355/solana-pump-fun-bans-uk-users-regulator","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-08-20","checkedFrom":"recorded","onRecordSince":"2026-09-08","ledgerKey":"web3_apps/pump-fun/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"pump.fun lifts the UK geoblock — for example via authorisation under the FSMA 2026 cryptoasset regime — and removes the United Kingdom from the restricted-territory clause of its terms.","expiresFrom":"research"}, {"name":"Kraken Wrapped Bitcoin (kBTC)","category":"wrapped_assets","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"Kraken's general terms bar the use of \"any web scraping, web harvesting, or data extraction methods\" and of \"any bots, robots, parsers, spiders, scripts\" on its services and content, so Kraken's kBTC support page, where the reserve address and custody are published, is not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads it, Kraken Wrapped Bitcoin (kBTC) is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://www.kraken.com/legal/global-terms","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"wrapped_assets/kraken-wrapped-bitcoin-kbtc/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"Kraken's kBTC support page, its licensing page and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"}, {"name":"ether.fi Liquid","category":"yield_vaults","kind":"terms_bar_agents_reread_pending","reason":"ether.fi's terms of use say \"you must not use any robots, spiders, crawlers, scrapers, or other automated tools or interfaces that are not provided by us to access the Website and extract data\", and ether.fi publishes how Liquid works, its withdrawal times and its fees on its own help and documentation sites, so they are not re-read the way this site reads a provider. Until a person reads them, ether.fi Liquid is not ranked here and its earlier scores are not shown.","source":"https://etherfi.gitbook.io/etherfi/legal/ether.fi-legal/terms-of-use","sourceFrom":"record","checkedOn":"2026-11-11","checkedFrom":"record","onRecordSince":"2026-11-11","ledgerKey":"yield_vaults/ether-fi-liquid/refusal","pointer":null,"aliases":[],"expiresIf":"ether.fi's Liquid help articles on how it works and its withdrawal times, its Liquid documentation and its terms are read by hand by a person in a browser: then the row is read again and returns on that read.","expiresFrom":"record"} ] }