Provider at a glance
- Category
- Naming Services
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- 3dns.box
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 63 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
3DNS
ICANN domains as onchain tokens
Naming Services
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 7 naming services in the published ranking
63
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is 3DNS right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Whether you can lose the name5/10 here; Base Names (Basenames) scores 6
- Onchain registry or company namespace4/10 here; SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) scores 5
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin8/10 here; the category best is 10
- Published price and renewal terms6/10 here; the category best is 9
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best naming service shows where it lands for you.
What will 3DNS cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is 3DNS?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to 3DNS
Compare all 4- 2Base Names (Basenames)1 point above · stronger on ownership durability (6 against 5)64
- 4SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida)2 points below · stronger on ownership durability (6 against 5)61
- 5Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles)10 points below · weaker on resolution reach (2 against 8)53
For your setup
Find out if 3DNS fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where 3DNS lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best naming serviceNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why 3DNS ranks #3
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (17.9 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
405+6.405.07#4/7Loading evidence…
254+3.204.09#3/7Loading evidence…
258+6.404.010#2/7Loading evidence…
106+1.926.09#2/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Base Names (Basenames), #2
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 61–66 and ranks #2–#4
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of 3DNS’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
Whether you can lose the name 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes Base Names (Basenames)+166#3 → #2
Onchain registry or company namespace 4 → 5 on its ladder · passes Base Names (Basenames)+165#3 → #2
Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin 8 → 9 on its ladder · passes Base Names (Basenames)+165#3 → #2
Published price and renewal terms 6 → 8 on its ladder · passes Base Names (Basenames)+264#3 → #2
Whether you can lose the name 5 → 4 on its ladder · SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) passes it−161#3 → #4
Onchain registry or company namespace 4 → 2 on its ladder · SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) passes it−260#3 → #4
Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin 8 → 6 on its ladder · SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) passes it−260#3 → #4
Smallest climb: whether you can lose the name 5 → 6 passes Base Names (Basenames), #2.
Strengths
0 from the score dataWhere it leads
No scored criterion is at or within one point of the category best, so no strength can be stated from the data.
Tradeoffs
4 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Whether you can lose the name — 5/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Onchain registry or company namespace — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin — 8/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Published price and renewal terms — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- Because these are genuine ICANN domains registered through a partner registrar, holding the NFT does not put you outside the legal system: UDRP and URS proceedings can move the underlying registration, and the registrar of record — not you — is the party that must comply. Also budget the $6/year tokenization fee as permanent overhead: on a $2.59/year .xyz the onchain wrapper costs more than twice the domain itself.
- Only four TLDs carry a published price (.com, .xyz, .io, .finance) while the 3DNS docs index describes the service as "supporting .com, .xyz, .box, and over 420 more TLDs"; the registry figures on the pricing page carry no currency unit, and the pricing, FAQ and Terms pages state no grace, redemption or lapse policy. All four published registry prices changed between 4 August and 14 September 2026. The Terms also say "3DNS may take down works in response to Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") takedown notices", while "If we terminate your Account or restrict your access or use of the Service, you retain ownership of your NFTs."
Competitive position
Where 3DNS leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#1 / 714.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#3 / 713.4 of 30 · best 20.3
Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 78.3 of 18 · constant here
Where 3DNS leads
- Onchain registry or company namespace#3 / 7
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin#2 / 7
- Published price and renewal terms#2 / 7
Where it trailsNo criterion in the bottom third of its pool.
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
Base Names (Basenames)#2 of 7 · score 64 · 1.0 point ahead
3DNS leads on
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin8 vs 7
Base Names (Basenames) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name6 vs 5
Largest single reason Base Names (Basenames) is ahead: published criteria (+1.0 display points).Scenario cost: Base Names (Basenames) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida)#4 of 7 · score 61 · 2.0 points behind
3DNS leads on
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin8 vs 4
SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name6 vs 5
- Onchain registry or company namespace5 vs 4
Largest single reason 3DNS is ahead: published criteria (+2.1 display points).Scenario cost: SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles)#5 of 7 · score 53 · 10.0 points behind
3DNS leads on
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin8 vs 2
- Published price and renewal terms6 vs 4
Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles) leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason 3DNS is ahead: published criteria (+10.4 display points).Scenario cost: Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 63 · gap 18.0Why ENS (Ethereum Name Service) ranks above 3DNS
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 18.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisENS (Ethereum Name Service)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight13.420.3−17.9, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisENS (Ethereum Name Service)Points
Whether you can lose the name · w4057−2.56, worse
Onchain registry or company namespace · w2549−4.00, worse
Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin · w25810−1.60, worse
Published price and renewal terms · w1069−0.96, worse
Net6381−18.0
Your scenario
3DNS is not priced for this scenario
Marketplace fee on your volume for a year. Excludes network gas and any withdrawal fee. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
your cost/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 14 September 2026.
your cost/yrCost is stated as your cost/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory medianNot priced0 of 7 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
7 of 7 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 14 September 2026
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #2 to #4 across one-point re-runs
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 14 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Whether you can lose the namestrength 5 · weight 40Report an error—14 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Onchain registry or company namespacestrength 4 · weight 25Report an error—14 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Does your wallet resolve it without a pluginstrength 8 · weight 25Report an error—14 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Published price and renewal termsstrength 6 · weight 10Report an error—14 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Whether you can lose the name · 40% (3DNS 5/10)Scored by Onchain registry or company namespace · 25% (3DNS 4/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Regulatory failure, Execution failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means. Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin (25%), Published price and renewal terms (10%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Per-TLD annual price plus a flat tokenization fee, as shown on the pricing page: '.com 8.75 / year + $6 tokenization fee'; '.xyz 2.59 / year + $6 tokenization fee'; '.io 38.79 / year + $6 tokenization fee'; '.finance 20.79 / year + $6 tokenization fee'. 'For $6 per domain per year, you can tokenize your domain'; the FAQ adds '3DNS costs $6/year on top of the cost of domain registration.' Only four TLDs are priced on the page, and it states no grace, redemption or lapse policy.3DNS — official pricing page ↗ · 14 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USD3DNS — official pricing page ↗ · 14 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Sold worldwide; the 3DNS Terms of Service bar users in jurisdictions under a comprehensive US Government embargo and sanctioned persons, without naming countries.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with 3DNS: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
10 methodology entries
- 14 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 63, #3 of 7. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
- 16 September 2026
2026.09.15Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources · platform-wide- changed Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
- fixed 66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
- changed Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.
- added availabilitySource (O-04g): for a reader who states a country, a row whose availability in that country rests on a region tag its record gives no source for sorts below every sourced row. It is inert in every order published here, which states no country.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt naming_services:three_dns:2026.10.18:a058cb0859d7
Are you 3DNS? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.