Provider at a glance
- Category
- Incentive Distribution
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- absinthe.network
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 41 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in August 2026.
Absinthe Labs
White-label points campaign engine
Incentive DistributionHistorical
#9 Overall
Ranked #9 of 9 incentive distribution in the published ranking
41
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Historical verdict. The record carries a sunset date of 28 September 2026. The score is what the methodology produced from the evidence read at the time; it is kept so the ranking history stays auditable, not as a recommendation.
Is Absinthe Labs right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?2/10 here; the category best is 9
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?6/10 here; the category best is 10
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?2/10 here; Galxe Quest / Business+ scores 7
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?6/10 here; the category best is 8
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 incentive distribution platform shows where it lands for you.
What will Absinthe Labs cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Transactions per year
- 1k
How safe is Absinthe Labs?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read August 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Absinthe Labs
Compare all 4- 6Galxe Quest / Business+18 points above · stronger on incident and operator record (7 against 2)59
- 7Layer316 points above · stronger on incident and operator record (6 against 2)57
- 8Zealy10 points above · stronger on incident and operator record (5 against 2)51
For your setup
Find out if Absinthe Labs fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Absinthe Labs 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 incentive distribution platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Absinthe Labs ranks #9
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (12.5 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
302+1.926.09#6/9Loading evidence…
286+5.387.010#6/9Loading evidence…
222+1.416.08#9/9Loading evidence…
206+3.847.08#6/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−10behind Zealy, #8
RobustnessNot scored on criteriait stopped operating on 2026-09-28, so its criterion scores are zeroed in the score and no move is computed
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
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
- If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? — 2/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? — 6/10 against a category best of 10/10
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? — 2/10 against a category best of 8/10
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? — 6/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- Nothing here is sold any more: on 2026-09-28 every path on absinthe.network returned one undated notice ('Today, Absinthe is winding down') that says nothing about deposited USDC budgets or unredeemed vouchers. A community still holding Absinthe points holds a leaderboard it cannot re-derive and, on 2026-09-28, could not load: the vendor's own status page showed the Leaderboard Endpoint at 0.000% uptime for fourteen consecutive days while its incident log for July, August and September 2026 said 'No incidents reported'. Everything downstream of that inherits it — the points arithmetic happens in 'the Absinthe engine' with no published file, no root and no contest window; the sole documented pointer to the 'open-source framework' behind it is a link the guides still print to a host whose TLS certificate had expired on 2026-09-28; and the campaign manager can reset any participant's balance to zero with no artefact left behind outside the vendor's dashboard. When a community disputes a number, the answer available to the budget-holder is a screenshot from a private admin tool.
Competitive position
Where Absinthe Labs 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 / 914.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#9 / 90.0 of 30 · best 19.9
Friction#1 / 92.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 93.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Absinthe Labs leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?#9 / 9
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.
Zealy#8 of 9 · score 51 · 10.0 points ahead
Absinthe Labs leads on
- If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?2 vs 1
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?6 vs 4
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?6 vs 5
Zealy leads on
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?5 vs 2
Largest single reason Zealy is ahead: published criteria (+21.8 display points).Scenario cost: Zealy has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Layer3#7 of 9 · score 57 · 16.0 points ahead
Absinthe Labs leads on
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?6 vs 5
Layer3 leads on
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?6 vs 2
Largest single reason Layer3 is ahead: published criteria (+28.1 display points).Scenario cost: Layer3 has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Galxe Quest / Business+#6 of 9 · score 59 · 18.0 points ahead
Absinthe Labs leads on
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?6 vs 5
Galxe Quest / Business+ leads on
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?7 vs 2
Largest single reason Galxe Quest / Business+ is ahead: published criteria (+29.6 display points).Scenario cost: Galxe Quest / Business+ has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 41 · gap 40.0Why Merkl (Angle Labs) ranks above Absinthe Labs
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; a floor bound on one of the rows keeps the reproduced gap (51.7) from matching the displayed one exactly, which is stated rather than hidden.
DimensionThisMerkl (Angle Labs)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight0.019.9−51.7, 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 criterionThisMerkl (Angle Labs)Points
If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? · w3029−6.72, worse
Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? · w2868−1.79, worse
What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? · w2228−4.22, worse
What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? · w2068−1.28, worse
Net4181−40.0≈
Your scenario
Absinthe Labs is not priced for this scenario
The cheapest published tier that covers your usage. List price before any discount; add-ons priced separately are excluded. 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
Transactions per year · your input1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 17 August 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 9 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
9 of 9 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 17 August 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.RobustnessNot scored on criteriano re-run describes this row
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 17 August 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?strength 2 · weight 30Report an error—17 August 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.Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?strength 6 · weight 28Report an error—17 August 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.What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?strength 2 · weight 22Report an error—17 August 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.What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?strength 6 · weight 20Report an error—17 August 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
- Contract failure (Absinthe Labs 2/10): the code holding the funds is exploited.Scored by What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? · 22%
- Custody failure (Absinthe Labs 6/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? · 28%
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? · 30% (Absinthe Labs 2/10)Scored by What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? · 20% (Absinthe Labs 6/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- NO LONGER SOLD. https://
absinthe .network / (fetched 28 September 2026, HTTP 200) no longer carries the pricing section read on 17 August 2026; the host now serves a single page titled "The Next Chapter for Absinthe", which states "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, and we are grateful for the trust they placed in us." The page carries no date; the change happened between 17 August 2026 and 28 September 2026. Every path on the host, including /sitemap.xml and an invented path, returns that same page, so no pricing, intake or FAQ surface survives. The monthly tiers, the White-Glove Launch package and the FAQ's 'monthly platform fee per campaign' recorded on 17 August 2026 are withdrawn; no price is published on any live Absinthe surface.Absinthe Labs — official pricing page ↗ · 17 August 2026 - Prices published in
- USDAbsinthe Labs — official pricing page ↗ · 17 August 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- ethereum, arbitrum, base, mantle, solana
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- NEITHER a market restriction NOR the usual OFAC/sanctions representation was found — because there is no legal surface at all. absinthe.network publishes no terms of service and no privacy policy: /terms and /privacy return the catch-all marketing page, and sitemap.xml lists only / and /intake. Nothing in the 58 documentation pages restricts a jurisdiction. The only geographic signal on any first-party surface is the fact that fees are quoted in USD and the founder-booking link is US-timezone; supportedRegions is recorded as 'global' by absence of any restriction, not by a positive availability statement.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Absinthe Labs: 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.
9 methodology entries
- 17 August 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 41, #9 of 9. 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
2026.10.7Forty-one more products are offered only where their own quoted terms serve- fixed 141 country exclusions on 31 rows, each the name of a country the row's own quoted terms exclude: for example Mercuryo Hungary, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Chile, Colombia and Morocco; Gemini Custody the United Kingdom, Australia and the EU after its wind-down; Backed xStocks the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Venezuela.
- changed Thirteen rows list the only countries their terms serve: Coins.ph the Philippines, Spritz bill pay, Brex, Unchained, WisdomTree, Franklin BENJI and AnchorWatch the United States (with its territories for AnchorWatch), PRYPCO Mint the UAE, N26 crypto seven EU countries, Gemini Tokenized Stocks the EU, XNET the US, Canada and the UK, Coldbit Steel and MetaMask Card the countries they list.
- changed Published (no-country) orders do not move. Country results change: in India six categories each lose one row (bill pay, cards, off-ramps, P2P, seed backup, tokenised real estate), and bill pay there has no row confirmed available, so it shows the published order marked as such; country pages list 23 fewer rows (24,357 to 24,334). The grounding test now matches full country names in any case, which shows seven earlier exclusions were quoted all along: the named debt of unquoted exclusions falls from 40 to 33 pairs.
- 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.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt incentive_distribution:absinthe_labs:2026.10.18:f89bd9058d07
Are you Absinthe Labs? 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.