Provider at a glance
- Category
- RPC & Node Services
- Entity
- All 2 Ankr products
- Official website
- ankr.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 59 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Ankr
Multichain RPC
RPC & Node Services
#7 Overall
Ranked #7 of 9 RPC & node services in the published ranking
59
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $12 your cost/yr
Is Ankr right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Archive debug and trace access7/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Real cost per 1M identical calls2/10 here; Infura (Consensys) scores 6
- Documented incident record and chain coverage3/10 here; Alchemy scores 7
- Published throughput and self-serve ceiling7/10 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 RPC provider shows where it lands for you.
What will Ankr cost you?
$12 your cost/yr
- Usage per month
- 10
- Price per unit
- $0.1
- Plan fee
- $0
$320 below the median of 8 priced RPC & node services.
How this is calculatedHow safe is Ankr?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Ankr
Compare all 4- 5Alchemy6 points above · stronger on reliability and coverage (7 against 3)65$63
- 6QuickNode6 points above · stronger on reliability and coverage (7 against 3)65$662
- 8Infura (Consensys)Level on score · stronger on real cost per million calls (6 against 2)59$0.00
For your setup
Find out if Ankr fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Ankr 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 RPC providerNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Ankr ranks #7
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (13.6 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 1 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
352+2.246.010#8/9Loading evidence…
207+4.485.07#1/9Loading evidence…
207+4.486.09#4/9Loading evidence…
253+2.405.07#8/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−6behind QuickNode, #6
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 57–61 and ranks #7–#8
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 Ankr’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.
Real cost per 1M identical calls 2 → 5 on its ladder · passes QuickNode+366#7 → #5
Documented incident record and chain coverage 3 → 7 on its ladder · passes QuickNode+465#7 → #5
Real cost per 1M identical calls 2 → 1 on its ladder · Infura (Consensys) passes it−157#7 → #8
Archive debug and trace access 7 → 6 on its ladder · Infura (Consensys) passes it−158#7 → #8
Published throughput and self-serve ceiling 7 → 6 on its ladder · Infura (Consensys) passes it−158#7 → #8
Smallest climb: real cost per 1M identical calls 2 → 5 passes QuickNode, #6.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Archive debug and trace access — 7/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Real cost per 1M identical calls — 2/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Documented incident record and chain coverage — 3/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Published throughput and self-serve ceiling — 7/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- The pricing is built to look cheap and bill expensive. '$0.10 per 1M credits' is the number you remember; '200 credits per EVM request' is the number that matters, and together they make Ankr the most expensive provider here at $20 per million requests — ten times what the headline implies and 13x BlockPI. Then the model shifts under you by chain: Solana is 500 credits ($50/M) and Advanced API is 700 ($70/M). Also note the company has pivoted attention toward its own Neura L1 and an 'RPCfi' token-flywheel model, so RPC is increasingly a feeder for a token economy rather than the end product.
- The live Ankr service-plans table states Public = 40+, Freemium = 65+, Premium = 80+ blockchains. Premium is 80+, not 55+ — which is ABOVE QuickNode's 70+, so the comparative claim inverts. The rest of the Ankr pricing block verified exactly (0.10 USD = 1M credits; EVM 200 / Solana 500 / Beacon 700 / Advanced API 700 / gRPC 10 credits; Freemium 200M credits/mo; $10 minimum deposit; Deal $500–$3,000 at +20%; ~1800 reqs/min free; Up to ~1.5k reqs/sec Premium; 'Full and Archive data' included on every tier; page last updated July 28, 2026). Read again 14 September 2026: the table now reads Public 30+, Freemium 45+ and Premium 80+ chains, marks Trace and Debug as Premium-only, and the pricing page is dated Sep 9, 2026.
Competitive position
Where Ankr 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#7 / 910.2 of 30 · best 18.6
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 Ankr leads
- Archive debug and trace access#1 / 9
Where it trails
- Real cost per 1M identical calls#8 / 9
- Documented incident record and chain coverage#8 / 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.
Infura (Consensys)#8 of 9 · score 59 · same score
Ankr leads on
- Archive debug and trace access7 vs 4
- Published throughput and self-serve ceiling7 vs 3
Infura (Consensys) leads on
- Real cost per 1M identical calls6 vs 2
Scenario cost: Infura (Consensys) is −$12 against Ankr.
QuickNode#6 of 9 · score 65 · 6.0 points ahead
Ankr leads on
- Archive debug and trace access7 vs 6
- Published throughput and self-serve ceiling7 vs 4
QuickNode leads on
- Real cost per 1M identical calls4 vs 2
- Documented incident record and chain coverage7 vs 3
Largest single reason QuickNode is ahead: published criteria (+5.7 display points).Scenario cost: QuickNode is +$650 against Ankr.
Alchemy#5 of 9 · score 65 · 6.0 points ahead
Ankr leads on
- Archive debug and trace access7 vs 4
- Published throughput and self-serve ceiling7 vs 6
Alchemy leads on
- Real cost per 1M identical calls4 vs 2
- Documented incident record and chain coverage7 vs 3
Largest single reason Alchemy is ahead: published criteria (+5.7 display points).Scenario cost: Alchemy is +$51 against Ankr.
Against the leader
81 vs 59 · gap 22.0Why BlockPI ranks above Ankr
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 22.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisBlockPIGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight10.218.6−21.8, 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 criterionThisBlockPIPoints
Real cost per 1M identical calls · w35210−8.96, worse
Archive debug and trace access · w2076+0.64, better
Published throughput and self-serve ceiling · w2079−1.28, worse
Documented incident record and chain coverage · w2535−1.60, worse
Net5981−22.0
Your scenario
What Ankr costs on your scenario
Metered usage beyond whatever the plan includes, for a year. Excludes egress, support tiers and enterprise minimums. 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
Usage per month · your input10
Price per unit · published rate$0.1
Plan fee · published rate$0
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 22 October 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.
$12
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median$3328 of 9 rows priced · Ankr −$320 vs median
Cheapest priced$0.00 · Infura (Consensys)Ankr costs +$12 more · availability not applied — set your country to filterCompare with Infura (Consensys)
1 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 22 October 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 #7 to #8 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 22 October 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Real cost per 1M identical callsstrength 2 · weight 35Report an error—22 October 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.Archive debug and trace accessstrength 7 · weight 20Report an error—22 October 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 throughput and self-serve ceilingstrength 7 · weight 20Report an error—22 October 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.Documented incident record and chain coveragestrength 3 · weight 25Report an error—22 October 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
- Liveness failure (Ankr 3/10): the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by Documented incident record and chain coverage · 25%
Not assessed by this ranking: Exit failure, Information 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: Real cost per 1M identical calls (35%), Archive debug and trace access (20%), Published throughput and self-serve ceiling (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Ankr RPC pricing doc (ankr.com/docs/rpc-service/pricing/, "Last updated on Oct 20, 2026"), read 22 October 2026 for the 21 October 2026 re-read; figures unchanged since 14 September 2026. "0.10 USD = 1M API Credits". HTTPS per request: EVM-compatible 200 ("$0.00002"); Solana 500 ("$0.00005"); Beacon Chains 700 ("$0.00007"); Other (non-EVM) 200 ("$0.00002"); Advanced API 700 ("$0.00007"). gRPC: method call 10 credits ("$0.000001"); data transfer 5,000,000 credits ("$0.5") per GB, both directions. Service plans page: Public free; Freemium "Free 200M API Credits / monthly" (0 per month); Premium PAYG with a "minimum PAYG deposit" of "10USD", or Deal "500USD — 3,000USD" monthly with 20% extra credits. Rate limits: Public/Freemium "≈1800 reqs/min — guaranteed"; Premium "Up to ≈1.5k reqs/sec" per endpoint (Solana ≈4k). Trace and Debug Premium only.Ankr — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDAnkr — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 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
- Ankr's Terms of Use (ankr.com/terms/, read 22 October 2026) carry no restricted-country list for the RPC service; their only sanctions clause is the Forge Program eligibility rule requiring participants to "not be a person with whom dealings are restricted under applicable sanctions laws". Global self-serve.
Legal entity on file: Ankr, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Ankr: 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
- 22 October 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 59, #7 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
2026.10.6A 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 rpc_nodes:ankr:2026.10.18:a6f69a8367c9
Are you Ankr? 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.