The score, by dimension
- the same for all 9
- #4 of 9 · best 13.4
- the same for all 9
- the same for all 9
- the same for all 9
Tick: the best in this ranking · Methodology v2026.11.1
ApeChain
Arbitrum Orbit L3 for ApeCoin
#4 of all 9 worldwide64
- Rank
- #4 of all 9 worldwidere-runs: scores 62–66 and ranks #2–#4
- Your cost
- Not priced on this basis
- Evidence
- High4 of 4 criteria sourced
- Licence
- No MiCA record on file
- Freshness
- Read September 2026checked · re-read due
Check availability for your country
ApeChain · apechain.com. Provider links appear once we know which country you are browsing from: ChainChoice links to providers only where it serves in full.
Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure
Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.
The verdict
ApeChain is #4 of 9 published appchains / L3s; it scores 5/10 on permissionless exit, the category best. Its widest gap is settlement security inherited: 3/10, where Zora Network scores 5. Choose Zora Network if settlement security inherited matters most.
Is ApeChain right for you?
Suits you if
- Permissionless exit without the operator5/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if
- Security inherited from settlement layer3/10 here; Zora Network scores 5
- Operators running the chain today3/10 here; dYdX Chain scores 7
- Measured liquidity on arrival2/10 here; dYdX Chain scores 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 appchain or L3 shows where it lands for you.
What will ApeChain cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Usage per month
- 10
How safe is ApeChain?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Entity: not verified. No hand-confirmed record on file ties ApeChain to the company that runs it, so this page cannot say which other products that company operates. Read the legal entity in its terms before you deposit. How we read the evidence
Open the evidenceIf it doesn’t fit, choose
Compare all 4- 2dYdX ChainIf liquidity on arrival matters most: 82 points above · stronger on liquidity on arrival (8 against 2)66
- 3Zora NetworkIf settlement security inherited matters most: 51 point above · stronger on settlement security inherited (5 against 3)65
- 5Xai4 points below · weaker on settlement security inherited (2 against 3)60
Provider at a glance
- Category
- Appchains / L3s
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- apechain.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 64 out of 100 under methodology 2026.11.1, from the evidence read in September 2026.
For your setup
Find out if ApeChain fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where ApeChain 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 appchain or L3Nothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why ApeChain ranks #4
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (10.6 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
353+3.361.08#3/9
Third party
Third party · read 2026-09-28255+4.003.05#1/9
Third party
Third party · read 2026-09-28203+1.923.07#3/9
Third party
Third party · read 2026-09-28202+1.282.08#5/9
Third party
Third party · read 2026-09-28Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Zora Network, #3 of all 9 worldwide, on the published score
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 62–66 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 ApeChain’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.
Security inherited from settlement layer 3 → 4 on its ladder · passes Zora Network+166#4 → #2
Permissionless exit without the operator 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes Zora Network+165#4 → #3
Operators running the chain today 3 → 5 on its ladder · passes Zora Network+266#4 → #2
Measured liquidity on arrival 2 → 4 on its ladder · passes Zora Network+266#4 → #2
Security inherited from settlement layer 3 → 1 on its ladder · Xai passes it−259#4 → #6
Permissionless exit without the operator 5 → 2 on its ladder · Xai passes it−359#4 → #6
Operators running the chain today 3 → 0 on its ladder · Xai passes it−360#4 → #5
Smallest climb: security inherited from settlement layer 3 → 4 passes Zora Network, #3.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Permissionless exit without the operator — 5/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Security inherited from settlement layer — 3/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Operators running the chain today — 3/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Measured liquidity on arrival — 2/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- Gas is APE, so the cost of using the chain and the price of the asset that constitutes 100% of its value secured are the same instrument. ApeChain's own contract page lists weth 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 and wethGateway 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 in BOTH its L2Contracts and L3Contracts tables, so there is no WETH gateway in the published token bridge.
Competitive position
How ApeChain places on each criterion
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.
Against the leader
78 vs 64 · gap 14.0Why Abstract ranks above ApeChain
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 14.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisAbstractGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight7.913.4−14.3, 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 criterionThisAbstractPoints
Security inherited from settlement layer · w3538−5.60, worse
Permissionless exit without the operator · w2554+0.80, better
Operators running the chain today · w2034−0.64, worse
Measured liquidity on arrival · w2025−1.92, worse
Net6478−14.0
Your scenario
ApeChain is not priced for this 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
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 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 · USDTypical costNot statedFewer than 5 priced rows: no typical cost is named · 0 of 9 rows priced
Lowest fee, priced rowsNone 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 typical, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 28 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 10 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 28 September 2026.
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Security inherited from settlement layerstrength 3 · weight 35Report an errorThird-party page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Permissionless exit without the operatorstrength 5 · weight 25Report an errorThird-party page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Operators running the chain todaystrength 3 · weight 20Report an errorThird-party page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Measured liquidity on arrivalstrength 2 · weight 20Report an errorThird-party page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Verification failure: an invalid state or transfer is accepted.Scored by Security inherited from settlement layer · 35% (ApeChain 3/10)Scored by Operators running the chain today · 20% (ApeChain 3/10)
- Liveness failure (ApeChain 5/10): the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by Permissionless exit without the operator · 25%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Execution 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: Measured liquidity on arrival (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- "ApeChain utilizes $APE as its native gas token." (docs.apechain.com, fetched 28 September 2026). Worked example from the chain, not a published price: eth_gasPrice on rpc.apechain.com returned 101.68276 gwei at ApeChain block 50,538,924 on 28 September 2026, so a 21,000-gas transfer costs 21000 x 101.68276e-9 = 0.0021353 APE, about 0.00034 US dollars at the APE price of 0.15902 US dollars returned by coins.llama.fi the same day. The Bridge 0x6B71AFb4b7725227ab944c96FE018AB9dc0434b8 named by the rollup on Arbitrum One returns nativeToken() 0x7f9FBf9bDd3F4105C478b996B648FE6e828a1e98, whose symbol() is APE, read at Arbitrum block 509,652,428.ApeChain — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDApeChain — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- ApeChain, Arbitrum One, Ethereum
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with ApeChain: 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
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.11.1Score 64, #4 of 9. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 15 October 2026
2026.10.10The live-data rule names the researched market measurements a criterion reads- changed The live-data rule names a second kind of figure a score reads: a researched, dated market measurement a criterion's ladder is built on, read again on the 45-day review. /methodology/live-data lists the 14 criteria that read one; no score, rank or order changes.
- changed A saved decision is checked again on the answers the reader saved. The drift check had merged a priority suggested by the market (price swings, gas) into those answers, so a market reading could move a saved decision's #1; the published ranking never read it.
- added On every build a test reads every criterion's published ladder: one that names a market quantity or a market-data source must be declared, and every scored row of a declared criterion must carry the source and the date its figure was read.
- 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.
Methodology 2026.11.1, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt appchains_l3s:apechain:2026.11.1:97026bcdaac1
Are you ApeChain? 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.