Provider at a glance
- Category
- Naming Services
- Entity
- All 21 Coinbase products
- Official website
- base.org
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 64 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Base Names (Basenames)
ENS names on Base
Naming Services
#2 Overall
Ranked #2 of 7 naming services in the published ranking
64
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Base Names (Basenames) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Whether you can lose the name6/10; the category best is 7
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Onchain registry or company namespace4/10 here; SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) scores 5
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin7/10 here; 3DNS scores 8
- 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 Base Names (Basenames) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Base Names (Basenames)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Base Names (Basenames)
Compare all 4- 33DNS1 point below · stronger on resolution reach (8 against 7)63
- 4SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida)3 points below · stronger on registry decentralisation (5 against 4)61
- 5Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles)11 points below · weaker on resolution reach (2 against 7)53
For your setup
Find out if Base Names (Basenames) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Base Names (Basenames) 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 Base Names (Basenames) ranks #2
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (18.4 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
406+7.685.07#2/7Loading evidence…
254+3.204.09#3/7Loading evidence…
257+5.604.010#3/7Loading 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−17behind ENS (Ethereum Name Service), #1
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 62–67 and ranks #2–#3
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 Base Names (Basenames)’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 6 → 5 on its ladder · 3DNS passes it−162#2 → #3
Onchain registry or company namespace 4 → 3 on its ladder · 3DNS passes it−163#2 → #3
Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin 7 → 6 on its ladder · 3DNS passes it−163#2 → #3
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Whether you can lose the name — 6/10, category best 7/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Onchain registry or company namespace — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin — 7/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Published price and renewal terms — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- Your renewal bill is denominated in ETH, so it re-prices every year with the market — 0.1 ETH/yr for a three-character name is a very different bill at different ETH prices, and Base publishes no USD equivalent. The launch discounts are time-limited by base.org/names itself: "You will need to pay the standard registration fees if you wish to keep your Basename after your initial discount has been fully applied." And because the recovery auction opens at 100 ETH rather than ENS's ~$100M, a Basename you forget to renew becomes economically worth sniping much earlier in the 21-day decay.
- The lapse terms are no longer on any Base page that loads: docs.base.org/identity/basenames/basenames-faq redirects to a "Base Account and Base MCP Have Moved" page and the FAQ link on base.org/names returns 404, so the 90-day grace period and the 100 ETH premium that halves every day for 21 days are readable only in the github.com/base/basenames source ("uint256 constant GRACE_PERIOD = 90 days;") and on-chain. On 14 September 2026 both the BaseRegistrar and the UpgradeableRegistrarController reported the same owner, 0xf9BbA2F07a2c95fC4225f1CAeC76E6BF04B463e9, an address with no contract code — a single key — and in the controller source setPriceOracle is "external onlyOwner". Coinbase's Terms state "Basenames is not part of the Services."
Competitive position
Where Base Names (Basenames) 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#2 / 713.8 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 Base Names (Basenames) leads
- Whether you can lose the name#2 / 7
- Onchain registry or company namespace#3 / 7
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin#3 / 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.
3DNS#3 of 7 · score 63 · 1.0 point behind
Base Names (Basenames) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name6 vs 5
3DNS leads on
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin8 vs 7
Largest single reason Base Names (Basenames) is ahead: published criteria (+1.0 display points).Scenario cost: 3DNS has no verified pricing for this scenario.
SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida)#4 of 7 · score 61 · 3.0 points behind
Base Names (Basenames) leads on
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin7 vs 4
SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) leads on
- Onchain registry or company namespace5 vs 4
Largest single reason Base Names (Basenames) is ahead: published criteria (+3.1 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 · 11.0 points behind
Base Names (Basenames) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name6 vs 5
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin7 vs 2
- Published price and renewal terms6 vs 4
Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles) leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Base Names (Basenames) is ahead: published criteria (+11.4 display points).Scenario cost: Lens Usernames (formerly Lens Handles) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 64 · gap 17.0Why ENS (Ethereum Name Service) ranks above Base Names (Basenames)
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 17.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisENS (Ethereum Name Service)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight13.820.3−16.9, 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 · w4067−1.28, worse
Onchain registry or company namespace · w2549−4.00, worse
Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin · w25710−2.40, worse
Published price and renewal terms · w1069−0.96, worse
Net6481−17.0
Your scenario
Base Names (Basenames) 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 #3 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 6 · 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 7 · 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% (Base Names (Basenames) 6/10)Scored by Onchain registry or company namespace · 25% (Base Names (Basenames) 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
- Annual fees quoted in ETH, not USD ('Annual registration fees are as follows:'): 3 characters 0.1 ETH; 4 characters 0.01 ETH; 5-9 characters 0.001 ETH; 10+ characters 0.0001 ETH. 'You will need to pay the standard registration fees if you wish to keep your Basename after your initial discount has been fully applied.' Base's Terms add that names 'may expire and you are responsible for monitoring and renewing the registration of such names.' The lapse terms are no longer on any page that loads (the FAQ link 404s). On-chain, the grace period is 90 days (GRACE_PERIOD = 90 days in the Basenames source), followed by a premium that starts at 100 ETH and halves every day for 21 days.Base Names (Basenames) — official pricing page ↗ · 14 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDBase Names (Basenames) — 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
- Available worldwide onchain; Coinbase's Base Terms bar SDN-listed persons and users in US-sanctioned jurisdictions from the base.org/names interface without naming countries.
Legal entity on file: Coinbase, placed in 21 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Base Names (Basenames): 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 64, #2 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:base_names:2026.10.18:a058cb0859d7
Are you Base Names (Basenames)? 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.