Provider at a glance
- Category
- MEV Protection
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- blinklabs.xyz
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 60 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Blink (formerly Merkle.io)
MEV-protection RPC for wallets
MEV Protection
#6 Overall
Ranked #6 of 8 MEV protection in the published ranking
60
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $0.00 your cost/yr
Is Blink (formerly Merkle.io) right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Order-flow privacy in practice5/10 here; Titan Builder scores 9
- Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address2/10 here; UniswapX scores 4
- Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped5/10 here; the category best is 7
- Independence and quality of the protection evidence2/10 here; UniswapX scores 4
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 MEV protection service shows where it lands for you.
What will Blink (formerly Merkle.io) cost you?
$0.00 your cost/yr
The fee alone, plus network gas.
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
- Taker fee
- 0%
How safe is Blink (formerly Merkle.io)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Blink (formerly Merkle.io)
Compare all 4- 4Titan Builder7 points above · stronger on order flow privacy (9 against 5)67
- 5UniswapXLevel on score · stronger on rebate paid to user (4 against 2)60$0.00
- 7MetaMask Smart Transactions4 points below · weaker on order flow privacy (4 against 5)56$0.00
For your setup
Find out if Blink (formerly Merkle.io) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Blink (formerly Merkle.io) 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 MEV protection serviceNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Blink (formerly Merkle.io) ranks #6
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (11.2 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
305+4.805.09#4/8Loading evidence…
302+1.923.09#5/8Loading evidence…
205+3.205.07#4/8Loading evidence…
202+1.283.56#6/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
MarginLevelbehind UniswapX, #5
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 58–62 and ranks #5–#6
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 Blink (formerly Merkle.io)’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.
Order-flow privacy in practice 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes UniswapX+162#6 → #5
Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address 2 → 3 on its ladder · passes UniswapX+162#6 → #5
Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes UniswapX+161#6 → #5
Independence and quality of the protection evidence 2 → 3 on its ladder · passes UniswapX+161#6 → #5
Order-flow privacy in practice 5 → 2 on its ladder · MetaMask Smart Transactions passes it−354#6 → #7
Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped 5 → 1 on its ladder · MetaMask Smart Transactions passes it−455#6 → #7
Smallest climb: order-flow privacy in practice 5 → 6 passes UniswapX, #5.
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
- Order-flow privacy in practice — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address — 2/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped — 5/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Independence and quality of the protection evidence — 2/10 against a category best of 6/10
Record watch-outs
- Merkle.io and Blink are the same company, not two options — docs.merkle.io now 307-redirects to docs.blinklabs.xyz/blink/ and merkle.io serves Blink Labs Ltd branding. And you are not the customer: the product is sold to wallets and RPC providers on the promise of "$0.20-$0.30 per Ethereum transaction in revenue", so the "up to 90%" refund is a negotiable enterprise term for the integrator, which is consistent with the 0 ETH measured at the trader's address.
- This number set does not exist in any single table of the paper; it is spliced from two mutually contradictory ones. Table 3 ('User Rebate per RPC') reads MEV Blocker 0.00350 / Merkle 0 / Flashbots 0.00088 / Blink 0. The paper's own conclusion Table 5 reads MEV Blocker 0.0035 / Flashbots 0.0016 / Merkle 0.0009 / Blink 0.0000. The research took Flashbots' 0.0016 from Table 5 and Merkle's 0 from Table 3. Blink = 0 survives in BOTH tables, so Blink's score of 2 stands — but 'Merkle 0 ETH' is only true in Table 3 (Table 5 says 0.0009), and 'Flashbots 0.0016' is only true in Table 5 (Table 3 says 0.00088). State Blink = 0 ETH only, and disclose that the paper contradicts itself on the other two.
Competitive position
Where Blink (formerly Merkle.io) 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 / 814.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#6 / 88.4 of 30 · best 15.8
Friction#1 / 82.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 83.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 88.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Blink (formerly Merkle.io) leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- Independence and quality of the protection evidence#6 / 8
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.
UniswapX#5 of 8 · score 60 · same score
Blink (formerly Merkle.io) leads on
- Order-flow privacy in practice5 vs 2
UniswapX leads on
- Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address4 vs 2
- Independence and quality of the protection evidence4 vs 2
Largest single reason UniswapX is ahead: published criteria (+0.5 display points).Scenario cost: not compared, since UniswapX's figure is the fee alone, plus swap fees and slippage.
MetaMask Smart Transactions#7 of 8 · score 56 · 4.0 points behind
Blink (formerly Merkle.io) leads on
- Order-flow privacy in practice5 vs 4
- Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address2 vs 1
MetaMask Smart Transactions leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Blink (formerly Merkle.io) is ahead: published criteria (+3.6 display points).Scenario cost: not compared, since MetaMask Smart Transactions's figure is the fee alone, plus network gas.
Titan Builder#4 of 8 · score 67 · 7.0 points ahead
Blink (formerly Merkle.io) leads on
- Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped5 vs 4
Titan Builder leads on
- Order-flow privacy in practice9 vs 5
- Independence and quality of the protection evidence3 vs 2
Largest single reason Titan Builder is ahead: published criteria (+7.5 display points).Scenario cost: not compared, since Blink (formerly Merkle.io)'s figure is the fee alone, plus network gas.
Against the leader
79 vs 60 · gap 19.0Why MEV Blocker ranks above Blink (formerly Merkle.io)
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 19.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisMEV BlockerGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight8.415.8−19.2, 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 criterionThisMEV BlockerPoints
Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address · w3029−6.72, worse
Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped · w2057−1.28, worse
Independence and quality of the protection evidence · w2025−1.92, worse
Net6079−19.0
Your scenario
What Blink (formerly Merkle.io) costs on your scenario
Taker 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
$1k a month × 12 months × 0% taker fee = $0.00 / year
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Taker fee · published rate0%
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.
$0.00
The fee alone, plus network gas: not a total, and never compared as one.Under the default inputs · USDCategory median and cheapestNot statedOnly 1 of 8 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
2 of 8 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
5 of 8 quote a zero fee that leaves costs out, so they are absent from the median and the cheapest row, 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 #5 to #6 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
Order-flow privacy in practicestrength 5 · weight 30Report 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.Rebate published AND reaching the end user's addressstrength 2 · weight 30Report 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.Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is droppedstrength 5 · 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.Independence and quality of the protection evidencestrength 2 · 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.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Liveness failure (Blink (formerly Merkle.io) 5/10): the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by Inclusion breadth and what happens when your transaction is dropped · 20%
- Execution failure (Blink (formerly Merkle.io) 5/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Order-flow privacy in practice · 30%
- Information failure (Blink (formerly Merkle.io) 2/10): the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Independence and quality of the protection evidence · 20%
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Regulatory 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: Rebate published AND reaching the end user's address (30%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- "Free up to 25 RPS" (www.merkle.io/ethereum-rpc, which now serves Blink's "free RPC" page, read 22 October 2026), with "Contact us for plans if more RPS is required"; headline claim "MEV Refunds up to 90%". No per-transaction user fee is published for the free endpoint (worked reading: typed fee 0). Blink's B2B homepage (blinklabs.xyz) states "We usually expect $0.20-$0.30 per Ethereum transaction in revenue." No list price for higher plans is published, so cost beyond the free tier cannot be compared before a sales conversation.Blink (formerly Merkle.io) — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDBlink (formerly Merkle.io) — 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
- Blink publishes no end-user terms or country restriction on blinklabs.xyz, www.merkle.io/ethereum-rpc or its docs (read 22 October 2026). Its privacy policy (docs.blinklabs.xyz/blink/misc/privacy-policy.md) names the operator: "BL Research Limited ("BL Research", "we", "us", or "our") acts as a data controller for personal data processed in connection with this dashboard and our related services. We are registered in England and Wales." The searcher terms bar searchers, not end users, from "transactions involving sanctioned addresses".
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Blink (formerly Merkle.io): 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 60, #6 of 8. 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 mev_protection:blink:2026.10.18:3ea6872f9a95
Are you Blink (formerly Merkle.io)? 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.