Provider at a glance
- Category
- Onchain Monitoring
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- blocksec.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 78 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
BlockSec Phalcon
Attack detection and blocking
Onchain Monitoring
#2 Overall
Ranked #2 of 7 onchain monitoring in the published ranking
78
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is BlockSec Phalcon right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Verified pre-emptive catches7/10; the category best is 8
- What it can actually DO9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- False-positive honesty and detection method3/10 here; Hexagate (by Chainalysis) scores 5
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 monitoring platform shows where it lands for you.
What will BlockSec Phalcon cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Transactions per year
- 1k
How safe is BlockSec Phalcon?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to BlockSec Phalcon
Compare all 4- 1Hypernative1 point above · stronger on verified interventions (8 against 7)79
- 3Hexagate (by Chainalysis)6 points below · stronger on false positive posture (5 against 3)72
- 4Forta Firewall10 points below · weaker on verified interventions (3 against 7)68
For your setup
Find out if BlockSec Phalcon fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where BlockSec Phalcon 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 monitoring platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why BlockSec Phalcon 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 (19.0 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
407+8.963.08#2/7Loading evidence…
259+7.207.09#1/7Loading evidence…
203+1.924.06#5/7Loading evidence…
152+0.962.03#2/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Hypernative, #1
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 75–79 and ranks #1–#2
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 BlockSec Phalcon’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.
Verified pre-emptive catches 7 → 8 on its ladder · passes Hypernative+179#2 → #1
What it can actually DO 9 → 10 on its ladder · passes Hypernative+179#2 → #1
False-positive honesty and detection method 3 → 4 on its ladder · passes Hypernative+179#2 → #1
Pricing and procurement disclosure 2 → 4 on its ladder · passes Hypernative+279#2 → #1
Verified pre-emptive catches 7 → 4 on its ladder · Hexagate (by Chainalysis) passes it−370#2 → #3
What it can actually DO 9 → 5 on its ladder · Hexagate (by Chainalysis) passes it−471#2 → #3
Smallest climb: verified pre-emptive catches 7 → 8 passes Hypernative, #1.
Strengths
3 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Verified pre-emptive catches — 7/10, category best 8/10
- What it can actually DO — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
1 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- False-positive honesty and detection method — 3/10 against a category best of 6/10
Record watch-outs
- Its last amount-bearing rescue story is January 2024 (the product page's list starts at "Apr 23 2024 Lead in" and "Jan 11 2024" Loot), and its false-positive figure has moved from "less than 0.001%" (22 May 2024 post) to "< 0.0001 %" on the product page — and front-running an attacker requires granting pre-authorised transaction execution rights ("users delegate some privileges to our EOA addresses (e.g., to pause the protocol)"), which is a real custody decision, not a config toggle.
- Its current published figure is the most extreme in the category: the product page states "99.9 % of hacks detected $ 20,000,000 saved in whitehat rescues < 0.0001 % false positive rate", tighter than the "less than 0.001%" in its own 22 May 2024 post and than Forta's "< 0.0002%", and the February 2025 Yei post says "Backtesting data from 2024 shows that Phalcon Security detected over 99.99% of attacks with a near-zero false positive rate". No denominator, window or audit is published for any of them, so the false-positive score is 3/10.
- The track record's most recent entry is "Apr 23 2024 Lead in" (Phalcon's Hack Blocking Saga); January 2024 (Loot, $1.2M) is the most recent entry carrying a stated amount, and the Loot post describes detection followed by a Twitter alert and a community vote, not an automated block. BlockSec's February 2025 aggregate — "intercepted 20+ attacks through white-hat rescues, preventing $20M+ in potential losses" — names no cases. The Paraspace rescue (March 2023) is the one case with a published rescue transaction hash.
Competitive position
Where BlockSec Phalcon 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 / 714.3 of 30 · best 14.8
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 BlockSec Phalcon leads
- Verified pre-emptive catches#2 / 7
- What it can actually DO#1 / 7
- Pricing and procurement disclosure#2 / 7
Where it trails
- False-positive honesty and detection method#5 / 7
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.
Hypernative#1 of 7 · score 79 · 1.0 point ahead
BlockSec Phalcon leads on
- What it can actually DO9 vs 8
- Pricing and procurement disclosure2 vs 1
Hypernative leads on
- Verified pre-emptive catches8 vs 7
- False-positive honesty and detection method4 vs 3
Largest single reason Hypernative is ahead: published criteria (+1.3 display points).Scenario cost: Hypernative has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Hexagate (by Chainalysis)#3 of 7 · score 72 · 6.0 points behind
BlockSec Phalcon leads on
- Verified pre-emptive catches7 vs 5
- What it can actually DO9 vs 7
Hexagate (by Chainalysis) leads on
- False-positive honesty and detection method5 vs 3
Largest single reason BlockSec Phalcon is ahead: published criteria (+5.7 display points).Scenario cost: Hexagate (by Chainalysis) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Forta Firewall#4 of 7 · score 68 · 10.0 points behind
BlockSec Phalcon leads on
- Verified pre-emptive catches7 vs 3
Forta Firewall leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason BlockSec Phalcon is ahead: published criteria (+10.1 display points).Scenario cost: Forta Firewall has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
79 vs 78 · gap 1.0Why Hypernative ranks above BlockSec Phalcon
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 1.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisHypernativeGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight14.314.8−1.3, 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 criterionThisHypernativePoints
Verified pre-emptive catches · w4078−1.28, worse
What it can actually DO · w2598+0.80, better
False-positive honesty and detection method · w2034−0.64, worse
Pricing and procurement disclosure · w1521+0.48, better
Net7879−1.0
Your scenario
BlockSec Phalcon 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 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.
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 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 #1 to #2 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
Verified pre-emptive catchesstrength 7 · weight 40Report 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.What it can actually DOstrength 9 · 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.False-positive honesty and detection methodstrength 3 · 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.Pricing and procurement disclosurestrength 2 · weight 15Report 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
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Verified pre-emptive catches · 40% (BlockSec Phalcon 7/10)Scored by False-positive honesty and detection method · 20% (BlockSec Phalcon 3/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness 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: What it can actually DO (25%), Pricing and procurement disclosure (15%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Not published. The Phalcon Security FAQ (blocksec.com/phalcon/security, fetched 22 October 2026) says "Phalcon Security is an exclusive, invite-only platform" and directs buyers to email phalcon_support@blocksec.com or "book a demo to request free trial access"; the demo includes "a free trial period". No price, tier or range appears on the product page, and blocksec.com/pricing returns 404. An April 2024 BlockSec post describing self-serve plans payable by card or crypto predates the invite-only model; the per-credit prices on BlockSec's 30 September 2026 billing post are for Phalcon Compliance, not Phalcon Security. No list price is published, so cost cannot be compared before a sales conversation.BlockSec Phalcon — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDBlockSec Phalcon — 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
- BlockSec Terms of Service §4.6 (blocksec.com/terms-of-service, read 22 October 2026): "You are not permitted to access or use any of the Services if you are in, under the control of, or a resident of Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, or Syria or any other country/region subject to any applicable sanction regimes or embargo", and persons on economic sanctions lists are also barred. Access is invite-only. Front-running blocking needs a public mempool; the FAQ says that on L2s Phalcon can only alert and auto-pause after the first attack transaction (a separate STOP product covers sequencers).
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with BlockSec Phalcon: 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 78, #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 onchain_monitoring:blocksec_phalcon_monitoring:2026.10.18:4473bca50edc
Are you BlockSec Phalcon? 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.