Provider at a glance
- Category
- Tokenised Real Estate
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- blocksquare.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 46 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Blocksquare
Real estate tokenisation rails
Tokenised Real Estate
#5 Overall
Ranked #5 of 6 tokenised real estate in the published ranking
46
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Blocksquare right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- What the token conveys5/10 here; PRYPCO Mint scores 7
- Exit reality2/10 here; PRYPCO Mint scores 4
- Open to you4/10 here; RedSwan CRE scores 5
- Fees disclosed4/10 here; PRYPCO Mint 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 tokenised real estate platform shows where it lands for you.
What will Blocksquare cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your balance
- $10k
How safe is Blocksquare?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Blocksquare
Compare all 4- 3Figure Connect2 points above · stronger on what the token conveys (6 against 5)48
- 4RedSwan CRE2 points above · stronger on what the token conveys (6 against 5)48
- 6PRYPCO Mint5 points below · stronger on what the token conveys (7 against 5)41
For your setup
Find out if Blocksquare fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Blocksquare 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 tokenised real estate platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Blocksquare ranks #5
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (12.2 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
325+5.126.09#5/6Loading evidence…
262+1.662.55#4/6Loading evidence…
224+2.824.510#4/6Loading evidence…
204+2.563.57#3/6Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−2behind RedSwan CRE, #4
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 44–48 and stays #5
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 Blocksquare’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.
What the token legally conveys 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes RedSwan CRE+250#5 → #3
Exit reality 2 → 4 on its ladder · passes RedSwan CRE+249#5 → #3
Who can participate 4 → 6 on its ladder · passes RedSwan CRE+249#5 → #3
Fee-stack disclosure 4 → 6 on its ladder · passes RedSwan CRE+249#5 → #3
Smallest climb: what the token legally conveys 5 → 7 passes RedSwan CRE, #4.
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
- What the token legally conveys — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Exit reality — 2/10 against a category best of 5/10
- Who can participate — 4/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Fee-stack disclosure — 4/10 against a category best of 7/10
Record watch-outs
- Beyond the network-wide 1.5% buyer token fee, fees on primary offerings, distributions and buybacks are set by the LICENSEE
- Counterparty diffusion: issuer, notary and marketplace operator, none a regulated custodian — and Blocksquare’s 2023 post places the notarised charge in favour of the lender, not holders
- Published scale figures are mutually inconsistent across Blocksquare’s own materials
- The frequently cited protocol-side instant liquidity is NOT shipped
Competitive position
Where Blocksquare 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 / 614.0 of 20 · pool best
Published criteria#4 / 69.1 of 30 · best 18.7
Friction#3 / 62.7 of 10 · best 7.3
Trust record#2 / 63.2 of 8 · best 4.8
Measured data#1 / 68.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Blocksquare leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- What the token legally conveys#5 / 6
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.
RedSwan CRE#4 of 6 · score 48 · 2.0 points ahead
Blocksquare leads on
- Fee-stack disclosure4 vs 3
RedSwan CRE leads on
- What the token legally conveys6 vs 5
- Who can participate5 vs 4
Largest single reason RedSwan CRE is ahead: published criteria (+2.1 display points).Scenario cost: RedSwan CRE has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Figure Connect#3 of 6 · score 48 · 2.0 points ahead
Blocksquare leads on
- Who can participate4 vs 1
- Fee-stack disclosure4 vs 3
Figure Connect leads on
- What the token legally conveys6 vs 5
- Exit reality3 vs 2
Largest single reason Figure Connect is ahead: trust record (+4.2 display points).Scenario cost: Figure Connect has no verified pricing for this scenario.
PRYPCO Mint#6 of 6 · score 41 · 5.0 points behind
Blocksquare leads on
- Who can participate4 vs 2
PRYPCO Mint leads on
- What the token legally conveys7 vs 5
- Exit reality4 vs 2
- Fee-stack disclosure5 vs 4
Largest single reason Blocksquare is ahead: availability (+20.8 display points).Scenario cost: PRYPCO Mint has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
83 vs 46 · gap 37.0Why Lofty ranks above Blocksquare
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 37.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisLoftyGap share
Availability · 23% weight14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight9.118.7−25.0, worse
Friction · 12% weight2.77.3−12.0, worse
Trust record · 9% weight3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisLoftyPoints
What the token legally conveys · w3259−4.10, worse
Exit reality · w2625−2.50, worse
Who can participate · w22410−4.22, worse
Fee-stack disclosure · w2047−1.92, worse
Net4683−37.0
Your scenario
Blocksquare is not priced for this scenario
The annual management fee on your balance. Excludes performance fees, spreads and any redemption charge. 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 balance · your input$10k
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 6 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
6 of 6 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.RobustnessHoldsrank #5 across every one-point re-run
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
What the token legally conveysstrength 5 · weight 32Report 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.Exit realitystrength 2 · weight 26Report 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.Who can participatestrength 4 · weight 22Report 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.Fee-stack disclosurestrength 4 · 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
- Insolvency failure (Blocksquare 5/10): the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by What the token legally conveys · 32%
- Regulatory failure (Blocksquare 4/10): no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Who can participate · 22%
- Exit failure (Blocksquare 2/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Exit reality · 26%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Custody 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: Fee-stack disclosure (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Blocksquare's pricing page (blocksquare.io/pricing, rendered and read 22 October 2026) charges marketplace operators, not investors: the Spring tokenization protocol is "5,900 EUR each real estate asset", plus a one-off platform setup fee with no figure. One investor-facing fee is network-wide: "At each transaction a fee of 1.5% tokens is deducted and credited to network stakeholders. Fees are always paid by the buyer and executed in property tokens", e.g. "the buyer will receive 10,000 - 1.5% tokens = 9,850 tokens on their wallet even if tokens are transferred outside the platform", split "0.5% goes to the platform operator, 0.5% goes to the issuing company, 0.5% goes to Blocksquare". Blocksquare's docs (docs.blocksquare.io, Transaction fees) show the same 0.5% / 0.5% / 0.5% split only on secondary-market trades, with Oceanpoint as the third recipient, and say "marketplace operators are free to shape their business models by adding various fees on any of these transactions, except on the secondary market": obtain primary-offering, revenue-distribution and buyback fees from the marketplace you use.Blocksquare pricing page (licence price and 1.5% buyer token fee) ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDBlocksquare pricing page (licence price and 1.5% buyer token fee) ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum, Polygon
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Property investors
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Terms set per licensee marketplace; secondary trading subject to that operator’s whitelist.
- Availability note
- Blocksquare's docs (docs.blocksquare.io, BSPT tokens, read 22 October 2026) leave eligibility to each issuer: "to hold property tokens, a user is required to first complete KYC using Blocksquare’s platform", and the token contract limits transfers "according to an issuer’s predefined requirements. For instance, it is possible to limit token ownership to wallets whose owners are US residents only, or exclude residents of certain countries, or even define custom parameters for eligibility". No platform-wide country list is published; gating is set by each licensee marketplace and issuer.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Blocksquare: 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.
11 methodology entries
- 22 October 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 46, #5 of 6. 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
2026.10.7Forty-one more products are offered only where their own quoted terms serve- fixed 141 country exclusions on 31 rows, each the name of a country the row's own quoted terms exclude: for example Mercuryo Hungary, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Chile, Colombia and Morocco; Gemini Custody the United Kingdom, Australia and the EU after its wind-down; Backed xStocks the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Venezuela.
- changed Thirteen rows list the only countries their terms serve: Coins.ph the Philippines, Spritz bill pay, Brex, Unchained, WisdomTree, Franklin BENJI and AnchorWatch the United States (with its territories for AnchorWatch), PRYPCO Mint the UAE, N26 crypto seven EU countries, Gemini Tokenized Stocks the EU, XNET the US, Canada and the UK, Coldbit Steel and MetaMask Card the countries they list.
- changed Published (no-country) orders do not move. Country results change: in India six categories each lose one row (bill pay, cards, off-ramps, P2P, seed backup, tokenised real estate), and bill pay there has no row confirmed available, so it shows the published order marked as such; country pages list 23 fewer rows (24,357 to 24,334). The grounding test now matches full country names in any case, which shows seven earlier exclusions were quoted all along: the named debt of unquoted exclusions falls from 40 to 33 pairs.
- 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 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt tokenised_realestate:blocksquare:2026.10.18:a0d75d028d86
Are you Blocksquare? 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.