The score, by dimension
- the same for all 8
- #2 of 8 · best 15.1
- the same for all 8
- the same for all 8
- the same for all 8
Tick: the best in this ranking · Methodology v2026.11.1
Conduit
Managed rollup deployment
#2 of all 8 worldwide75
- Rank
- #2 of all 8 worldwidere-runs: scores 73–77 and stays #2
- 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 in progress
Check availability for your country
Conduit · conduit.xyz. 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
Conduit is #2 of 8 published rollup-as-a-service; it scores 9/10 on exit path documented, the category best. Its widest gap is key custody onchain: 2/10, where Karnot scores 7. Choose Karnot if key custody onchain matters most.
Is Conduit right for you?
Suits you if
- The documented way out9/10, the category best
- Independently counted live chains8/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if
- Who can change your chain2/10 here; Karnot scores 7
- A price you can act on before you talk to sales6/10 here; Karnot scores 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 rollup-as-a-service provider shows where it lands for you.
What will Conduit cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Usage per month
- 10
How safe is Conduit?
- 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 Conduit 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- 1KarnotIf key custody onchain matters most: 74 points above · stronger on key custody onchain (7 against 2)79
- 3Alchemy RollupsIf key custody onchain matters most: 314 points below · stronger on key custody onchain (3 against 2)61
- 4ZeeveIf key custody onchain matters most: 615 points below · stronger on key custody onchain (6 against 2)60
Provider at a glance
- Category
- Rollup-as-a-Service
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- conduit.xyz
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 75 out of 100 under methodology 2026.11.1, from the evidence read in September 2026.
For your setup
Find out if Conduit fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Conduit 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 rollup-as-a-service providerNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Conduit 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 (17.9 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 2 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
352+2.243.07#6/8
Third party
Third party · read 2026-09-25256+4.801.09#2/8
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-25209+5.763.09#1/8
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-25208+5.123.08#1/8
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-25Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind Karnot, #1 of all 8 worldwide, on the published score
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 73–77 and stays #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 Conduit’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.
Who can change your chain 2 → 4 on its ladder · passes Karnot+279#2 → #1
A price you can act on before you talk to sales 6 → 9 on its ladder · passes Karnot+379#2 → #1
Smallest climb: who can change your chain 2 → 4 passes Karnot, #1.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- The documented way out — 9/10, the category best
- Independently counted live chains — 8/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Who can change your chain — 2/10 against a category best of 7/10
- A price you can act on before you talk to sales — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- One Safe that Conduit controls, clearing at four signatures out of ten, appears in the discovery data of 26 chains, 17 of them live — and three of those live chains do not even carry Conduit's badge, so the exposure is wider than the customer list. The written key-handover promise is real, is the best in the category, and Conduit says it "is standard in our contracts" — but the contract is not published and the promise carries no deadline; until you invoke it, four Conduit signatures are enough to change your chain. Ronin negotiated a 5-of-6 Safe where Conduit holds only 2 seats, so ask for that configuration by name.
Competitive position
How Conduit 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
79 vs 75 · gap 4.0Why Karnot ranks above Conduit
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 4.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisKarnotGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight13.415.1−4.4, 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 criterionThisKarnotPoints
Who can change your chain · w3527−5.60, worse
A price you can act on before you talk to sales · w2569−2.40, worse
The documented way out · w2094+3.20, better
Independently counted live chains · w2084+2.56, better
Net7579−4.0
Your scenario
Conduit 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 25 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 8 rows priced
Lowest fee, priced rowsNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
8 of 8 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the typical, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 25 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.RobustnessHoldsrank #2 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 10 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 25 September 2026.
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Who can change your chainstrength 2 · weight 35Report an errorThird-party page25 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.A price you can act on before you talk to salesstrength 6 · weight 25Report an errorProvider's own page25 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.The documented way outstrength 9 · weight 20Report an errorProvider's own page25 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Independently counted live chainsstrength 8 · weight 20Report an errorProvider's own page25 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
- Control failure (Conduit 2/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Who can change your chain · 35%
- Exit failure (Conduit 9/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by The documented way out · 20%
- Information failure (Conduit 8/10): the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Independently counted live chains · 20%
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness 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: A price you can act on before you talk to sales (25%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- conduit.xyz/pricing (re-fetched 25 September 2026, HTTP 200) publishes, under Chains: Growth = "Contact for pricing" "+ 5% sequencer profit" ("Managed testnet and mainnet chains", "Pro RPC plan included", "1B CU base limit then autoscales at $0.10/1M CUs"); Pro = "Contact for pricing" "+ 5% sequencer profit"; Enterprise = "Custom pricing" "+ 5% sequencer profit"; and Trial Testnet = "$250 per month". RPC Nodes: Starter "Free" "100M Compute Units*/month"; Pro "$50/month" "1B CUs/month", "Autoscales at $0.10 per additional 1M CUs"; Enterprise "Custom pricing". Indexing: Testnets "$250/month", Mainnets "$500/month", Querying Pro "$250/month" with "Autoscales at $5.00 per additional 1M queries". The mainnet chain price itself is Contact-only on all three tiers. A separate still-live Conduit page — the blog post dated 11 Feb 2025 at conduit.xyz/blog/rollup-total-cost-of-operations-tco (re-fetched 25 September 2026, HTTP 200) — still states (paraphrased here because it is on a different page) that on Conduit it costs just thirty-six thousand dollars per year to run a rollup on mainnet, plus onchain DA costs, and, two sentences later, that the total should not exceed a few hundred thousand per year for most rollups — the second sentence is on the page today, reversing the August verifier's removal of it. Normalised on 2026-09-25: 36,000 a year / 12 = 3,000 a month for the chain, plus five percent of sequencer profit, plus (if bought) "$500/month" mainnet indexing and "$50/month" RPC Pro = a floor of 3,550 a month before DA, in US dollars. That 3,000 a month is NOT on the current pricing page; the pricing page is where you transact and it governs. Terms (conduit.xyz/terms, Updated 20 April 2026, HTTP 200) add that outstanding invoices must be paid before any post-termination key migration.Conduit — official pricing page ↗ · 25 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDConduit — official pricing page ↗ · 25 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
- Conduit Terms of Use (conduit.xyz/terms, Updated 20 April 2026, fetched 25 September 2026): customers must not be "a citizen, resident, or organized in a jurisdiction or territory that is the subject of comprehensive country-wide, territory-wide, or regional economic sanctions by the United Nations, European Union, any EU country, UK Treasury, or the United States, including without limitation Cuba, the Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk regions of Ukraine, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, or Yemen."
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Conduit: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
Reviewed Methodology v2026.11.1
Re-read due since
The published cadence is 45 days; this page's next read was due on 9 November 2026.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
- 25 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.11.1Score 75, #2 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 2026.11.1, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt rollup_as_a_service:conduit:2026.11.1:b05dc5478b3f
Are you Conduit? 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.