Provider at a glance
- Category
- Decentralised Identity
- Entity
- All 3 ENS products
- Official website
- ens.domains
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 81 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
ENS (as identity layer)
Onchain names and records
Decentralised Identity
#1 Overall
Ranked #1 of 8 decentralised identity in the published ranking
81
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $5.00 your cost/yr
Is ENS (as identity layer) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Credential custody & revocation power9/10, the category best
- Biometric & PII handling (documented)7/10; the category best is 8
- Enforcement record & product continuity9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Verification without the vendor8/10 here; Proof of Humanity (v2) scores 10
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 identity provider shows where it lands for you.
What will ENS (as identity layer) cost you?
$5.00 your cost/yr
- Transactions per year
- 1k
- Annual price
- $5
How safe is ENS (as identity layer)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to ENS (as identity layer)
Compare all 4- 2Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID)9 points below · stronger on biometric and pii posture (8 against 7)72
- 3Proof of Humanity (v2)9 points below · stronger on verification independence (10 against 8)72
- 4Human Passport (formerly Gitcoin Passport)21 points below · weaker on custody and revocation (4 against 9)60
For your setup
Find out if ENS (as identity layer) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where ENS (as identity layer) 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 identity providerNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why it leads
Why ENS (as identity layer) ranks #1
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (26.4 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
309+8.645.09#1/8Loading evidence…
258+6.405.010#2/8Loading evidence…
257+5.605.08#2/8Loading evidence…
209+5.765.09#1/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin+9over Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID), #2
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 81–82 and stays #1
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 ENS (as identity layer)’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.
Credential custody & revocation power 9 → 4 on its ladder · Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID) passes it−580#1 → #3
Verification without the vendor 8 → 2 on its ladder · Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID) passes it−680#1 → #3
Biometric & PII handling (documented) 7 → 1 on its ladder · Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID) passes it−680#1 → #3
Strengths
3 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Credential custody & revocation power — 9/10, the category best
- Biometric & PII handling (documented) — 7/10, category best 8/10
- Enforcement record & product continuity — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
1 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Verification without the vendor — 8/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- ENS is a name, not a credential — it proves control of a private key and nothing else. It cannot tell you a user is a unique human, is over 18, or is not sanctioned, so it does not substitute for anything else in this category; it complements them. Treat it as the durable identifier your other credentials attach to, and remember that an unrenewed name hands the whole identity to a stranger.
Competitive position
Where ENS (as identity layer) 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#1 / 819.8 of 30 · pool best
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 ENS (as identity layer) leads
- Credential custody & revocation power#1 / 8
- Verification without the vendor#2 / 8
- Biometric & PII handling (documented)#2 / 8
- Enforcement record & product continuity#1 / 8
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.
Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID)#2 of 8 · score 72 · 9.0 points behind
ENS (as identity layer) leads on
- Credential custody & revocation power9 vs 6
- Enforcement record & product continuity9 vs 5
Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID) leads on
- Biometric & PII handling (documented)8 vs 7
Largest single reason ENS (as identity layer) is ahead: published criteria (+9.1 display points).Scenario cost: Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Proof of Humanity (v2)#3 of 8 · score 72 · 9.0 points behind
ENS (as identity layer) leads on
- Credential custody & revocation power9 vs 8
- Biometric & PII handling (documented)7 vs 2
- Enforcement record & product continuity9 vs 7
Proof of Humanity (v2) leads on
- Verification without the vendor10 vs 8
Largest single reason ENS (as identity layer) is ahead: published criteria (+9.1 display points).Scenario cost: Proof of Humanity (v2) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Human Passport (formerly Gitcoin Passport)#4 of 8 · score 60 · 21.0 points behind
ENS (as identity layer) leads on
- Credential custody & revocation power9 vs 4
- Verification without the vendor8 vs 4
- Enforcement record & product continuity9 vs 5
Human Passport (formerly Gitcoin Passport) leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason ENS (as identity layer) is ahead: published criteria (+20.5 display points).Scenario cost: Human Passport (formerly Gitcoin Passport) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against #2
81 vs 72 · gap 9.0Why ENS (as identity layer) ranks above Privado ID (formerly Polygon ID)
DimensionThisPrivado ID (formerly Polygon ID)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight19.816.3+9.1, better
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisPrivado ID (formerly Polygon ID)Points
Credential custody & revocation power · w3096+2.88, better
Biometric & PII handling (documented) · w2578−0.80, worse
Enforcement record & product continuity · w2095+2.56, better
Net8172+9.0
Your scenario
What ENS (as identity layer) costs on your 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
Annual price · published rate$5
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.
$5.00
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median and cheapestNot statedOnly 2 of 8 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
6 of 8 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 #1 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
Credential custody & revocation powerstrength 9 · 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.Verification without the vendorstrength 8 · 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.Biometric & PII handling (documented)strength 7 · 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.Enforcement record & product continuitystrength 9 · 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
- Custody failure (ENS (as identity layer) 9/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by Credential custody & revocation power · 30%
- Regulatory failure (ENS (as identity layer) 9/10): no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Enforcement record & product continuity · 20%
- Exit failure (ENS (as identity layer) 8/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Verification without the vendor · 25%
- Information failure (ENS (as identity layer) 7/10): the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Biometric & PII handling (documented) · 25%
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- ENS support "Pricing & Fees" page (support.ens.domains, read 22 October 2026): "Annual .eth pricing by name length: $5, $160, or $640. Paid in ETH on Ethereum Mainnet, plus gas — no other cost." (5+ characters $5 a year, 4 characters $160, 3 characters $640.) "Renewals use the same fee table as registration — $5, $160, or $640 a year, depending on the name length." "Gas is on top of the registration or renewal fee and changes with network demand." After expiry: "Grace period (90 days after expiry). Anyone can extend at the standard renewal price — extending only keeps the name with its previous owner. Nobody can register it." Then a temporary premium that "starts at $100 million and falls to $0 over 21 days." ENS docs (docs.ens.domains/registry/eth, read 22 October 2026): "At the time of writing, a 5+ letter .eth will cost you 5 USD per year. A 4 letter 160 USD per year, and a 3 letter 640 USD per year." "The minimum length of a name is 3 characters." "Because the rent price is paid in ETH but denominated in USD", callers should overpay slightly.ENS (as identity layer) — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDENS (as identity layer) — 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
- Available worldwide through a permissionless Ethereum contract. The ENS Terms of Use (ens.domains/legal/terms-of-use, last updated 12/08/2026, read 22 October 2026) bar anyone who is "the subject of sanctions administered or enforced by the United Nations, the European Union, any country in the European Union, the United States of America, Singapore, or any other country or governmental authority" and anyone in "any jurisdiction that has been designated as non-cooperative with international anti-money laundering principles or procedures by an intergovernmental group or organization, such as the Financial Action Task Force". No country is named.
Legal entity on file: ENS, placed in 3 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with ENS (as identity layer): 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 81, #1 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
2026.10.7Forty-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 decentralised_id:ens_identity:2026.10.18:f265808df1ee
Are you ENS (as identity layer)? 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.