Provider at a glance
- Category
- Naming Services
- 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 September 2026.
ENS (Ethereum Name Service)
Ethereum Name Service
Naming Services
#1 Overall
Ranked #1 of 7 naming services in the published ranking
81
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is ENS (Ethereum Name Service) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Whether you can lose the name7/10, the category best
- Onchain registry or company namespace9/10, the category best
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin10/10, the category best
- Published price and renewal terms9/10, the category best
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 naming service shows where it lands for you.
What will ENS (Ethereum Name Service) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is ENS (Ethereum Name Service)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to ENS (Ethereum Name Service)
Compare all 4- 2Base Names (Basenames)17 points below · weaker on registry decentralisation (4 against 9)64
- 33DNS18 points below · weaker on registry decentralisation (4 against 9)63
- 4SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida)20 points below · weaker on resolution reach (4 against 10)61
For your setup
Find out if ENS (Ethereum Name Service) 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 (Ethereum Name Service) 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 naming serviceNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why it leads
Why ENS (Ethereum Name Service) 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 (27.0 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on every criterion.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
407+8.965.07#1/7Loading evidence…
259+7.204.09#1/7Loading evidence…
2510+8.004.010#1/7Loading evidence…
109+2.886.09#1/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin+17over Base Names (Basenames), #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 (Ethereum Name Service)’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.
Whether you can lose the name 7 → 0 on its ladder · Base Names (Basenames) passes it−778#1 → #2
Strengths
4 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Whether you can lose the name — 7/10, the category best
- Onchain registry or company namespace — 9/10, the category best
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin — 10/10, the category best
- Published price and renewal terms — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
0 from the score dataWhere it trails
No scored criterion trails the category best by two points or more, so no tradeoff can be stated from the data.
Record watch-outs
- ENS Labs cancelled Namechain — the ZK rollup announced in 2024 specifically to make .eth registration cheap — on 6 February 2026, and moved ENSv2 to Ethereum mainnet only (theblock.co/post/388932). Registration therefore stays a two-transaction L1 operation with L1 gas indefinitely. Separately, the $5/year headline is per-year and the clock does not stop: an .eth name is rented, and a 90-day lapse plus a 21-day auction is all that stands between you and someone else owning your payment address.
- ENS publishes the full ladder, the renewal obligation and the lapse consequence on one consumer support page (support.ens.domains/en/articles/12238910-pricing-fees): "Renewals use the same fee table as registration — $5, $160, or $640 a year, depending on the name length." During the "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." After it, a temporary premium "starts at $100 million and falls to $0 over 21 days." Gas is not quantified: "Gas is on top of the registration or renewal fee and changes with network demand".
Competitive position
Where ENS (Ethereum Name Service) 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#1 / 720.3 of 30 · pool best
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 ENS (Ethereum Name Service) leads
- Whether you can lose the name#1 / 7
- Onchain registry or company namespace#1 / 7
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin#1 / 7
- Published price and renewal terms#1 / 7
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.
Base Names (Basenames)#2 of 7 · score 64 · 17.0 points behind
ENS (Ethereum Name Service) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name7 vs 6
- Onchain registry or company namespace9 vs 4
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin10 vs 7
Base Names (Basenames) leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason ENS (Ethereum Name Service) is ahead: published criteria (+16.9 display points).Scenario cost: Base Names (Basenames) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
3DNS#3 of 7 · score 63 · 18.0 points behind
ENS (Ethereum Name Service) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name7 vs 5
- Onchain registry or company namespace9 vs 4
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin10 vs 8
3DNS leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason ENS (Ethereum Name Service) is ahead: published criteria (+17.9 display points).Scenario cost: 3DNS has no verified pricing for this scenario.
SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida)#4 of 7 · score 61 · 20.0 points behind
ENS (Ethereum Name Service) leads on
- Whether you can lose the name7 vs 6
- Onchain registry or company namespace9 vs 5
- Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin10 vs 4
SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason ENS (Ethereum Name Service) is ahead: published criteria (+20.0 display points).Scenario cost: SNS (Solana Name Service, formerly Bonfida) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against #2
81 vs 64 · gap 17.0Why ENS (Ethereum Name Service) ranks above Base Names (Basenames)
DimensionThisBase Names (Basenames)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight20.313.8+16.9, 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 criterionThisBase Names (Basenames)Points
Whether you can lose the name · w4076+1.28, better
Onchain registry or company namespace · w2594+4.00, better
Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin · w25107+2.40, better
Published price and renewal terms · w1096+0.96, better
Net8164+17.0
Your scenario
ENS (Ethereum Name Service) is not priced for this scenario
Marketplace 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
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 14 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 · 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 14 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 #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 14 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Whether you can lose the namestrength 7 · weight 40Report an error—14 September 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.Onchain registry or company namespacestrength 9 · weight 25Report an error—14 September 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.Does your wallet resolve it without a pluginstrength 10 · weight 25Report an error—14 September 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.Published price and renewal termsstrength 9 · weight 10Report an error—14 September 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
- Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Whether you can lose the name · 40% (ENS (Ethereum Name Service) 7/10)Scored by Onchain registry or company namespace · 25% (ENS (Ethereum Name Service) 9/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Regulatory failure, Execution 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: Does your wallet resolve it without a plugin (25%), Published price and renewal terms (10%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Annual fee by name length, set in USD and paid in ETH on Ethereum Mainnet: 'Annual .eth pricing by name length: $5, $160, or $640. Paid in ETH on Ethereum Mainnet, plus gas — no other cost.' (5+ characters $5, 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.' 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.' Registration is a commit-reveal: the docs say you commit, 'wait 60 seconds, and then call the register function', so two L1 transactions, each paying gas.ENS (Ethereum Name Service) — official pricing page ↗ · 14 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDENS (Ethereum Name Service) — official pricing page ↗ · 14 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
- Available worldwide via a permissionless Ethereum contract; the ENS Terms of Use bar sanctioned persons and residents of FATF-designated non-cooperative jurisdictions without naming countries.
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 (Ethereum Name Service): 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.
10 methodology entries
- 14 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 81, #1 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 naming_services:ens_naming:2026.10.18:a058cb0859d7
Are you ENS (Ethereum Name Service)? 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.