Provider at a glance
- Category
- Token Launch Platforms
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- four.meme
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 73 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
four.meme
Bonding-curve token launches on BNB Chain
Token Launch Platforms
#6 Overall
Ranked #6 of 9 token launch platforms in the published ranking
73
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is four.meme right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure7/10; the category best is 8
- Creator control surface and published ranges8/10; the category best is 9
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Graduation and LP disposition6/10 here; Jupiter Studio scores 7
- Post-deploy rug surface and admin powers4/10 here; Heaven 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 token launch platform shows where it lands for you.
What will four.meme cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is four.meme?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to four.meme
Compare all 4- 4Jupiter Studio6 points above · stronger on protocol fee floor and disclosure (8 against 7)79
- 5Heaven5 points above · stronger on protocol fee floor and disclosure (8 against 7)78
- 7pump.fun2 points below · stronger on protocol fee floor and disclosure (8 against 7)71
For your setup
Find out if four.meme fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where four.meme 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 token launch platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why four.meme ranks #6
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (21.1 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
307+6.727.08#5/9Loading evidence…
308+7.688.09#3/9Loading evidence…
256+4.807.09#7/9Loading evidence…
154+1.924.09#5/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−5behind Heaven, #5
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 71–75 and stays #6
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 four.meme’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.
Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure 7 → 10 on its ladder · passes Heaven+379#6 → #4
Graduation and LP disposition 6 → 9 on its ladder · passes Heaven+378#6 → #5
Post-deploy rug surface and admin powers 4 → 9 on its ladder · passes Heaven+578#6 → #5
Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure 7 → 5 on its ladder · pump.fun passes it−270#6 → #7
Creator control surface and published ranges 8 → 6 on its ladder · pump.fun passes it−270#6 → #7
Graduation and LP disposition 6 → 4 on its ladder · pump.fun passes it−270#6 → #7
Smallest climb: unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure 7 → 10 passes Heaven, #5.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure — 7/10, category best 8/10
- Creator control surface and published ranges — 8/10, category best 9/10
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Graduation and LP disposition — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Post-deploy rug surface and admin powers — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- The venue's own admin powers are the one thing it refuses to document, and they are not theoretical. The fee and curve logic governing a token you already deployed can be changed by the venue afterwards, and the issuer cannot price a power the venue never names. Second, the guarantee most issuers pick this venue for — 'LP tokens will be burned' — is dated 2025-03-31, has not been restated on any 2026-dated surface, and sits on a page whose sibling claim ('All tokens ... will have a contract address ending with 4444') is already false on-chain: seven of the ten launches sampled on 2026-08-27 ended in ffff (the two live tokens read on 2026-09-30 both end in 4444). The same venue reversed this exact policy once before, in the other direction, and still serves the superseded page ('LP tokens are no longer burned but locked on @GoPlusSecurity'). The newer OpenFour path quietly drops the guarantee altogether, exposing the LP recipient as a caller-supplied address parameter with no published default. Third, the 1% you were quoted is a floor rather than a rate. The vendor states in readable text that fees "automatically decrease block by block after token creation" and that "All launch fees above 1% are used to immediately buy the token and burn it", but publishes the actual opening schedule only as an image — and its own trade guide confirms the on-chain fee event records the base fee ONLY, with any excess tracked in a separate `extraFee` field. Three of fourteen live tokens sampled on 2026-08-27 carry that mode switched on. Fourth, small numeric traps: the fee page says the trade-fee minimum is 0.001 BNB while the live config says 0 for BNB (0.001 survives only on the BNX band), and the developer guide's fixed-parameter table says a 24 BNB raise where both the fee page and the live config say 18. Finally, there is no vesting or cliff field at all — not restricted, simply absent — so a founder allocation cannot be locked at the venue.
Competitive position
Where four.meme 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 / 914.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#6 / 915.8 of 30 · best 18.8
Friction#1 / 92.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 93.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where four.meme leads
- Creator control surface and published ranges#3 / 9
Where it trails
- Graduation and LP disposition#7 / 9
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.
pump.fun#7 of 9 · score 71 · 2.0 points behind
four.meme leads on
- Creator control surface and published ranges8 vs 6
pump.fun leads on
- Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure8 vs 7
Largest single reason four.meme is ahead: published criteria (+1.8 display points).Scenario cost: pump.fun has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Heaven#5 of 9 · score 78 · 5.0 points ahead
four.meme leads onNo scored criterion
Heaven leads on
- Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure8 vs 7
- Graduation and LP disposition7 vs 6
- Post-deploy rug surface and admin powers5 vs 4
Largest single reason Heaven is ahead: published criteria (+4.4 display points).Scenario cost: Heaven has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Jupiter Studio#4 of 9 · score 79 · 6.0 points ahead
four.meme leads onNo scored criterion
Jupiter Studio leads on
- Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure8 vs 7
- Creator control surface and published ranges9 vs 8
- Graduation and LP disposition7 vs 6
Largest single reason Jupiter Studio is ahead: published criteria (+5.5 display points).Scenario cost: Jupiter Studio has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 73 · gap 8.0Why Raydium LaunchLab ranks above four.meme
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 8.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisRaydium LaunchLabGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight15.818.8−7.8, 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 criterionThisRaydium LaunchLabPoints
Creator control surface and published ranges · w3089−0.96, worse
Graduation and LP disposition · w2568−1.60, worse
Post-deploy rug surface and admin powers · w1547−1.44, worse
Net7381−8.0
Your scenario
four.meme is not priced for this scenario
Trading 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 30 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 9 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
9 of 9 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 30 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 #6 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 30 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosurestrength 7 · weight 30Report an error—30 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.Creator control surface and published rangesstrength 8 · weight 30Report an error—30 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.Graduation and LP dispositionstrength 6 · weight 25Report an error—30 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.Post-deploy rug surface and admin powersstrength 4 · weight 15Report an error—30 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 Creator control surface and published ranges · 30% (four.meme 8/10)Scored by Post-deploy rug surface and admin powers · 15% (four.meme 4/10)
- Custody failure (four.meme 6/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by Graduation and LP disposition · 25%
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: Unavoidable protocol fee and fee disclosure (30%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- From https://
four-meme .gitbook .io /four .meme /guide /how-it-works .md (HTTP 200, fetched 30 September 2026; the page carries no date): "Launching your project is free of charge on Four.meme, the only fee you will pay is the transaction fee which is" about "0.005 BNB"; "While trading on our platform we take only 1%" with "minimum is 0.001 BNB"; and "Once your project reaches 100% of the bonding curve (approximately 18 BNB), the seeding process will begin." Live vendor config https:// four .meme /meme-api /v1 /public /config (HTTP 200, read 30 September 2026): 31 quote bands, 14 now at status PUBLISH (BNB, USDT, USD1, UUSD and ten tokenised-stock bands including QQQB, HOODB and PPOLY; 7 were published in August), every band with deployCost 0 and buyFee/sellFee 0.01, and BNB minTradeFee 0 (the 0.001 BNB minimum on this page is not in the live BNB band). BNB band totalBAmount 18, saleRate 0.8. On-chain (BSC, TokenManagerHelper3 0xF251F83e40a78868FcfA3FA4599Dad6494E46034 getTokenInfo, 30 September 2026): tradingFeeRate 100 (1%) on the two live tokens read from recent TokenManager2 logs. The 1% is a base, not the rate for every launch: product-update/6 (HTTP 200) states that under X Mode fees start higher and decrease block by block and that launch fees above 1% are used to buy and burn the token; the block-by-block schedule is still published only as an image. Vendor repo guide docs/create-guide.md (github.com/four-meme-community/fourmeme-docs, unchanged since 18 August 2026) still gives a documented creation fee of 0.00 BNB and says platform fees may change.four.meme — official pricing page ↗ · 30 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDfour.meme — official pricing page ↗ · 30 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
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with four.meme: 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
- 30 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 73, #6 of 9. 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 token_launch_platforms:four_meme:2026.10.18:f28b4b445d40
Are you four.meme? 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.