Provider at a glance
- Category
- SocialFi
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- friend.tech
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 78 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
friend.tech
Social-key market on Base
SocialFi
#2 Overall
Ranked #2 of 8 SocialFi in the published ranking
78
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is friend.tech right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?9/10; the category best is 10
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?6/10 here; Nostr scores 9
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?8/10 here; Nostr 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 SocialFi platform shows where it lands for you.
What will friend.tech cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is friend.tech?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to friend.tech
Compare all 4- 1Nostr4 points above · stronger on exit path and somewhere to go (9 against 6)82
- 3Lens Protocol8 points below · stronger on exit path and somewhere to go (8 against 6)70
- 4Bluesky / AT Protocol10 points below · stronger on exit path and somewhere to go (9 against 6)68
For your setup
Find out if friend.tech fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where friend.tech 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 SocialFi platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why friend.tech 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 (25.7 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 1 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
329+9.226.510#2/8Loading evidence…
276+5.187.09#5/8Loading evidence…
259+7.205.59#1/8Loading evidence…
168+4.104.010#2/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind Nostr, #1
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 76–79 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 friend.tech’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.
Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? 6 → 9 on its ladder · passes Nostr+382#2 → #1
If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine? 9 → 5 on its ladder · Lens Protocol passes it−470#2 → #3
Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? 6 → 1 on its ladder · Lens Protocol passes it−569#2 → #3
Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down? 9 → 4 on its ladder · Lens Protocol passes it−570#2 → #3
Smallest climb: “Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?” 6 → 9 passes Nostr, #1.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine? — 9/10, category best 10/10
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down? — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it? — 8/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- You would be building an audience on a market that has stopped trading. The immutability is real and it is best-in-pool — 5% to you, 0% to anyone else, owner() renounced, no proxy, no one who can ever change it — but immutability is not demand. In the ~2.3 days to block 50,094,323 the Keys contract processed THREE trades, all of them sells, and in every one the seller was the creator cashing out of their own curve. On 2026-09-28 the contract still held 908.41 ETH at Base block 51,916,631 and had logged zero Trade events in the 100,000 blocks before it; that balance is other people's exit liquidity, not evidence of a live market. This product is the pool's cleanest proof that surviving the company is necessary and not sufficient: the contracts will outlive friend.tech, the front end still works, and there is almost nobody left to sell a key to. Second annoyance, smaller but sharper: the same company that publishes 'Contract developers cannot modify or delete any data' also reserves, in a Notion document last touched in May 2024, the right to 'revoke access to your Username at our discretion without notice' — so the asset is immutable and the name on it is not.
Competitive position
Where friend.tech 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#2 / 819.3 of 30 · best 21.0
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 friend.tech leads
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?#2 / 8
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?#1 / 8
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?#2 / 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.
Nostr#1 of 8 · score 82 · 4.0 points ahead
friend.tech leads on
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?9 vs 6
Nostr leads on
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?10 vs 9
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?9 vs 6
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?10 vs 8
Largest single reason Nostr is ahead: published criteria (+4.4 display points).Scenario cost: Nostr has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Lens Protocol#3 of 8 · score 70 · 8.0 points behind
friend.tech leads on
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?9 vs 6
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?8 vs 2
Lens Protocol leads on
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?8 vs 6
Largest single reason friend.tech is ahead: published criteria (+7.3 display points).Scenario cost: Lens Protocol has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Bluesky / AT Protocol#4 of 8 · score 68 · 10.0 points behind
friend.tech leads on
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?9 vs 6
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?9 vs 5
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?8 vs 6
Bluesky / AT Protocol leads on
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?9 vs 6
Largest single reason friend.tech is ahead: published criteria (+9.4 display points).Scenario cost: Bluesky / AT Protocol has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
82 vs 78 · gap 4.0Why Nostr ranks above friend.tech
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.
DimensionThisNostrGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight19.321.0−4.4, 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 criterionThisNostrPoints
If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine? · w32910−1.02, worse
Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? · w2769−2.59, worse
Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down? · w2596+2.40, better
Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it? · w16810−1.02, worse
Net7882−4.0
Your scenario
friend.tech 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 28 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 8 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone 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 median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 28 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 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 28 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?strength 9 · weight 32Report an error—28 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.Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?strength 6 · weight 27Report an error—28 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.Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?strength 9 · weight 25Report an error—28 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.Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?strength 8 · weight 16Report an error—28 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 (friend.tech 8/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it? · 16%
- Custody failure (friend.tech 9/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine? · 32%
- Exit failure (friend.tech 6/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? · 27%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Regulatory failure, Execution 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: Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down? (25%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- PRICING IS NOT PUBLISHED IN PROSE ON ANY FIRST-PARTY PAGE. The page that should carry it is https://
www .friend .tech /about (HTTP 200, 11,081 bytes, fetched 28 September 2026), the only page describing how the system works, and its substantive text is still: "The friend.tech website is a frontend unifying the following contracts:" [eight Basescan-linked addresses] "All data is stored onchain on the Base network. Contract developers cannot modify or delete any data. Please use at your own discretion." It states no price, fee or percentage. There is no pricing page and no docs site (docs.friend.tech and api.friend.tech return NXDOMAIN on 28 September 2026), and the Terms of Service ("Last modified: May 22, 2024", read 28 September 2026 through Notion's public page API) name no rate. THE PRICE IS AN ONCHAIN READ: eth_call Keys 0xcf205808ed36593aa40a44f10c7f7c2f67d4a4d4 on Base at block 51,916,631 (28 September 2026): getPrice(1,1) = 62500000000000 wei (0.0000625 ETH), on the curve price = supply^2 / 16000 ETH that August established at three points; subjectFeePercent() = 50000000000000000 (5e16, i.e. five percent of each buy and sell, paid to the creator) and protocolFeePercent() = 0, with owner() = 0x0 and a zero EIP-1967 implementation slot, so neither rate can change. No number was invented.friend.tech — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDfriend.tech — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- base
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- STANDARD OFAC/SANCTIONS REPRESENTATION, NOT A REGIONAL FOOTPRINT. Read on the Terms of Service (https://
www .notion .so /friendtech /friend-tech-Terms-of-Service-eea 9ff06aafc 49eb8bc 40c3f519 a39de, 17 August 2026): 'Furthermore, you certify that you are neither (a) subject to economic or trade sanctions imposed by any governmental authority nor listed on any prohibited or restricted parties list (including but not limited to the list maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury), nor (b) a citizen, resident, or organized in a jurisdiction or territory subject to comprehensive country-wide, territory-wide, or regional economic sanctions by the United States.' That is an eligibility rule that applies everywhere, not a market restriction, and it names no specific country. The only other geographic language is a generic availability disclaimer — 'Our Product may not be available or appropriate for use in your jurisdiction. Your ability to access the Product in any jurisdiction does not mean that friend.tech intends to offer you such Product in such jurisdiction' — and a New York governing-law/forum clause: 'You agree that the laws of the State of New York, without regard to principles of conflict of laws, govern this Agreement and any Dispute between you and us.' No geo-blocking, no country allowlist and no denylist is published. Scored 'global'. Note independently that the contracts are permissionless and unowned, so the Protocol layer is unrestricted regardless of what the front end does.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with friend.tech: 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
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 78, #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 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt socialfi:friend_tech:2026.10.18:4f61424dedef
Are you friend.tech? 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.