Provider at a glance
- Category
- Wallet Screening
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- globalledger.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 55 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in November 2026.
Global Ledger
Blockchain analytics from Switzerland
Wallet Screening
#8 Overall
Ranked #8 of 9 wallet screening in the published ranking
55
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $4,200 your cost/yr
Is Global Ledger right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- False-positive posture & appeal path5/10; the category best is 6
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Attribution defensibility3/10 here; Crystal Intelligence scores 6
- Coverage for your stack2/10 here; Crystal Intelligence scores 7
- Access & price transparency6/10 here; the category best is 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 wallet screening tool shows where it lands for you.
What will Global Ledger cost you?
$4,200 your cost/yr
- Transactions per year
- 1k
- Annual price
- $4200
- Monthly price
- $400
How safe is Global Ledger?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read November 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Global Ledger
Compare all 4- 6Crystal Intelligence7 points above · stronger on coverage (7 against 2)62
- 7Merkle Science1 point above · stronger on coverage (4 against 2)56
- 9AMLBot3 points below · stronger on coverage (4 against 2)52
For your setup
Find out if Global Ledger fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Global Ledger 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 wallet screening toolNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Global Ledger ranks #8
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (12.4 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
303+2.884.09#6/9Loading evidence…
265+4.164.06#3/9Loading evidence…
242+1.544.09#9/9Loading evidence…
206+3.843.010#3/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Merkle Science, #7
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 53–57 and ranks #7–#8
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 Global Ledger’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.
Attribution defensibility 3 → 4 on its ladder · passes Merkle Science+157#8 → #7
False-positive posture & appeal path 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes Merkle Science+157#8 → #7
Coverage for your stack 2 → 3 on its ladder · passes Merkle Science+157#8 → #7
Access & price transparency 6 → 7 on its ladder · passes Merkle Science+156#8 → #7
Attribution defensibility 3 → 1 on its ladder · AMLBot passes it−252#8 → #9
False-positive posture & appeal path 5 → 2 on its ladder · AMLBot passes it−350#8 → #9
Access & price transparency 6 → 3 on its ladder · AMLBot passes it−352#8 → #9
Smallest climb: attribution defensibility 3 → 4 passes Merkle Science, #7.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- False-positive posture & appeal path — 5/10, category best 6/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Attribution defensibility — 3/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Coverage for your stack — 2/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Access & price transparency — 6/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- Capital thinness plus coverage overstatement. No disclosed institutional funding against competitors that raised $70M–$120M in 2026 is a genuine…
- Enterprise sales only, volume-banded. No free tier, no trial, no self-serve signup, no published per-check price.
- No breach, enforcement action, regulatory action or wind-down found.
Competitive position
Where Global Ledger 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 / 920.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#7 / 99.3 of 30 · best 15.6
Friction#5 / 90.7 of 10 · best 2.7
Trust record#7 / 93.2 of 8 · best 5.6
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Global Ledger leads
- False-positive posture & appeal path#3 / 9
- Access & price transparency#3 / 9
Where it trails
- Coverage for your stack#9 / 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.
Merkle Science#7 of 9 · score 56 · 1.0 point ahead
Global Ledger leads on
- False-positive posture & appeal path5 vs 4
- Access & price transparency6 vs 2
Merkle Science leads on
- Coverage for your stack4 vs 2
Largest single reason Merkle Science is ahead: trust record (+4.2 display points).Scenario cost: Merkle Science has no verified pricing for this scenario.
AMLBot#9 of 9 · score 52 · 3.0 points behind
Global Ledger leads on
- Attribution defensibility3 vs 2
- False-positive posture & appeal path5 vs 2
AMLBot leads on
- Coverage for your stack4 vs 2
Largest single reason Global Ledger is ahead: published criteria (+3.6 display points).Scenario cost: AMLBot has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Crystal Intelligence#6 of 9 · score 62 · 7.0 points ahead
Global Ledger leads on
- False-positive posture & appeal path5 vs 4
- Access & price transparency6 vs 2
Crystal Intelligence leads on
- Attribution defensibility6 vs 3
- Coverage for your stack7 vs 2
Largest single reason Crystal Intelligence is ahead: published criteria (+6.5 display points).Scenario cost: Crystal Intelligence has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
83 vs 55 · gap 28.0Why TRM Labs ranks above Global Ledger
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 28.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisTRM LabsGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here20.020.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight9.315.6−16.4, worse
Friction · 12% weight0.72.7−5.2, worse
Trust record · 9% weight3.25.6−6.2, worse
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisTRM LabsPoints
Attribution defensibility · w3038−4.80, worse
False-positive posture & appeal path · w2656−0.83, worse
Coverage for your stack · w2429−5.38, worse
Access & price transparency · w2062+2.56, better
Net5583−28.0
Your scenario
What Global Ledger 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$4200
Monthly price · published rate$400
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 3 November 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.
$4,200
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median and cheapestNot statedOnly 2 of 9 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
7 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 3 November 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.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #7 to #8 across one-point re-runs
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.Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Attribution defensibilitystrength 3 · weight 30Report an error—3 November 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.False-positive posture & appeal pathstrength 5 · weight 26Report an error—3 November 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.Coverage for your stackstrength 2 · weight 24Report an error—3 November 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.Access & price transparencystrength 6 · weight 20Report an error—3 November 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
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Attribution defensibility · 30% (Global Ledger 3/10)Scored by False-positive posture & appeal path · 26% (Global Ledger 5/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: 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: Coverage for your stack (24%), Access & price transparency (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Global Ledger's pricing page (globalledger.io/pricing), read 3 November 2026, now publishes prices for its two entry tiers, bought online: "KYT Starter $400 /month 10,000 Requests" ($4,200 a year on yearly billing, "SAVE 12%") and "KYT Essentials $900 /month 10,000 Requests" ($9,000 a year, "SAVE 17%"), each 1 user. The two larger tiers stay quote-only: "KYT Advanced Custom pricing 50,000 Requests" (3 users) and "Enterprise All-in-One | Unlimited Custom pricing" (250,000 or unlimited requests, 5 or 20 users), routed to "Request Pricing". Buying online is not instant: the sign-up page (globalledger.io/sanction-check) says "Tell us about your business. We’ll review it and email you a payment link, usually within 12 hours.", then payment by card. No free tier and no trial. Add-ons (Tracing+, Investigation+, 24/7 support with "Guaranteed 99.8% system availability" on annual contracts) are "Talk to Sales". Re-read 3 November 2026.Global Ledger — verified source ↗ · 3 November 2026
- Prices published in
- USDGlobal Ledger — verified source ↗ · 3 November 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Global
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Enterprise sales only, volume-banded. No free tier, no trial, no self-serve signup, no published per-check price.
- Availability note
- Sold to verified businesses only; no free tier and no trial. Global Ledger's sign-up page (globalledger.io/sanction-check), read 2026-11-03: "Tell us about your business. We’ll review it and email you a payment link, usually within 12 hours." and "We’re required to verify every business we work with." Entry tiers are then paid by card; larger tiers are "Custom pricing". The operator is GLO Services AG, Zug, Switzerland; no terms of service are published and the pages read name no restricted country.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Global Ledger: 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
- 3 November 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 55, #8 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 wallet_screening:global_ledger:2026.10.18:8a4a1bd0c003
Are you Global Ledger? 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.