Provider at a glance
- Category
- Incentive Distribution
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- hedgey.finance
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 69 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in August 2026.
Hedgey
Self-service token distribution
Incentive Distribution
#5 Overall
Ranked #5 of 9 incentive distribution in the published ranking
69
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Hedgey right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?7/10; the category best is 8
Look elsewhere if these come first
- If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?6/10 here; the category best is 9
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?8/10 here; Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups) scores 10
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?4/10 here; Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups) scores 7
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 incentive distribution platform shows where it lands for you.
What will Hedgey cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Transactions per year
- 1k
How safe is Hedgey?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read August 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Hedgey
Compare all 4- 2Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups)9 points above · stronger on incident and operator record (7 against 4)78
- 3Boost (Rabbithole)2 points above · stronger on incident and operator record (5 against 4)71
- 4Streamflow1 point above · stronger on incident and operator record (6 against 4)70
For your setup
Find out if Hedgey fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Hedgey 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 incentive distribution platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Hedgey ranks #5
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (20.2 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
306+5.766.09#2/9Loading evidence…
288+7.177.010#2/9Loading evidence…
224+2.826.08#8/9Loading evidence…
207+4.487.08#4/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind Streamflow, #4
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 67–71 and ranks #4–#5
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 Hedgey’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.
If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? 6 → 7 on its ladder · passes Streamflow+171#5 → #4
Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? 8 → 9 on its ladder · passes Streamflow+170#5 → #4
What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? 4 → 5 on its ladder · passes Streamflow+170#5 → #4
What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? 7 → 8 on its ladder · passes Streamflow+170#5 → #4
If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? 6 → 0 on its ladder · Galxe Quest / Business+ passes it−657#5 → #6
Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? 8 → 2 on its ladder · Galxe Quest / Business+ passes it−658#5 → #6
Smallest climb: “If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?” 6 → 7 passes Streamflow, #4.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? — 7/10, category best 8/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? — 8/10 against a category best of 10/10
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? — 4/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- You are buying a rail, not an allocation engine — Hedgey will not tell you who should get what, will not filter a single farmer out of your list before the fact, and gives a disputing recipient nobody to appeal to but you. And the surface you evaluate it on will not tell you that the exact contract you are about to fund, ClaimCampaigns.sol, was drained for ~$45m across 23 live campaigns on 19 April 2024: the homepage answers 'Are Hedgey contracts audited.' with an audit count, the 4,713-line docs corpus (re-read 2026-09-28) refers to that exploit zero times (its one occurrence of the word is hypothetical bounty language and all six 'hack' hits are the auditor name 'Hacken'), and the only surviving in-product trace is an unexplained GitHub branch named 'Freeze' in the audits table. You have to already know to go looking on Medium.
Competitive position
Where Hedgey 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#5 / 915.2 of 30 · best 19.9
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 Hedgey leads
- If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?#2 / 9
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?#2 / 9
Where it trails
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?#8 / 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.
Streamflow#4 of 9 · score 70 · 1.0 point ahead
Hedgey leads on
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?8 vs 7
Streamflow leads on
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?6 vs 4
Largest single reason Streamflow is ahead: published criteria (+1.0 display points).Scenario cost: Streamflow has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Boost (Rabbithole)#3 of 9 · score 71 · 2.0 points ahead
Hedgey leads onNo scored criterion
Boost (Rabbithole) leads on
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?5 vs 4
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?8 vs 7
Largest single reason Boost (Rabbithole) is ahead: published criteria (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: Boost (Rabbithole) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups)#2 of 9 · score 78 · 9.0 points ahead
Hedgey leads onNo scored criterion
Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups) leads on
- Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?10 vs 8
- What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?7 vs 4
- What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?8 vs 7
Largest single reason Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups) is ahead: published criteria (+8.8 display points).Scenario cost: Sablier Airdrops (Merkle Lockups) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 69 · gap 12.0Why Merkl (Angle Labs) ranks above Hedgey
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 12.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisMerkl (Angle Labs)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight15.219.9−12.2, 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 criterionThisMerkl (Angle Labs)Points
If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? · w3069−2.88, worse
What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? · w2248−2.82, worse
What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? · w2078−0.64, worse
Net6981−12.0
Your scenario
Hedgey is not priced for this 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
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 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.
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 17 August 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 #4 to #5 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.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 17 August 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it?strength 6 · weight 30Report an error—17 August 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 is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me?strength 8 · weight 28Report an error—17 August 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.What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today?strength 4 · weight 22Report an error—17 August 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.What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person?strength 7 · weight 20Report an error—17 August 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
- Contract failure (Hedgey 4/10): the code holding the funds is exploited.Scored by What has already gone wrong on this machinery, and who is actually running it today? · 22%
- Custody failure (Hedgey 8/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by Who is holding my budget, who can still change the list, and what comes back to me? · 28%
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by If someone disputes their number, can anyone outside the vendor recompute it? · 30% (Hedgey 6/10)Scored by What exactly stops a farm from eating this budget, and what happens when it flags the wrong person? · 20% (Hedgey 7/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- From https://
hedgey .gitbook .io /hedgey-community-docs /legal /terms-of-use .md (fetched 28 September 2026, HTTP 200): "Hedgey is available to use as a free, public goods platform. There are no fees to create or access or interact with the products available on app.hedgey.finance or to interact with the smart contracts those products interact with." No take on the budget — nothing deducted from the deposit and nothing added on top; in https:// raw .githubusercontent .com /hedgey-finance /ClaimCampaigns /master /contracts /ClaimCampaigns .sol (fetched 28 September 2026) the only vendor-bound transfer is a voluntary ETH tip: "if (msg.value > 0) {" / "treasury.call{value: msg.value}('');". The docs restate it: "100% free to use, 100% onchain" and "available as free public goods on our self-service platform" (https:// hedgey .gitbook .io /hedgey-community-docs /llms-full .txt, fetched 28 September 2026). Where the cost actually lands: creation gas paid by the buyer, described only as "It costs pennies on L2s to create." (https:// hedgey .gitbook .io /hedgey-community-docs /hedgey /token-claims .md, 28 September 2026) with no L1 figure, and claim gas paid by each recipient. The paid tier is the successor product (Hedgey Pro by Anchorage Digital), which publishes no number: "Certain features of the Services may require payment of subscription fees as detailed in your applicable order form or online registration." and "Fees are non-refundable except as required by law or explicitly stated otherwise in your subscription agreement." (https:// hedgey .gitbook .io /hedgey-community-docs /legal /hedgey-pro-terms-of-use .md, 28 September 2026). https:// hedgey .finance /pricing returns HTTP 404 (28 September 2026).Hedgey — official pricing page ↗ · 28 October 2026 - Prices published in
- USDHedgey — official pricing page ↗ · 28 October 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- ethereum, arbitrum, optimism, polygon, base, mantle, bnb-smart-chain, linea, mode, zora, iota-evm, celo, scroll, avalanche, gnosis, blast, filecoin-evm, berachain, peaq
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- BOTH kinds of language are present, and they must not be conflated. (1) A genuine market-restriction clause, not the standard sanctions rep: 'No U.S. PERSONS for products or services which U.S. persons are restricted from participating in.' and 'The Interface is not intended for users in the United States of America for products which may be or become restricted for U.S. persons. Under no circumstances may you access or use the Interface if you are a resident of the United States or located within the United States of America and restricted from using specific services.' (https://
hedgey .gitbook .io /hedgey-community-docs /legal /terms-of-use .md, read 17 August 2026). This is self-referentially conditional — it bars US persons only from products from which US persons are barred — and it is visibly inherited boilerplate from Hedgey's earlier options business, since the same document defines the Interface as one 'that allows users to buy and sell within a decentralized options protocol', which is not what the claims product does. It does NOT operate as a footprint restriction on token claims in practice: Hedgey's own documentation is built around US-domiciled programmes (dedicated Arbitrum STIP, Arbitrum LTIPP and Polygon Village guides; Gitcoin and Protocol Labs testimonials on hedgey.finance). (2) Separately and additionally, the ordinary OFAC/sanctions representation that nearly every crypto ToS carries, which is an eligibility rule applying everywhere rather than a regional footprint: 'you hereby represent and warrant that (1) you are not located in a country that is subject to a United States of America embargo, or that has been designated by the American Government as a "terrorist supporting" country; and (2) you are not listed on any United States Government list of prohibited or restricted parties.' Also present, and unusual for a self-described public good: 'As part of our legal compliance program, we will monitor your Hedgey Finance Account and your use of the Interface, and review your personal information on an ongoing basis' with access that 'may be temporarily restricted'. Scored as global: no jurisdiction is affirmatively excluded from token claims, the contracts are permissionless across 21 published deployments, and the only hard exclusions are sanctions-based.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Hedgey: 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
- 17 August 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 69, #5 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
2026.10.7Forty-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 incentive_distribution:hedgey:2026.10.18:f89bd9058d07
Are you Hedgey? 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.