Provider at a glance
- Category
- Onchain Monitoring
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- hypernative.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 79 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Hypernative
Threat detection with automated pausing
Onchain Monitoring
#1 Overall
Ranked #1 of 7 onchain monitoring in the published ranking
79
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Hypernative right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Verified pre-emptive catches8/10, the category best
- What it can actually DO8/10; the category best is 9
Look elsewhere if these come first
- False-positive honesty and detection method4/10 here; Hexagate (by Chainalysis) scores 5
- Pricing and procurement disclosure1/10 here; BlockSec Phalcon scores 2
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 monitoring platform shows where it lands for you.
What will Hypernative cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Transactions per year
- 1k
How safe is Hypernative?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Hypernative
Compare all 4- 2BlockSec Phalcon1 point below · stronger on response capability (9 against 8)78
- 3Hexagate (by Chainalysis)7 points below · stronger on false positive posture (5 against 4)72
- 4Forta Firewall11 points below · stronger on response capability (9 against 8)68
For your setup
Find out if Hypernative fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Hypernative 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 monitoring platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why it leads
Why Hypernative 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 (19.7 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
408+10.243.08#1/7Loading evidence…
258+6.407.09#3/7Loading evidence…
204+2.564.06#4/7Loading evidence…
151+0.482.03#6/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin+1over BlockSec Phalcon, #2
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 78–79 and ranks #1–#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 Hypernative’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.
Verified pre-emptive catches 8 → 7 on its ladder · BlockSec Phalcon passes it−178#1 → #2
What it can actually DO 8 → 7 on its ladder · BlockSec Phalcon passes it−179#1 → #2
False-positive honesty and detection method 4 → 3 on its ladder · BlockSec Phalcon passes it−179#1 → #2
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Verified pre-emptive catches — 8/10, the category best
- What it can actually DO — 8/10, category best 9/10
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- False-positive honesty and detection method — 4/10 against a category best of 6/10
- Pricing and procurement disclosure — 1/10 against a category best of 3/10
Record watch-outs
- The "$3B+ prevented, onchain, verifiable" headline ships without a single transaction hash — you must take the case studies on trust, and its flagship Balancer save of $19.3M sits against a loss that Balancer's own post-mortem states inconsistently: "an estimated $94.8M theft" in its introduction and "$121.1M in total losses" under Financial Impact.
- The Venus save is shared and double-counted across this comparison. Venus's own post-mortem lists "09:09:00 AM UTC - Hexagate (@hexagate_) and Hypernative (@HypernativeLabs) reported a potential issue to the Venus team and suggested pausing the protocol" and "09:25:37 AM UTC - Protocol pause." — a manual pause by the Venus team on a joint alert — and Hexagate publishes the same $13M incident as its own case study. Counting the same event at full weight for two providers in one comparison inflates Hypernative's 8 and depresses Hexagate's 5. The homepage nonetheless labels the Venus card "AUTOMATED PREVENTION".
- Sourcing: the homepage renders the headline stat as '$3 B+ Funds Saved'; the "prevented, onchain, verifiable" sentence appears on hypernative.io/hypernative-difference. hypernative.io/pricing returns "Page Not Found" and the homepage carries 'Request a Demo' / 'Request Demo' with no price. The '98% of hacks detected more than 2 minutes before the first transaction' claim was found on none of the homepage, /hypernative-difference or the product page when read again on 14 September 2026; /why-hypernative now redirects to /hypernative-difference.
Competitive position
Where Hypernative 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 / 714.8 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 Hypernative leads
- Verified pre-emptive catches#1 / 7
- What it can actually DO#3 / 7
Where it trails
- Pricing and procurement disclosure#6 / 7
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.
BlockSec Phalcon#2 of 7 · score 78 · 1.0 point behind
Hypernative leads on
- Verified pre-emptive catches8 vs 7
- False-positive honesty and detection method4 vs 3
BlockSec Phalcon leads on
- What it can actually DO9 vs 8
- Pricing and procurement disclosure2 vs 1
Largest single reason Hypernative is ahead: published criteria (+1.3 display points).Scenario cost: BlockSec Phalcon has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Hexagate (by Chainalysis)#3 of 7 · score 72 · 7.0 points behind
Hypernative leads on
- Verified pre-emptive catches8 vs 5
- What it can actually DO8 vs 7
Hexagate (by Chainalysis) leads on
- False-positive honesty and detection method5 vs 4
- Pricing and procurement disclosure2 vs 1
Largest single reason Hypernative is ahead: published criteria (+7.0 display points).Scenario cost: Hexagate (by Chainalysis) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Forta Firewall#4 of 7 · score 68 · 11.0 points behind
Hypernative leads on
- Verified pre-emptive catches8 vs 3
- False-positive honesty and detection method4 vs 3
Forta Firewall leads on
- What it can actually DO9 vs 8
- Pricing and procurement disclosure2 vs 1
Largest single reason Hypernative is ahead: published criteria (+11.4 display points).Scenario cost: Forta Firewall has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against #2
79 vs 78 · gap 1.0Why Hypernative ranks above BlockSec Phalcon
DimensionThisBlockSec PhalconGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight14.814.3+1.3, 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 criterionThisBlockSec PhalconPoints
Verified pre-emptive catches · w4087+1.28, better
What it can actually DO · w2589−0.80, worse
False-positive honesty and detection method · w2043+0.64, better
Pricing and procurement disclosure · w1512−0.48, worse
Net7978+1.0
Your scenario
Hypernative 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 22 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 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 22 October 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 #1 to #2 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 22 October 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Verified pre-emptive catchesstrength 8 · weight 40Report an error—22 October 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 it can actually DOstrength 8 · weight 25Report an error—22 October 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 honesty and detection methodstrength 4 · weight 20Report an error—22 October 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.Pricing and procurement disclosurestrength 1 · weight 15Report an error—22 October 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 Verified pre-emptive catches · 40% (Hypernative 8/10)Scored by False-positive honesty and detection method · 20% (Hypernative 4/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness 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: What it can actually DO (25%), Pricing and procurement disclosure (15%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Not published. hypernative.io/pricing returns "Page Not Found" (fetched 22 October 2026). The homepage, /hypernative-difference and the Onchain Monitoring & Automated Response product page offer only "Request a Demo" / "Request Demo", with no price, tier, range or unit of billing; the product FAQ says only "Most organizations are live within weeks." No list price is published, so cost cannot be compared before a sales conversation.Hypernative — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDHypernative — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 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
- Enterprise B2B sale via demo request. Hypernative publishes no service terms or country list on its own site: /terms, /terms-of-service, /terms-of-use and /legal all return "Page Not Found" (read 22 October 2026), the footer links only a Privacy Policy, and that policy (hypernative.io/privacy-policy, read 22 October 2026) says only "The Services are intended to the use of individuals over the age of 18." Any jurisdictional limits sit in the customer contract.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Hypernative: 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
- 22 October 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 79, #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 onchain_monitoring:hypernative_monitoring:2026.10.18:4473bca50edc
Are you Hypernative? 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.