Provider at a glance
- Category
- SocialFi
- Entity
- All 2 Lens products
- Official website
- lens.xyz
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 70 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Lens Protocol
Onchain social protocol
SocialFi
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 8 SocialFi in the published ranking
70
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Lens Protocol 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
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?8/10; the category best is 9
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?6/10 here; friend.tech scores 9
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?2/10 here; friend.tech scores 8
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 Lens Protocol cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Lens Protocol?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Lens Protocol
Compare all 4- 2friend.tech8 points above · stronger on who outranks my keys (8 against 2)78
- 4Bluesky / AT Protocol2 points below · stronger on who outranks my keys (6 against 2)68
- 5Farcaster2 points below · stronger on who outranks my keys (5 against 2)68
For your setup
Find out if Lens Protocol fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Lens Protocol 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 Lens Protocol ranks #3
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (22.0 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
329+9.226.510#2/8Loading evidence…
278+6.917.09#3/8Loading evidence…
256+4.805.59#2/8Loading evidence…
162+1.024.010#7/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−8behind friend.tech, #2
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 68–72 and ranks #3–#4
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 Lens Protocol’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.
Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it? 2 → 10 on its ladder · passes friend.tech+878#3 → #2
If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine? 9 → 8 on its ladder · Bluesky / AT Protocol passes it−168#3 → #4
Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? 8 → 6 on its ladder · Bluesky / AT Protocol passes it−267#3 → #5
Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down? 6 → 4 on its ladder · Bluesky / AT Protocol passes it−267#3 → #5
Smallest climb: “Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?” 2 → 10 passes friend.tech, #2.
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
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to? — 8/10, category best 9/10
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down? — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it? — 2/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- Everything Lens tells you about custody is true, and the one thing it never tells you undoes a chunk of it. Your handle really is an ERC-721 you hold, your followers really are contract state readable from a cold public RPC without an API key, and no admin function exists to burn your name or delete a follow edge: in the verified source the requires are `msg.sender == owner` and `msg.sender == followerAccount`. But the Namespace and the Global Graph are both beacon proxies, and a single externally-owned account with no bytecode — 0xaAFa8246dE0ae0e7b81125db325e9B39BED43B49 — owns both beacons, both proxy admins, both AccessControls, the upgrade slot of the fee contract, AND is the address the 1.5% is paid into. One signature can replace the code that decides what 'owner' means. Lens publishes a contracts page, a fee waterfall and a reserved-usernames rule, but no governance, timelock or upgrade-authority page exists anywhere in its 1.4MB docs corpus. You are not trusting Lens's product; you are trusting one key it never mentions.
Competitive position
Where Lens Protocol 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#3 / 816.5 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 Lens Protocol leads
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?#2 / 8
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?#3 / 8
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?#2 / 8
Where it trails
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?#7 / 8
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.
Bluesky / AT Protocol#4 of 8 · score 68 · 2.0 points behind
Lens Protocol 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?6 vs 5
Bluesky / AT Protocol leads on
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?9 vs 8
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?6 vs 2
Largest single reason Lens Protocol is ahead: published criteria (+2.1 display points).Scenario cost: Bluesky / AT Protocol has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Farcaster#5 of 8 · score 68 · 2.0 points behind
Lens Protocol leads on
- If this company shuts down tomorrow, is my handle and my follower list still mine?9 vs 7
- Who takes a cut of what I earn here, and is the number actually written down?6 vs 5
Farcaster leads on
- Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it?5 vs 2
Largest single reason Lens Protocol is ahead: published criteria (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: Farcaster has no verified pricing for this scenario.
friend.tech#2 of 8 · score 78 · 8.0 points ahead
Lens Protocol leads on
- Can I actually walk out with my audience — and is there anywhere to walk to?8 vs 6
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
Largest single reason friend.tech is ahead: published criteria (+7.3 display points).Scenario cost: friend.tech has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
82 vs 70 · gap 12.0Why Nostr ranks above Lens Protocol
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.
DimensionThisNostrGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight16.521.0−11.7, 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? · w2789−0.86, worse
Whose key can override mine — and what exactly can they do with it? · w16210−4.10, worse
Net7082−12.0
Your scenario
Lens Protocol 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.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #3 to #4 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 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 8 · 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 6 · 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 2 · 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 (Lens Protocol 2/10): 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 (Lens Protocol 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 (Lens Protocol 8/10): 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
- Entry price, from https://
lens .xyz /docs /protocol /accounts /create (HTTP 200, fetched 28 September 2026): "The process of creating a Lens Account differs slightly depending on whether you want to create a free username (such as one in the lens/ Global Namespace) or a username within a Custom Namespace that may be token-gated or require fees." - section heading "Account With Free Username". Take rate, from https:// lens .xyz /docs /protocol /feeds /post-actions (HTTP 200, fetched 28 September 2026): "For paid collects, a 1.5% Lens treasury fee is deducted from the total amount paid by the collector before calculating referral and recipient shares." and "A maximum of 20% of the tipped amount can be allocated to referrals, but only if they're explicitly included when the tip is sent." Worked example published on the same page under "Referral Fee Breakdown": "1.5 GHO (1.5%) is deducted for the Lens treasury fee", "98.5 GHO remains", "19.7 GHO (20%) is distributed as referrals", "78.8 GHO is sent to the Post author". Confirmed onchain: eth_call LensFees proxy 0xFd577b6317F4ab53D5675E85b8DEB7A814165C3C getTreasuryFeeBps() = 150 basis points at Lens Chain block 6,301,758 (28 September 2026), the same value as at block 6,186,000 in August; the doc figure and the chain figure still agree. No number was invented.Lens Protocol — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDLens Protocol — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Lens Chain (ZKsync stack, chainId 232 / 0xe8, verified via eth_chainId on https://
rpc .lens .xyz, 17 August 2026), Ethereum (settlement / bridge, https:// lens .xyz /bridge), Polygon (legacy Lens v2, migrated out as of 3 April 2025 per https:// lens .xyz /docs /protocol /migration /overview) - Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- STANDARD OFAC/SANCTIONS ELIGIBILITY REPRESENTATION — NOT A REGIONAL FOOTPRINT. Read on https://
lens .xyz /terms (HTTP 200, 142,830 bytes, 17 August 2026): "you are located, organized, or resident in a country or territory that is, or whose government is, the subject of sanctions, including but not limited to Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Belarus, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Liberia, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria" — this is an eligibility warranty applying everywhere, not a market restriction. Also on the same page: "We may restrict your access to the Services for any reason, including, but not limited, compliance with sanctions regulations." and a discretionary reservation, "We reserve the right - but are not obligated to - limit the provision of Profiles to any person, geographic region or jurisdiction. We may exercise this right on a case-by-case basis in our sole discretion." — reserved, not exercised, and no country list of unavailability is published. Governing law, same page: "The law of the Cayman Islands governs our Services." No country is stated as unserved, so supportedRegions = global. Note the practical asymmetry the rubric would want flagged: this ToS binds the lens.xyz FRONT END; the Namespace and Graph contracts have no geographic gate in code and can be called from any RPC.
Legal entity on file: Lens, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Lens Protocol: 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 70, #3 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:lens_protocol:2026.10.18:4f61424dedef
Are you Lens Protocol? 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.