Provider at a glance
- Category
- L2 Blockchains
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- manta.network
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 43 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Manta Pacific
OP Stack L2 with Celestia data availability
L2 Blockchains
#14 Overall
Ranked #14 of 15 L2 blockchains in the published ranking
43
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $0.00044 your cost/yr
Is Manta Pacific right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Transactions if the sequencer censors you10/10, the category best
- EVM equivalence10/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Proof system0/10 here; Linea scores 10
- Withdrawals if the operator stops0/10 here; the category best is 10
- Ethereum data availability0/10 here; Linea scores 10
- Maturity & track record6/10 here; the category best is 10
- Exit window before an upgrade0/10 here; the category best is 2
- Rollup stage0/10 here; Linea scores 3
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: United States, Europe, Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best layer-2 blockchain shows where it lands for you.
What will Manta Pacific cost you?
$0.00044 your cost/yr
- Your transactions a year
- 100
- Median fee per transaction
- $0.0000044
$0.18 below the median of 11 priced L2 blockchains.
How this is calculatedHow safe is Manta Pacific?
- Evidence: verified8 of 8 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- IncidentsNo dated entry in the records read on 1 October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Manta Pacific
Compare all 4- 12Linea14 points above · stronger on proof system (10 against 0)57$1.53
- 13Blast4 points above · stronger on data on Ethereum (10 against 0)47
- 15Polygon zkEVM2 points below · weaker on censorship resistance (0 against 10)41
For your setup
Find out if Manta Pacific fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Manta Pacific 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 layer-2 blockchainNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Manta Pacific ranks #14
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (9.0 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 2 of 8.
8 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
1010+3.2010.010#1/15Loading evidence…
106+1.926.010#5/15Loading evidence…
140+0.0010.010#14/15Loading evidence…
80+0.003.07#13/15Loading evidence…
180+0.0010.010#13/15Loading evidence…
100+0.000.02#5/15Loading evidence…
180+0.005.010#10/15Loading evidence…
1210+3.8410.010#1/15Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind Blast, #13
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 8 criterion scores, the re-run scores 42–44 and stays #14
Evidence8 of 8 scored8 quoted, 8 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of Manta Pacific’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.
Proof system 0 → 5 on its ladder · passes Blast+548#14 → #13
Withdrawals if the operator stops 0 → 5 on its ladder · passes Blast+548#14 → #13
Ethereum data availability 0 → 6 on its ladder · passes Blast+648#14 → #13
Exit window before an upgrade 0 → 9 on its ladder · passes Blast+948#14 → #13
Smallest climb: proof system 0 → 5 passes Blast, #13.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Transactions if the sequencer censors you — 10/10, the category best
- EVM equivalence — 10/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
4 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Proof system — 0/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Withdrawals if the operator stops — 0/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Ethereum data availability — 0/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Maturity & track record — 6/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Exit window before an upgrade — 0/10 against a category best of 2/10
- Rollup stage — 0/10 against a category best of 7/10
Record watch-outs
- Data availability is on Celestia (external modular DA), not Ethereum L1 — a different DA trust model to weigh
- A Jan-2024 DDoS hit its RPC nodes (a liveness/infra event, not a fund exploit); live L2 gas cost is feed-pending; live TVL shown for context, never scored
Competitive position
Where Manta Pacific 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 / 1514.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#14 / 156.7 of 30 · best 21.5
Friction#1 / 152.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 153.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 155.5 of 18 · constant here
Where Manta Pacific leads
- EVM equivalence#1 / 15
- Maturity & track record#5 / 15
- Exit window before an upgrade#5 / 15
- Transactions if the sequencer censors you#1 / 15
Where it trails
- Ethereum data availability#14 / 15
- Rollup stage#13 / 15
- Proof system#13 / 15
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.
Polygon zkEVM#15 of 15 · score 41 · 2.0 points behind
Manta Pacific leads on
- EVM equivalence10 vs 0
- Maturity & track record6 vs 0
- Transactions if the sequencer censors you10 vs 0
Polygon zkEVM leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Manta Pacific is ahead: published criteria (+17.4 display points).Scenario cost: Polygon zkEVM has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Blast#13 of 15 · score 47 · 4.0 points ahead
Manta Pacific leads on
- EVM equivalence10 vs 6
- Maturity & track record6 vs 4
Blast leads on
- Ethereum data availability10 vs 0
Largest single reason Blast is ahead: published criteria (+4.9 display points).Scenario cost: Blast has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Linea#12 of 15 · score 57 · 14.0 points ahead
Manta Pacific leads on
- Transactions if the sequencer censors you10 vs 0
Linea leads on
- Ethereum data availability10 vs 0
- Rollup stage3 vs 0
- Proof system10 vs 0
Largest single reason Linea is ahead: published criteria (+14.0 display points).Scenario cost: Linea is +$1.53 against Manta Pacific.
Against the leader
81 vs 43 · gap 38.0Why Arbitrum One ranks above Manta Pacific
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 38.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisArbitrum OneGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight6.721.5−38.5, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here5.55.5same
Published criterionThisArbitrum OnePoints
Maturity & track record · w10610−1.28, worse
Ethereum data availability · w14010−4.48, worse
Rollup stage · w807−1.79, worse
Proof system · w18010−5.76, worse
Exit window before an upgrade · w1002−0.64, worse
Withdrawals if the operator stops · w18010−5.76, worse
Net4381−38.0
Your scenario
What Manta Pacific costs on your scenario
growthepie's median fee per transaction on the chain, the median of the last 7 daily medians, times your transactions, for a year. A median, not a fee schedule: a busy day, a heavy contract call or a deposit or withdrawal through Ethereum costs more. Excludes bridging to and from the chain. 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 transactions a year · your input100
Median fee per transaction · published rate$0.0000044
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 4 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.
$0.00044
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median$0.1811 of 15 rows priced · Manta Pacific −$0.18 vs median
Cheapest priced$0.00044 · Manta PacificManta Pacific is the cheapest priced row for this scenario · availability not applied — set your country to filter
4 of 15 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 1 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.
8 of 8 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified8 of 8 criteria reconstruct from receipts
8 of 8 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…8 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
8/8 criteria scored, with 8 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #14 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 1 October 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
EVM equivalencestrength 10 · weight 10Report an error—1 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.Maturity & track recordstrength 6 · weight 10Report an error—1 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.Ethereum data availabilitystrength 0 · weight 14Report an error—1 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.Rollup stagestrength 0 · weight 8Report an error—1 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.Proof systemstrength 0 · weight 18Report an error—1 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.Exit window before an upgradestrength 0 · weight 10Report an error—1 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.Withdrawals if the operator stopsstrength 0 · weight 18Report an error—1 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.Transactions if the sequencer censors youstrength 10 · weight 12Report an error—1 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
- Control failure (Manta Pacific 0/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Exit window before an upgrade · 10%
- Verification failure: an invalid state or transfer is accepted.Scored by Ethereum data availability · 14% (Manta Pacific 0/10)Scored by Proof system · 18% (Manta Pacific 0/10)
- Liveness failure: the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by Withdrawals if the operator stops · 18% (Manta Pacific 0/10)Scored by Transactions if the sequencer censors you · 12% (Manta Pacific 10/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Execution 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: EVM equivalence (10%), Maturity & track record (10%), Rollup stage (8%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- L2BEAT category: Other (OP Stack, state validation: none). EVM: equivalent. Mainnet: 2023. DA: Celestia (external modular). Gas in ETH. Live gas feed-pending; TVL shown for context (L2Beat), not scored.L2Beat ↗ · 1 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDL2Beat ↗ · 1 October 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- unregulated
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- ethereum
- Markets served
- us, europe, global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
Failure record
Incident timeline
Dated events at Manta Pacific that a verified research record holds, newest first: the record’s own words, the date it gives, the source, and what ChainChoice’s read did where the record links the two.
Reading the incident record for Manta Pacific.
When an event that meets the extraordinary-review rule is found, the placement is re-read within 72 hours and carries a label until then. The timeline itself never moves a score. How reviews work
If something goes wrong with Manta Pacific: 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.
11 methodology entries
- 1 October 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 43, #14 of 15. 8 of 8 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.
- 1 October 2026
2026.10.1Layer-2 chains: an eighth criterion, a fast-exit requirement, and published friction rules- added l2_chains criterion sequencer_failure (12): 10 = forced inclusion through Ethereum within a day or a decentralised sequencer set rated good; 8 = forced inclusion after a longer delay; 5 = an L1 queue or log the sequencer must eventually process but cannot be forced to; 0 = no mechanism. 15 rows quoted from L2BEAT's API, matched by a live re-fetch on the read date (0 differences on any scored entry).
- changed l2_chains weights: proof system 18, withdrawals if the operator stops 18, Ethereum data availability 14, sequencer failure 12, exit window 10, EVM equivalence 10, maturity 10, rollup stage 8 (was 18/18/15/–/6/17/12/14). Three model runs proposed them (withdrawal safety, builder, minimal change) and a fourth, judging the three, set them; its exit window of 8 left the #1 resting on a 1.6-point margin that one one-point move in proof system or proposer failure would overturn, which the brief forbade, so exit window takes the safety lens's 10 and stage, which every lens found double-counted, gives 2.
- changed Published l2_chains order: the #1 does not change (Arbitrum One 81, OP Mainnet 80). Starknet rises from #10 to #8, Mantle from #12 to #10, and Linea falls from #9 to #12 because it has no forced inclusion. No other category moves.
- changed Find my best: "Fast, trust-minimised exit to Ethereum" removes every chain that is not a ZK rollup (structuralFacts.rollupType must be zk) and replaces the +2 for ZK rollups; it also no longer up-weights proof system and exit window, since the filter already decides what those weights leaned towards. The results page lists each removed chain with its reason under "Removed by your requirement", the coverage line and timeline count the removals apart from the country's, and the inputs table shows the answer as a filter (decision layer 1.1.0). The explorer's quick question applies the same requirement and says how many rows it removed. Replaying the 2,217 golden cases, one winner changes: that answer now leads to Scroll.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt l2_chains:manta-pacific:2026.10.18:e00cba53ba4e
Are you Manta Pacific? 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.