The score, by dimension
- the same for all 7
- #5 of 7 · best 15.5
- the same for all 7
- the same for all 7
- the same for all 7
Tick: the best in this ranking · Methodology v2026.11.1
Messari API
Crypto data API
#5 of all 7 worldwide66
- Rank
- #5 of all 7 worldwidere-runs: scores 64–68 and stays #5
- Your cost
- Not priced on this basis
- Evidence
- High4 of 4 criteria sourced
- Licence
- No MiCA record on file
- Freshness
- Read September 2026checked · re-read in progress
Check availability for your country
Messari API · api.messari.io. Provider links appear once we know which country you are browsing from: ChainChoice links to providers only where it serves in full.
Commission: This provider pays ChainChoice nothing for this link. Disclosure
Crypto products are high risk. Check the provider is authorised where you live before you deposit.
The verdict
Messari API is #5 of 7 published market-data APIs; it scores 6/10 on coverage and granularity, where the category best is 9. Its widest gap is cost at production volume: 4/10, where Kaiko scores 5. Choose Kaiko if cost at production volume matters most.
Is Messari API right for you?
Look elsewhere if
- Published cost at production call volume4/10 here; Kaiko scores 5
- Coverage and documented granularity6/10 here; Kaiko scores 9
- What the free tier actually survives5/10 here; the category best is 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 market-data API shows where it lands for you.
What will Messari API cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Transactions per year
- 1k
How safe is Messari API?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
If it doesn’t fit, choose
Compare all 4- 4KaikoIf coverage and granularity matters most: 94 points above · stronger on coverage and granularity (9 against 6)70$12,000 a year · read
- 6Dune APIIf redistribution rights matter most: 45 points below · stronger on redistribution rights (4 against 3)61
- 7CoinDesk Data APIIf coverage and granularity matters most: 89 points below · stronger on coverage and granularity (8 against 6)57
Provider at a glance
- Category
- Market-Data APIs
- Entity
- All 2 Messari products
- Official website
- api.messari.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 66 out of 100 under methodology 2026.11.1, from the evidence read in September 2026.
For your setup
Find out if Messari API fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Messari API 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 market-data APINothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Messari API 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 (14.0 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
304+3.845.09#5/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10283+2.694.04#5/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10205+3.205.07#4/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10226+4.227.09#5/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind Kaiko, #4 of all 7 worldwide, on the published score
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 64–68 and stays #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 Messari API’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.
Published cost at production call volume 4 → 7 on its ladder · passes Kaiko+371#5 → #4
Redistribution and licensing rights 3 → 6 on its ladder · passes Kaiko+371#5 → #4
Coverage and documented granularity 6 → 9 on its ladder · passes Kaiko+370#5 → #4
What the free tier actually survives 5 → 9 on its ladder · passes Kaiko+471#5 → #4
Published cost at production call volume 4 → 1 on its ladder · Dune API passes it−360#5 → #6
Redistribution and licensing rights 3 → 0 on its ladder · Dune API passes it−361#5 → #6
What the free tier actually survives 5 → 1 on its ladder · Dune API passes it−461#5 → #6
Smallest climb: published cost at production call volume 4 → 7 passes Kaiko, #4.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Published cost at production call volume — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Coverage and documented granularity — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
- What the free tier actually survives — 5/10 against a category best of 7/10
Record watch-outs
- The transparent price is a trap at scale and the scalable price is unreadable. x402 lets you start with about $1 of USDC and no account, but at $0.10 per Get Asset Details request a product doing 1,000,000 lookups a month owes $100,000 — several hundred times the subscription vendors — and the price table itself warns that "Endpoint support and pricing can change over time."
Competitive position
How Messari API places on each criterion
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.
Against the leader
79 vs 66 · gap 13.0Why CoinMarketCap API ranks above Messari API
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 13.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisCoinMarketCap APIGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight10.515.5−13.0, 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 criterionThisCoinMarketCap APIPoints
Published cost at production call volume · w3048−3.84, worse
Redistribution and licensing rights · w2834−0.90, worse
What the free tier actually survives · w2057−1.28, worse
Coverage and documented granularity · w2267−0.70, worse
Net6679−13.0
Your scenario
Messari API 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 10 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.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDTypical costNot statedFewer than 5 priced rows: no typical cost is named · 4 of 7 rows priced
Lowest fee, priced rows$0.00 · Coinpaprika APIDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filterCompare with Coinpaprika API
3 of 7 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the typical, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 27 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.RobustnessHoldsrank #5 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 10 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 27 September 2026.
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Published cost at production call volumestrength 4 · weight 30Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Redistribution and licensing rightsstrength 3 · weight 28Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.What the free tier actually survivesstrength 5 · weight 20Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Coverage and documented granularitystrength 6 · weight 22Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
None of this ranking's criteria scores a way of losing money; the families that apply are listed below as not assessed.
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness failure, Exit 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: Published cost at production call volume (30%), Redistribution and licensing rights (28%), What the free tier actually survives (20%), Coverage and documented granularity (22%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Fetched 10 November 2026 from Messari's x402 payments documentation (HTTP 200; the HTML rendering is cited because the .md rendering escapes every dollar sign as \$). Exact published per-request prices, unchanged from 6 August 2026 and quoted from the endpoint table: "Chat Completion - Messari v2" "$0.25 per request"; "Get Asset Details" "$0.10 per request"; "Get All-Time Highs" "$0.10 per request"; "Get ROIs" "$0.10 per request"; "List Assets", "List Metrics" and "Get Markets" "$0.00 per request"; "Asset Timeseries" "1h : $0.18" and "1d : $0.15"; "Get Market" "$0.35 per request"; "Get Market Timeseries Metrics" "$0.35 per request"; "Get Market Timeseries" "$0.75 per request", and with granularity "1h : $1.00" and "1d : $0.75". The table has grown since August to cover Exchanges ("Get Exchange" "$0.35 per request"), Networks, Stablecoins, Fundraising, News, Signals and Token Unlocks endpoints, and still carries its own disclaimer: "Endpoint support and pricing can change over time." Settlement is USDC on Base Mainnet or Solana Mainnet, and "With x402, you can access Messari endpoints without a Messari account or API key — simply pay per request with crypto." NORMALISATION (10 November 2026, unit = USD/month at 1,000,000 calls, worked example): using Get Asset Details, the cheapest priced per-asset lookup, 1,000,000 requests x $0.10 = $100,000.00 per month, i.e. $100.00 per 1,000 calls. Against the figures in this pool's other notes that is 401x CoinGecko Lite ($0.2495/1k, last read 27 September 2026), 503x Coinpaprika Pro ($0.199/1k) and 669x CoinMarketCap Growth ($0.1495/1k). Subscription pricing: messari.io/pricing now redirects to https://
app .blockworks .com /pricing ("Blockworks Intel Pricing: Free, Pro & Data Packages", HTTP 200 on 10 November 2026); the served page compares Free and Pro without printing a price, routes the "Full Blockworks API" to "Contact Sales", and says "Pro provides access to only the Assets endpoints in the API. Contact our sales team to discuss full access to the API and MCP." So no subscription figure is stated here.Messari API — official page at docs.messari.io ↗ · 10 November 2026 - Prices published in
- USDMessari API — official page at docs.messari.io ↗ · 10 November 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
- Messari Terms of Service (https://
messari .io /terms-of-service, "Last Modified: October 21, 2025"), read 2026-11-10: a user represents that they are not on a sanctions list and are not "located within or a resident of, or a segment of the government of, any country or territory for which the United States maintains trade and economic sanctions or embargoes." The terms name no country as a market: the United States appears in that sentence as the sanctions authority, and clause 17.1 names Delaware as governing law ("we will be deemed solely based in Delaware").
Legal entity on file: Messari, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Messari API: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
Reviewed Methodology v2026.11.1
Re-read due since
The published cadence is 45 days; this page's next read was due on 11 November 2026.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
- 27 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.11.1Score 66, #5 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 2026.11.1, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt market_data_apis:messari_api:2026.11.1:0b86b656e1b2
Are you Messari API? 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.