Provider at a glance
- Category
- Shared Sequencers
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- theradius.xyz
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 57 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in August 2026.
Radius
Encrypted-mempool block building
Shared Sequencers
#5 Overall
Ranked #5 of 6 shared sequencers in the published ranking
57
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Radius right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Named mainnet rollups sequencing today0/10 here; Rome Protocol scores 4
- Published economics and MEV policy3/10 here; Rome Protocol scores 5
- What the documentation says happens the day it stops3/10 here; Spire (Based Stack / Pylon) scores 5
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 shared sequencer shows where it lands for you.
What will Radius cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Usage per month
- 10
How safe is Radius?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read August 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Radius
Compare all 4- 3Spire (Based Stack / Pylon)7 points above · stronger on mainnet rollups named (3 against 0)64
- 4Rome Protocol7 points above · stronger on mainnet rollups named (4 against 0)64
- 6AltLayer SQUAD2 points below · weaker on published economics MEV (2 against 3)55
For your setup
Find out if Radius fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Radius 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 shared sequencerNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Radius 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 (7.0 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
350+0.003.57#5/6Loading evidence…
254+3.202.54#1/6Loading evidence…
203+1.923.59#4/6Loading evidence…
203+1.924.08#4/6Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−7behind Rome Protocol, #4
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 56–59 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 Radius’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.
Named mainnet rollups sequencing today 0 → 4 on its ladder · passes Rome Protocol+466#5 → #3
Sequencer set and halt power 4 → 9 on its ladder · passes Rome Protocol+565#5 → #3
Published economics and MEV policy 3 → 9 on its ladder · passes Rome Protocol+665#5 → #3
What the documentation says happens the day it stops 3 → 9 on its ladder · passes Rome Protocol+665#5 → #3
Sequencer set and halt power 4 → 2 on its ladder · AltLayer SQUAD passes it−254#5 → #6
Published economics and MEV policy 3 → 1 on its ladder · AltLayer SQUAD passes it−255#5 → #6
What the documentation says happens the day it stops 3 → 1 on its ladder · AltLayer SQUAD passes it−255#5 → #6
Smallest climb: named mainnet rollups sequencing today 0 → 4 passes Rome Protocol, #4.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Named mainnet rollups sequencing today — 0/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Published economics and MEV policy — 3/10 against a category best of 9/10
- What the documentation says happens the day it stops — 3/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- Radius has repositioned away from this category and a buyer should read its About page before its architecture pages. The 2026 self-description is "the foundational infrastructure necessary to build, deploy, and operate institutional-grade Layer 1 (L1) and Layer 2 (L2) networks", organised around "Compliance, Resilience, and Scale" and aimed at "global enterprises, leading fintechs, and ambitious protocols". The encrypted-mempool sequencing work a buyer would come here for now sits under testnet headings inside a company selling something else.
Competitive position
Where Radius 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 / 614.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#5 / 65.3 of 30 · best 13.7
Friction#1 / 62.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 63.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 68.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Radius leads
- Sequencer set and halt power#1 / 6
Where it trails
- Named mainnet rollups sequencing today#5 / 6
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.
AltLayer SQUAD#6 of 6 · score 55 · 2.0 points behind
Radius leads on
- Published economics and MEV policy3 vs 2
- What the documentation says happens the day it stops3 vs 2
AltLayer SQUAD leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Radius is ahead: published criteria (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: AltLayer SQUAD has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Rome Protocol#4 of 6 · score 64 · 7.0 points ahead
Radius leads on
- Sequencer set and halt power4 vs 2
- What the documentation says happens the day it stops3 vs 2
Rome Protocol leads on
- Named mainnet rollups sequencing today4 vs 0
- Published economics and MEV policy5 vs 3
Largest single reason Rome Protocol is ahead: published criteria (+6.8 display points).Scenario cost: Rome Protocol has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Spire (Based Stack / Pylon)#3 of 6 · score 64 · 7.0 points ahead
Radius leads on
- Sequencer set and halt power4 vs 2
Spire (Based Stack / Pylon) leads on
- Named mainnet rollups sequencing today3 vs 0
- Published economics and MEV policy4 vs 3
- What the documentation says happens the day it stops5 vs 3
Largest single reason Spire (Based Stack / Pylon) is ahead: published criteria (+7.0 display points).Scenario cost: Spire (Based Stack / Pylon) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
79 vs 57 · gap 22.0Why Taiko (Taiko Alethia) ranks above Radius
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 22.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisTaiko (Taiko Alethia)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight5.313.7−21.8, 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 criterionThisTaiko (Taiko Alethia)Points
Named mainnet rollups sequencing today · w3505−5.60, worse
Sequencer set and halt power · w2543+0.80, better
Published economics and MEV policy · w2039−3.84, worse
What the documentation says happens the day it stops · w2037−2.56, worse
Net5779−22.0
Your scenario
Radius is not priced for this scenario
Metered usage beyond whatever the plan includes, for a year. Excludes egress, support tiers and enterprise minimums. 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
Usage per month · your input10
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 6 August 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 6 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
6 of 6 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 6 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.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 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 6 August 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Named mainnet rollups sequencing todaystrength 0 · weight 35Report an error—6 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.Sequencer set and halt powerstrength 4 · weight 25Report an error—6 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.Published economics and MEV policystrength 3 · weight 20Report an error—6 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 the documentation says happens the day it stopsstrength 3 · weight 20Report an error—6 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
- Verification failure (Radius 4/10): an invalid state or transfer is accepted.Scored by Sequencer set and halt power · 25%
- Liveness failure (Radius 3/10): the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by What the documentation says happens the day it stops · 20%
- Execution failure (Radius 3/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Published economics and MEV policy · 20%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control 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: Named mainnet rollups sequencing today (35%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- No price, fee, rate or revenue share appears on any Radius page readable on 28 October 2026, and Radius no longer presents a sequencing product. Its homepage now reads "We operate solvers and arbitrageurs. That experience informs the execution, credit, and liquidity infrastructure we build for more efficient onchain capital flows.", lists a credit layer "being built" and an onchain repo "in research and pilot preparation", and offers only a "Compare notes" contact link (www.theradius.xyz, HTTP 200, fetched 28 October 2026). The documentation host docs.theradius.xyz still redirects to an empty GitBook application shell, so the August contact-form and roadmap strings cannot be re-read.Radius — official page at www.theradius.xyz ↗ · 6 August 2026
- Prices published in
- USDRadius — official page at www.theradius.xyz ↗ · 6 August 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
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Radius: 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.
10 methodology entries
- 6 August 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 57, #5 of 6. 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 shared_sequencers:radius:2026.10.18:ff73f1eafe36
Are you Radius? 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.