The score, by dimension
- the same for all 7
- #3 of 7 · best 17.8
- 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
Reactive Network
EVM chain for event-driven automation
#3 of all 7 worldwide68
- Rank
- #3 of all 7 worldwidere-runs: scores 66–69 and ranks #2–#4
- 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 due
Check availability for your country
Reactive Network · dev.reactive.network. 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
Reactive Network is #3 of 7 published automation & keepers; it scores 8/10 on trigger surface and predicate locus, the category best. Its widest gap is survives the vendor: 2/10, where Keep3r Network scores 9. Choose Keep3r Network if survives the vendor matters most.
Is Reactive Network right for you?
Suits you if
- What can fire the call, against what target, and who can check the condition was true8/10, the category best
- Whether a run that never happened is visible, or the job just goes quiet7/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if
- Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published2/10 here; Keep3r Network scores 9
- The lateness the vendor will put in writing, and the conditions under which it declines to execute5/10 here; DeFi Saver Automation scores 9
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 automation network shows where it lands for you.
What will Reactive Network cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Usage per month
- 10
How safe is Reactive Network?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Entity: not verified. No hand-confirmed record on file ties Reactive Network to the company that runs it, so this page cannot say which other products that company operates. Read the legal entity in its terms before you deposit. How we read the evidence
Open the evidenceIf it doesn’t fit, choose
Compare all 4- 2KeeperHubIf survives the vendor matters most: 61 point above · stronger on survives the vendor (6 against 2)69
- 4DeFi Saver AutomationIf published lateness bound matters most: 92 points below · stronger on published lateness bound (9 against 5)66
- 5Keep3r NetworkIf survives the vendor matters most: 93 points below · stronger on survives the vendor (9 against 2)65
Provider at a glance
- Category
- Automation & Keepers
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- dev.reactive.network
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 68 out of 100 under methodology 2026.11.1, from the evidence read in September 2026.
For your setup
Find out if Reactive Network fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Reactive Network 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 automation networkNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Reactive Network 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 (17.3 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 2 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
288+7.176.08#1/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-28302+1.924.09#6/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-28247+5.385.07#1/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-28185+2.886.09#6/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-09-28Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−1behind KeeperHub, #2 of all 7 worldwide, on the published score
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 66–69 and ranks #2–#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 Reactive Network’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.
Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published 2 → 3 on its ladder · passes KeeperHub+169#3 → #2
What can fire the call, against what target, and who can check the condition was true 8 → 10 on its ladder · passes KeeperHub+271#3 → #2
Whether a run that never happened is visible, or the job just goes quiet 7 → 9 on its ladder · passes KeeperHub+271#3 → #2
The lateness the vendor will put in writing, and the conditions under which it declines to execute 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes KeeperHub+270#3 → #2
What can fire the call, against what target, and who can check the condition was true 8 → 7 on its ladder · DeFi Saver Automation passes it−166#3 → #4
Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published 2 → 1 on its ladder · DeFi Saver Automation passes it−166#3 → #4
Whether a run that never happened is visible, or the job just goes quiet 7 → 5 on its ladder · DeFi Saver Automation passes it−265#3 → #5
Smallest climb: whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published 2 → 3 passes KeeperHub, #2.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- What can fire the call, against what target, and who can check the condition was true — 8/10, the category best
- Whether a run that never happened is visible, or the job just goes quiet — 7/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published — 2/10 against a category best of 9/10
- The lateness the vendor will put in writing, and the conditions under which it declines to execute — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- The architecture that removes the vendor from the PREDICATE does not remove it from the DELIVERY. One externally-owned account, 0x777f67156e2bb3ee9cea6866c2656b099b67d132, was observed on 2026-08-14 sending every cron() transaction on Reactive Mainnet AND every callback delivery on Ethereum and Base, and 399 of 400 on Arbitrum — behind an onchain allowlist ("require(callback_senders[msg.sender], 'Callback only')") whose membership sits in an internal mapping the buyer can neither join nor read. The vendor names this single delivering role itself: "Callbacks are delivered by Reactive Signer, which posts transactions to destination chains." "No callers, no keepers" is true of the condition and false of the crank: if that one key stops, your function is never called, and nothing in the published docs gives you a way to call it yourself. Three secondary things to read before committing. First, the callback target is only nominally arbitrary — "Reactive Network replaces the first 160 bits of the callback payload with the address of the reactive contract that initiated the callback" — so the recipient must be purpose-written rather than any pre-existing contract. Second, the one timing number on the marketing site is wrong by 7x: reactive.network advertises "~1s blocks", while the chain measured a steady 7.00 s/block and the vendor's own CRON table says "~7 seconds". Third, a migration is visibly under way and is nowhere announced — an entire /legacy/ docs tree sits beside the current one, the library moved to reactive-lib-omni and the testnet RPC to lasna-omni, the cron mechanism is described as belonging to "The legacy system contract", and across all 16 sitemap URLs plus the current tree there is not one occurrence of "sunset", "end of life" or "migration". Note also that the current docs tree is served as unlisted pages carrying "This page is unlisted. Search engines will not index it, and only users having a direct link can access it." — only the /legacy/ tree, /docs/, /contacts/ and /search appear in dev.reactive.network/sitemap.xml, so a reader arriving from search lands on the older documentation.
Competitive position
How Reactive Network 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
80 vs 68 · gap 12.0Why TukTuk (Helium) ranks above Reactive Network
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.
DimensionThisTukTuk (Helium)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight13.017.8−12.5, 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 criterionThisTukTuk (Helium)Points
Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published · w3028−5.76, worse
The lateness the vendor will put in writing, and the conditions under which it declines to execute · w1856−0.58, worse
Net6880−12.0
Your scenario
Reactive Network 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 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 · USDTypical costNot statedFewer than 5 priced rows: no typical cost is named · 0 of 7 rows priced
Lowest fee, priced rowsNone 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 typical, 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 #2 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 10 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 28 September 2026.
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
What can fire the call, against what target, and who can check the condition was truestrength 8 · weight 28Report an errorProvider's own page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is publishedstrength 2 · weight 30Report an errorProvider's own page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Whether a run that never happened is visible, or the job just goes quietstrength 7 · weight 24Report an errorProvider's own page28 September 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.The lateness the vendor will put in writing, and the conditions under which it declines to executestrength 5 · weight 18Report an errorProvider's own page28 September 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
- Control failure (Reactive Network 8/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by What can fire the call, against what target, and who can check the condition was true · 28%
- Liveness failure (Reactive Network 7/10): the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by Whether a run that never happened is visible, or the job just goes quiet · 24%
- Execution failure (Reactive Network 5/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by The lateness the vendor will put in writing, and the conditions under which it declines to execute · 18%
- Exit failure (Reactive Network 2/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Whether the job survives the vendor: who else can turn the crank, and what end-of-life is published · 30%
Every failure family that applies to this category is scored.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- No pricing page exists. On 28 September 2026 https://
reactive .network /pricing and https:// dev .reactive .network /pricing both returned HTTP 404. The only published price mechanics are on https:// dev .reactive .network /economy, fetched 28 September 2026 and unchanged since August: "Callback costs depend on the destination network and current base fees." and "Reactive Network enforces a minimum callback gas limit of 100,000 gas. Callback requests below this threshold are ignored, as this minimum ensures sufficient gas for internal audits and computations required to process the callback." and "The maximum gas limit for reactive transactions is 900,000 units." Two formulas are published in the page's KaTeX source: "fee = BaseFee ⋅ GasUsed" for reactive transactions and "p_{callback} = p_{base} ⋅ C ⋅ (g_{callback} + K)" for callbacks. C is "destination-network pricing coefficient" and K is "fixed gas surcharge"; neither is given a number on any page. The verified Ethereum CallbackProxy source carries a constructor hint, "uint256 _gas_price_coefficient_promille, // Suggested: 1050", which implies a 1.05x gas-price multiplier. That number is published nowhere on the vendor's own pages.Reactive Network — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDReactive Network — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum, Base, BSC, Arbitrum, Avalanche, Sonic, Linea, Unichain, Abstract, HyperEVM, Plasma, Reactive Network
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Global, with no country restriction published anywhere — verified 14 August 2026 by reading https://
reactive .network /terms in full. The Terms impose only generic lawfulness obligations and name no prohibited-country list, no sanctions schedule and no US-person carve-out: under ELIGIBILITY, "The user confirms that they are at least 18 years old or otherwise of legal age in their jurisdiction, have the legal capacity to enter into these Terms, and are not prohibited by applicable law from using the Website" and "The user is responsible for determining whether their access to or use of the Website, the Reactive Network protocol or any digital asset referred to on the Website is lawful in their jurisdiction"; under ACCEPTABLE USE the user shall not "use the Website in violation of any applicable law or regulation, including applicable sanctions, anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws" or "use the Website from, or on behalf of a person in, a jurisdiction where such use is prohibited". The duty to determine lawfulness is pushed to the user; the vendor blocks nobody by name. There is no KYC, no account and no sign-up: the product is deployed by sending a Solidity contract to a public RPC, so access is permissionless in practice. The operating entity per the same page is "PARSIQ TECHNOLOGIES PTE. LTD., a company incorporated in Singapore with Unique Entity Number (UEN) 202306664E and registered office at 178 Joo Chiat Road, #02-02, Singapore 427449, trading as Reactive Network", with Terms "governed by the laws of Singapore". That entity detail is quoted from the vendor's own page ONLY and is expressly NOT register-verified: a direct ACRA lookup was attempted on 14 August 2026 and failed (data.gov.sg's ACRA datastore resource returned HTTP 404, bizfile.gov.sg serves a 1,583-byte JavaScript shell, and its /api/search endpoint returned HTTP 500), so the UEN and registered address remain unconfirmed against the register itself. No financial licence or authorisation of any kind is claimed, implied or asserted here.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Reactive Network: 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 2026.11.1Score 68, #3 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 automation_keepers:reactive_network:2026.11.1:89ccfa60e9be
Are you Reactive Network? 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.