Provider at a glance
- Category
- Sentiment Analytics
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- thetie.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 61 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in August 2026.
The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)
Institutional sentiment terminal and API
Sentiment Analytics
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 8 sentiment analytics in the published ranking
61
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Documented bot filtering6/10; the category best is 7
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Published predictive evidence4/10 here; the category best is 8
- Published price and free-tier substance1/10 here; Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me) scores 10
- Source and asset coverage5/10 here; the category best is 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 sentiment analytics tool shows where it lands for you.
What will The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Transactions per year
- 1k
How safe is The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read August 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)
Compare all 4- 4Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me)1 point below · stronger on published price and what free survives (10 against 1)60
- 5StockGeist Crypto Sentiment API2 points below · stronger on published price and what free survives (8 against 1)59
- 6cookie.fun (Cookie DAO)3 points below · stronger on published price and what free survives (5 against 1)58
For your setup
Find out if The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) 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 sentiment analytics toolNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) 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 (12.6 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+3.843.08#3/8Loading evidence…
251+0.805.010#8/8Loading evidence…
256+4.805.07#2/8Loading evidence…
205+3.203.59#3/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−18behind Santiment (Sanbase / SanAPI), #2
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 59–63 and ranks #3–#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 The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)’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 predictive evidence 4 → 3 on its ladder · Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me) passes it−159#3 → #5
Published price and free-tier substance 1 → 0 on its ladder · Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me) passes it−159#3 → #5
Documented bot filtering 6 → 5 on its ladder · Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me) passes it−159#3 → #5
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Documented bot filtering — 6/10, category best 7/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Published predictive evidence — 4/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Published price and free-tier substance — 1/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Source and asset coverage — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- The Tie sells a sentiment score on tokens while, per its own disclosure page dated May 28, 2026, The Tie Capital LLC "is a broker-dealer registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission" and a "member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority", providing "private capital raises, mergers and acquisitions advisory" to clients in the digital asset industry. The same group runs a Corporate Access programme for protocols seeking institutional exposure, and its own /insights index carries "The Tie Expands into Investment Banking through Launch of SEC-Registered Broker-Dealer, The Tie Capital". The disclosure page describes the banking business at length and says nothing about information barriers between it and the data business.
Competitive position
Where The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) 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 / 89.5 of 30 · best 16.8
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 The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) leads
- Published predictive evidence#3 / 8
- Documented bot filtering#2 / 8
- Source and asset coverage#3 / 8
Where it trails
- Published price and free-tier substance#8 / 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.
Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me)#4 of 8 · score 60 · 1.0 point behind
The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) leads on
- Published predictive evidence4 vs 3
- Documented bot filtering6 vs 1
- Source and asset coverage5 vs 1
Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me) leads on
- Published price and free-tier substance10 vs 1
Largest single reason The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) is ahead: published criteria (+0.8 display points).Scenario cost: Crypto Fear & Greed Index (alternative.me) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
StockGeist Crypto Sentiment API#5 of 8 · score 59 · 2.0 points behind
The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) leads on
- Published predictive evidence4 vs 2
- Documented bot filtering6 vs 2
- Source and asset coverage5 vs 3
StockGeist Crypto Sentiment API leads on
- Published price and free-tier substance8 vs 1
Largest single reason The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) is ahead: published criteria (+1.6 display points).Scenario cost: StockGeist Crypto Sentiment API has no verified pricing for this scenario.
cookie.fun (Cookie DAO)#6 of 8 · score 58 · 3.0 points behind
The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) leads on
- Published predictive evidence4 vs 1
- Documented bot filtering6 vs 5
- Source and asset coverage5 vs 3
cookie.fun (Cookie DAO) leads on
- Published price and free-tier substance5 vs 1
Largest single reason The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) is ahead: published criteria (+3.4 display points).Scenario cost: cookie.fun (Cookie DAO) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 61 · gap 19.0Why LunarCrush ranks above The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)
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 19.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisLunarCrushGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight9.516.8−19.0, 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 criterionThisLunarCrushPoints
Published predictive evidence · w3048−3.84, worse
Published price and free-tier substance · w2515−3.20, worse
Documented bot filtering · w2567−0.80, worse
Source and asset coverage · w2058−1.92, worse
Net6180−19.0
Your scenario
The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) 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 28 October 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 7 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.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #3 to #5 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 7 August 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Published predictive evidencestrength 4 · weight 30Report an error—7 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 price and free-tier substancestrength 1 · weight 25Report an error—7 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.Documented bot filteringstrength 6 · weight 25Report an error—7 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.Source and asset coveragestrength 5 · weight 20Report an error—7 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
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Published predictive evidence · 30% (The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) 4/10)Scored by Documented bot filtering · 25% (The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) 6/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Exit 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 price and free-tier substance (25%), Source and asset coverage (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- No price is published on any The Tie page loaded on 27 September 2026 (home, /solutions/terminal, /solutions/api, /legal/disclosure, /insights, and the docs.thetie.io introduction and sentiment-metrics reference); https://
www .thetie .io /pricing returns HTTP 404. The Terminal page's only commercial calls to action are "Schedule a demo" and "Terminal Login"; the Data APIs page's is "Contact us". The API documentation states "Before you begin, ensure you have your API key. If you don't have an API key, please contact your Account Manager". Every page listed returned HTTP 200 and was scanned for a currency figure; the only dollar figures on the site are company statistics on the homepage and insights index, not prices. No list price is published, so cost cannot be compared before a sales conversation.The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 October 2026 - Prices published in
- USDThe Tie (Terminal and Data APIs) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 October 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 The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs): 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
- 7 August 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 61, #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 sentiment_analytics:the_tie:2026.10.18:68454499df99
Are you The Tie (Terminal and Data APIs)? 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.