Provider at a glance
- Category
- Tokenised Carbon Credits
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- toucan.earth
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 75 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Toucan Protocol
Carbon credit bridge and pools
Tokenised Carbon Credits
#2 Overall
Ranked #2 of 8 tokenised carbon credits in the published ranking
75
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Toucan Protocol right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Retirement finality at the registry8/10; the category best is 9
- Vintage and methodology disclosure8/10, the category best
- Price against comparable credits8/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Registry serial traceability5/10 here; Regen Network scores 8
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 carbon credit token shows where it lands for you.
What will Toucan Protocol cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your balance
- $10k
How safe is Toucan Protocol?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Toucan Protocol
Compare all 4- 1Regen Network6 points above · stronger on registry serial link (8 against 5)81
- 3Carbonmark3 points below · stronger on registry serial link (6 against 5)72
- 4Thallo10 points below · weaker on vintage methodology (5 against 8)65
For your setup
Find out if Toucan Protocol fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Toucan Protocol 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 carbon credit tokenNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Toucan Protocol ranks #2
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (22.5 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
325+5.124.08#3/8Loading evidence…
268+6.665.09#2/8Loading evidence…
228+5.637.08#1/8Loading evidence…
208+5.126.58#1/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−6behind Regen Network, #1
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 73–77 and stays #2
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 Toucan Protocol’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.
Registry serial traceability 5 → 9 on its ladder · passes Regen Network+481#2 → #1
Registry serial traceability 5 → 3 on its ladder · Carbonmark passes it−271#2 → #3
Retirement finality at the registry 8 → 6 on its ladder · Carbonmark passes it−271#2 → #3
Vintage and methodology disclosure 8 → 6 on its ladder · Carbonmark passes it−272#2 → #3
Smallest climb: registry serial traceability 5 → 9 passes Regen Network, #1.
Strengths
3 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Retirement finality at the registry — 8/10, category best 9/10
- Vintage and methodology disclosure — 8/10, the category best
- Price against comparable credits — 8/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
1 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Registry serial traceability — 5/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- The registry-sanctioned part of Toucan is almost empty and reaching a retirement costs a tenth of the position. eth_call totalSupply() at Base block 49,697,317 returns 170.2810 CHAR in the live Puro-backed Biochar pool, against 15,677,735.2131 BCT and 1,418,623.3297 NCT at Polygon block 91,652,635 in the deprecated Verra-era pools that no registry will retire. The fee contract is not merely adjacent to the pool, it is wired into it. eth_call feeCalculator() on the CHAR pool 0x20b048fA035D5763685D695e66aDF62c5D9F5055 returns 0x6a4549759c475d845d4ae074b3656dc257490da5, the same FeeCalculator that Toucan lists on app.toucan.earth/contracts, and that contract returns singleAssetDepositRelativeFee() = 1e17 and singleAssetRedemptionRelativeFee() = 1e17, i.e. 10 percent each way, and dustAssetRedemptionRelativeFee() = 3e17, i.e. 30 percent, read at Base block 49,697,337. getFeeSetup() splits proceeds 75 and 25 to 0x7d3e7bbd4e9e4e1507ff4a4b488934abfbacb801 and 0xca07b1b8a2d6767178f7f7038a3c54ac949d9440. Because only TCO2 tokens can be retired and pool tokens must be redeemed first, a CHAR holder pays that redemption fee to reach a retirement, and the retirement documentation mentions no fee at all. The core team also stepped back on 8 May 2025.
Competitive position
Where Toucan Protocol 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#2 / 816.9 of 30 · best 19.3
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 Toucan Protocol leads
- Registry serial traceability#3 / 8
- Retirement finality at the registry#2 / 8
- Vintage and methodology disclosure#1 / 8
- Price against comparable credits#1 / 8
Where it trailsNo criterion in the bottom third of its pool.
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.
Carbonmark#3 of 8 · score 72 · 3.0 points behind
Toucan Protocol leads on
- Retirement finality at the registry8 vs 6
- Vintage and methodology disclosure8 vs 7
Carbonmark leads on
- Registry serial traceability6 vs 5
Largest single reason Toucan Protocol is ahead: published criteria (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: Carbonmark has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Regen Network#1 of 8 · score 81 · 6.0 points ahead
Toucan Protocol leads on
- Vintage and methodology disclosure8 vs 7
Regen Network leads on
- Registry serial traceability8 vs 5
- Retirement finality at the registry9 vs 8
Largest single reason Regen Network is ahead: published criteria (+6.2 display points).Scenario cost: Regen Network has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Thallo#4 of 8 · score 65 · 10.0 points behind
Toucan Protocol leads on
- Retirement finality at the registry8 vs 7
- Vintage and methodology disclosure8 vs 5
- Price against comparable credits8 vs 5
Thallo leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Toucan Protocol is ahead: published criteria (+9.6 display points).Scenario cost: Thallo has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 75 · gap 6.0Why Regen Network ranks above Toucan Protocol
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 6.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisRegen NetworkGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight16.919.3−6.2, 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 criterionThisRegen NetworkPoints
Registry serial traceability · w3258−3.07, worse
Retirement finality at the registry · w2689−0.83, worse
Vintage and methodology disclosure · w2287+0.70, better
Net7581−6.0
Your scenario
Toucan Protocol is not priced for this scenario
The annual management fee on your balance. Excludes performance fees, spreads and any redemption charge. 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 balance · your input$10k
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 · 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 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.RobustnessHoldsrank #2 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 28 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Registry serial traceabilitystrength 5 · weight 32Report an error—28 September 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.Retirement finality at the registrystrength 8 · weight 26Report an error—28 September 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.Vintage and methodology disclosurestrength 8 · weight 22Report an error—28 September 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.Price against comparable creditsstrength 8 · weight 20Report an error—28 September 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
- Insolvency failure (Toucan Protocol 5/10): the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by Registry serial traceability · 32%
- Execution failure (Toucan Protocol 8/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Retirement finality at the registry · 26%
- Information failure (Toucan Protocol 8/10): the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Vintage and methodology disclosure · 22%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Custody failure, Regulatory failure, 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: Price against comparable credits (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- CoinGecko simple/price (the URL cited), fetched 28 September 2026, returns for CHAR, Toucan's live Puro-registry biochar pool token (one token per tonne), "biochar":{"usd":203.3; for the legacy Verra-era BCT pool "toucan-protocol-base-carbon-tonne":{"usd":0.00270894,"usd_market_cap":57175.31393169687 with "last_updated_at":1790330740, which is 25 September 2026 and three days stale; and for NCT "toucan-protocol-nature-carbon-tonne":{"usd":0.226982. Toucan's own pages quote no per-tonne figure; its docs send buyers to a DEX: "CHAR is available on Uniswap via the Base and Celo networks." (docs.toucan.earth/toucan/carbon-pools/how-to-buy-char.md). Read on chain the same day, worked examples labelled as such: eth_call slot0() on the Uniswap v3 CHAR/USDC pool 0x7af66828a7d1041db8b183f1356797788979eaf8 at Base block 51,898,372 returns sqrtPriceX96 1131458334939334905325822, and (1131458334939334905325822 / 2^96)^2 x 10^12 = 203.95 USDC per CHAR, against pool balances of 13.0723 CHAR and 31,223.853551 USDC; eth_call getReserves() on the SushiSwap USDC/BCT pair 0x1e67124681b402064cd0abe8ed1b5c79d2e02f64 at Polygon block 94,587,186 returns 1,075.601339 USDC and 397,777.463021 BCT, and 1,075.601339 / 397,777.463021 = 0.002704 USDC per BCT (0.000833 on 8 August 2026). Turning CHAR into a retireable TCO2 carries the pool's single-asset redemption fee: eth_call singleAssetRedemptionRelativeFee() on the FeeCalculator 0x6a4549759c475d845d4ae074b3656dc257490da5 returns 100000000000000000 (10 percent) at Base block 51,898,286, so, worked example, 203.3 / 0.9 = 225.89 per retireable tonne.Toucan Protocol — official page at api.coingecko.com ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDToucan Protocol — official page at api.coingecko.com ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Base, Polygon, Celo
- 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 Toucan Protocol: 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 2026.10.18Score 75, #2 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 carbon_credits:toucan_protocol:2026.10.18:621a9fbb1d0f
Are you Toucan Protocol? 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.