The score, by dimension
- the same for all 7
- #3 of 7 · best 19.8
- 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
Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC)
ERC-20 wrapped bitcoin
#3 of all 7 worldwide57
- Rank
- #3 of all 7 worldwidere-runs: scores 55–59 and stays #3
- Your cost
- Not priced on this basis
- Evidence
- High4 of 4 criteria sourced
- Licence
- No MiCA record on file
- Freshness
- Read November 2026checked · re-read due
Check availability for your country
Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) · wbtc.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
Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) is #3 of 7 published wrapped assets; it scores 9/10 on reserve proof, the category best. Its widest gap is redemption access: 2/10, where SolvBTC (Solv Protocol) scores 4. Choose SolvBTC (Solv Protocol) if redemption access matters most.
Is Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) right for you?
Suits you if
- How tightly the reserve is actually proven9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if
- Who can move the bitcoin4/10 here; the category best is 9
- Who is allowed to redeem2/10 here; SolvBTC (Solv Protocol) scores 4
- Published dated cost3/10 here; SolvBTC (Solv Protocol) 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 wrapped asset shows where it lands for you.
What will Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read November 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Entity: not verified. No hand-confirmed record on file ties Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 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- 4SolvBTC (Solv Protocol)If redemption access matters most: 45 points below · stronger on redemption access (4 against 2)52
- 5Coinbase Wrapped BTC (cbBTC)If redemption access matters most: 36 points below · stronger on redemption access (3 against 2)51
- 6Ignition FBTC (Function)9 points below · weaker on reserve proof (6 against 9)48
Provider at a glance
- Category
- Wrapped Assets
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- wbtc.network
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 57 out of 100 under methodology 2026.11.1, from the evidence read in November 2026.
For your setup
Find out if Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 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 wrapped assetNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 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 (14.0 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
324+4.104.09#3/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10282+1.794.08#6/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10229+6.346.09#1/7
Primary
Provider page · read 2026-11-10183+1.733.010#4/7
Third party
Third party · read 2026-11-10Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−13behind Lombard Staked BTC (LBTC), #2 of all 7 worldwide, on the published score
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 55–59 and stays #3
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 Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC)’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.
Who is allowed to redeem 2 → 10 on its ladder · passes Lombard Staked BTC (LBTC)+871#3 → #2
Who can move the bitcoin 4 → 1 on its ladder · SolvBTC (Solv Protocol) passes it−351#3 → #4
How tightly the reserve is actually proven 9 → 5 on its ladder · SolvBTC (Solv Protocol) passes it−451#3 → #4
Smallest climb: who is allowed to redeem 2 → 10 passes Lombard Staked BTC (LBTC), #2.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- How tightly the reserve is actually proven — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Who can move the bitcoin — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Who is allowed to redeem — 2/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Published dated cost — 3/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- You are buying the best reserve proof in the category attached to the worst redemption right in it: you personally cannot burn a single satoshi of WBTC, only a DAO-approved institution can. On custody, know what is and is not established — BiT Global announced on 1 March 2026 that it would hold two of the three keys (Hong Kong and Singapore) with BitGo retaining one in the US, expected to complete on 1 May 2026, and no published confirmation could be found that it did complete, or of what signing threshold now applies.
Competitive position
How Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 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
81 vs 57 · gap 24.0Why tBTC (Threshold Network) ranks above Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC)
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 24.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThistBTC (Threshold Network)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight10.519.8−24.2, 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 criterionThistBTC (Threshold Network)Points
Who can move the bitcoin · w3249−5.12, worse
Who is allowed to redeem · w2828−5.38, worse
How tightly the reserve is actually proven · w2296+2.11, better
Published dated cost · w18310−4.03, worse
Net5781−24.0
Your scenario
Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) is not priced for this scenario
Transfer fee on your volume for a year. Excludes network gas and any withdrawal fee. 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 monthly volume · your input$1k
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 cost and lowest feeNot statedOnly 1 of 7 rows publish a comparable price; a typical cost and a lowest fee need at least 3.
5 of 7 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the typical, not counted as free.
1 of 7 quote a zero fee that leaves costs out, so they are absent from the typical and the lowest fee, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 10 November 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 #3 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.CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Who can move the bitcoinstrength 4 · weight 32Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Who is allowed to redeemstrength 2 · weight 28Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.How tightly the reserve is actually provenstrength 9 · weight 22Report an errorProvider's own page10 November 2026…
Verified
The published strength matches the evidence cell and a source page is on file.Published dated coststrength 3 · weight 18Report an errorThird-party 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
- Custody failure (Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 4/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by Who can move the bitcoin · 32%
- Insolvency failure (Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 9/10): the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by How tightly the reserve is actually proven · 22%
- Exit failure (Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) 2/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Who is allowed to redeem · 28%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Verification failure, Regulatory 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 dated cost (18%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- WBTC publishes no protocol-level fee page; the price is set by whichever merchant you transact with. Pages read for a fee on 10 November 2026 and found without one: https://
wbtc .network / (HTTP 200), https:// wbtc .network /faq (200) and https:// wbtc .network /merchants (200), which says only "Earn fees from BTC minting and burning services while increasing your platform's on-chain transaction volume." The only dated merchant schedule that could be loaded belongs to CoinList and is nearly five years old: "the fees start at 0.25% for minting / redeeming 0-10 BTC/WBTC and decrease from there to 0.10% mint / 0.14% redeem." (CoinList blog, https:// blog .coinlist .co /improving-our-wrapped-bitcoin-wbtc-and-wrapped-filecoin-efil-fee-schedule /, dated on its face "Nov 18, 2021", read 10 November 2026, HTTP 200). Worked example on that stale schedule at the 0-10 BTC tier (our arithmetic, not a page string): 0.0025 BTC to mint 1 BTC and 0.0024938 BTC to redeem, 0.0049938 BTC in all. The figure is a 2021 third-party quote, not a 2026 one; the finding is that the largest wrapper in the category publishes no current price.Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) — official pricing page ↗ · 10 November 2026 - Prices published in
- USDWrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) — official pricing page ↗ · 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
- WBTC's own pages name no country. The home page (wbtc.network, read 10 November 2026) says "Only identity-verified institutions, approved through DAO governance, can mint and burn WBTC." and the FAQ (wbtc.network/faq) says "Direct minting is also available through authorized WBTC merchants." and "Direct redemption is also available through authorized WBTC merchants." Where a holder can mint or redeem therefore depends on the merchant used; the token itself is transferable on its chains.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC): 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
- 10 November 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.11.1Score 57, #3 of 7. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 November 2026
2026.11.1Wrapped assets: the published-cost criterion no longer quotes a dollar price for bitcoin- removed Wrapped assets, published dated cost: the sentence giving the bitcoin price of 6 August 2026 from DefiLlama, and the note on recomputing dollar figures at it, leave the criterion text. The bands (9-10, 5-8, 3-4, 1-2) are unchanged and no score moves.
- 15 October 2026
2026.10.10The live-data rule names the researched market measurements a criterion reads- changed The live-data rule names a second kind of figure a score reads: a researched, dated market measurement a criterion's ladder is built on, read again on the 45-day review. /methodology/live-data lists the 14 criteria that read one; no score, rank or order changes.
- changed A saved decision is checked again on the answers the reader saved. The drift check had merged a priority suggested by the market (price swings, gas) into those answers, so a market reading could move a saved decision's #1; the published ranking never read it.
- added On every build a test reads every criterion's published ladder: one that names a market quantity or a market-data source must be declared, and every scored row of a declared criterion must carry the source and the date its figure was read.
- 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.
Methodology 2026.11.1, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt wrapped_assets:wbtc:2026.11.1:4a6ef67abb48
Are you Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC)? 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.