- Verified dollar demand4 vs 2
- Reward integrity and liquidity3 vs 2
XNET Mobile
#6 overall across 7 scored depin networks. 37 points behind #1 GEODNET. Scored 43 on the published 41–99 scale under methodology 2026.09.15, from the evidence read in August 2026.
Why XNET Mobile ranks #6
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (5.6 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.
Each line is the ranking run again with one of XNET Mobile’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.
Smallest climb: verified dollar demand 2 → 5 passes DIMO, #5.
Where it leads
- Verified dollar demand — 2/10
- Reward integrity and liquidity — 2/10
Where it trails
- The widely repeated XNET payback claim of roughly 84 days at $2.97/day comes from DePIN aggregator sites, not from XNET, and it cannot be reconciled with a token trading about $2,002 a day and a reward description that gives no rate — do not act on it. If you are considering XNET, the only responsible next step is to require, in writing and before purchase, the contracted per-GB rate and the current node count, neither of which the company publishes, and to confirm that your location will pass the "Carrier Location Approval" that data-transfer rewards wait on.
- Corrected during verification: INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT (reproduced from CoinGecko without reconciliation) — $0.00188696 x 137,461,986 = ~$259,000, not $2.46M. CoinGecko's market cap ($2,459,238) is computed off total_supply 1,300,719,331 and is effectively equal to its FDV ($2,450,364). Either the market cap or the circulating supply is wrong at source. The consequence the research missed: only ~10.6% of XNET supply circulates, a ~9.5x dilution overhang that is never flagged — even though the identical supply-ratio argument is applied to HNT and (incorrectly) to WINGS. Read again 15 September 2026: CoinGecko now reports a circulating supply of 402,125,370 against a max supply of 2,400,000,000 (about 17%), at $0.00109919.
Where XNET Mobile 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.
- Reward integrity and liquidity#5 / 7
- Operator disclosure quality#5 / 7
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.
- Operator disclosure quality4 vs 2
Why GEODNET ranks above XNET Mobile
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 37.0 to within rounding.
Find out if XNET Mobile fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where XNET Mobile 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.
- 3–5 questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
XNET Mobile 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.
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 15 Sept 2026.
7 of 7 rows in the pool have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence read 5 Aug 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.
What the record publishes
- Pricing
- XR670: "$995.00" (struck-through "$1.195.00" as printed), "~500+ Concurrent Users". XT670: "$1,295.00" (struck-through "$1.695.00"), "Up to 9.34 Gbps combined throughput". X7-35X: "$749.00", "Up to 9.2 Gbps aggregate data rate". The official store (shop.xnetmobile.com) lists seven access points, all available: XP6-Pro Access Point 229.00, XPX6 Outdoor Access Point 329.00, Cambium X7-35X 749.00, Cambium XV2-2T0 Long Distance Outdoor AP 749.00, RUCKUS XR670 995.00, RUCKUS XT350 Outdoor 1099.00, RUCKUS XT670 Outdoor 1295.00; it ships only to the US, Canada and the UK. The site and docs publish no revenue, no per-GB carrier payment, no node count and no reward rate; docs.xnetmobile.com names AT&T as a roaming partner ("potential reach to 150+ million subscribers across the U.S.") and claims "serving over 31 million devices to date", both operator-reported.XNET Mobile — official pricing page ↗ · 15 Sept 2026
- Prices published in
- USDXNET Mobile — official pricing page ↗ · 15 Sept 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain
- Markets served
- us, ca, uk
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- XNET's official store (shop.xnetmobile.com, linked from every Shop Now button on xnetmobile.com) ships only to the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. The only named carrier partner is AT&T (U.S.), and data-transfer rewards begin only after 'Carrier Location Approval' by carrier partners; residential deployments are not allowed unless servicing a business or public location.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks and scores are recorded in a ledger, but this page does not chart that record yet, so no score line is drawn: history begins with the current verified snapshot. Below it, the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
- 5 Aug 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.09.15Score 43, #6 of 7. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 16 Sept 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.
- 10 Sept 2026
2026.09.5The published review cadence is now one the work actually keeps · platform-wide- changed reviewCadenceDays 30 → 45 across all 119 category specs, and the two prose sites that quoted "the 30-day review cadence" in tokenised_bonds.
- changed check-review-cadence-is-kept ceiling 7 → 3, negative-tested: restoring a single 30-day promise over 49-day evidence takes it to 4 and fails the build.
- fixed Measured by regenerating rankings.json: no category changed order and no score moved, and the golden suite confirms it independently — across all 119 fixtures and 2,217 cases the only fields that differ are methodologyVersion and contentHash. A cadence is a claim about freshness, not an input to any ranking.
- 6 Sept 2026
2026.09.3The country gate reaches every country the questionnaire offers- changed The gate moved from scoreAvailability to collectProducts and reads assessCountry from the decision layer. It runs for all 60 questionnaire countries: the 27 mapped ones at country resolution, the other 33 at the wizard's region resolution (an EU member the table does not map is credited with an "eu" tag; Ukraine is not).
- changed Measured effect over every category by every questionnaire country (6,959 runs): 807 runs change, in 29 categories and 48 countries; 2,182 rows leave ranked lists and 73 runs change leader — none of them a published, no-answer ranking, which are untouched by construction. Survivors keep their relative order in every run.
- changed 19 further runs — bill_pay in 18 countries, crypto_card in New Zealand — now leave nothing eligible and show the pool for reference. Those rows had been ranked as recommendations with a "not confirmed" label; each is now labelled with its own verdict ("names Hungary as a restricted market", "lists its markets and your region is not among them") and the result says nothing is available rather than "limited availability".
- fixed A restriction sentence is now matched word-bounded ("Niger" no longer matches "Nigeria"; "US" matches "US persons", not "industrial"). Previously a substring test.
How this verdict was produced
- Methodology version
- 2026.09.15 · last platform-wide change 16 Sept 2026
- Data snapshot
- Evidence read 5 Aug 2026
- Last recalculated
- At page build from the published inputs — the same run every visitor sees.
- Published run
- runWizardEngine(depin_networks, defaults) · no visitor answers
- Receipt id
- depin_networks:xnet_depin:2026.09.15:1a6bcd11d7a4
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Rankings, scores and Fit read no affiliate, payout, conversion or sponsorship data. This page's commercial note appears once, beside the outbound action, and is written by no component that scores.