Provider at a glance
- Category
- Account Abstraction Infra
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- zerodev.app
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 69 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
ZeroDev
Smart account platform
Account Abstraction Infra
#5 Overall
Ranked #5 of 8 account abstraction infra in the published ranking
69
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is ZeroDev right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Verified mainnet chain coverage6/10; the category best is 7
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Published price per user operation7/10 here; Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster) scores 8
- Exit path without the vendor5/10 here; Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster) scores 8
- Markup on sponsored gas6/10 here; Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster) scores 10
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 bundler and paymaster service shows where it lands for you.
What will ZeroDev cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Usage per month
- 10
How safe is ZeroDev?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to ZeroDev
Compare all 4- 3Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster)11 points above · stronger on exit without vendor (8 against 5)80
- 4Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs)7 points above · stronger on exit without vendor (7 against 5)76
- 6thirdweb Account Abstraction1 point below · stronger on sponsored gas markup (8 against 6)68
For your setup
Find out if ZeroDev fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where ZeroDev 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 bundler and paymaster serviceNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why ZeroDev ranks #5
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (19.2 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
307+6.727.510#5/8Loading evidence…
206+3.846.010#4/8Loading evidence…
305+4.806.09#5/8Loading evidence…
206+3.845.57#3/8Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−7behind Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs), #4
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 67–71 and ranks #5–#6
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 ZeroDev’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.
Exit path without the vendor 5 → 9 on its ladder · passes Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs)+477#5 → #4
Published price per user operation 7 → 6 on its ladder · thirdweb Account Abstraction passes it−167#5 → #6
Markup on sponsored gas 6 → 5 on its ladder · thirdweb Account Abstraction passes it−168#5 → #6
Exit path without the vendor 5 → 4 on its ladder · thirdweb Account Abstraction passes it−167#5 → #6
Smallest climb: exit path without the vendor 5 → 9 passes Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs), #4.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Verified mainnet chain coverage — 6/10, category best 7/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Published price per user operation — 7/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Exit path without the vendor — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Markup on sponsored gas — 6/10 against a category best of 10/10
Record watch-outs
- ZeroDev is no longer an independent vendor and the buyer should price that in: "Today we are excited to share that ZeroDev has been acquired by Offchain Labs", dated "August 13, 2025" (docs.zerodev.app/blog/zerodev-acquired). A neutral, chain-agnostic infrastructure layer is now owned by the company that builds one of the chains it serves. Separately, ZeroDev does not appear at all in BundleBear's bundler table, which names sixteen operators including alchemy, pimlico, coinbase, biconomy, candide and etherspot (bundlebear.com/erc4337-bundlers/all) — consistent with UltraRelay's relayed operations not being attributed to a labelled bundler, but it means ZeroDev's throughput could not be independently verified in this session.
Competitive position
Where ZeroDev 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#5 / 814.4 of 30 · best 19.0
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 ZeroDev leads
- Verified mainnet chain coverage#3 / 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.
thirdweb Account Abstraction#6 of 8 · score 68 · 1.0 point behind
ZeroDev leads on
- Exit path without the vendor5 vs 3
thirdweb Account Abstraction leads on
- Markup on sponsored gas8 vs 6
Largest single reason ZeroDev is ahead: published criteria (+1.3 display points).Scenario cost: thirdweb Account Abstraction has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs)#4 of 8 · score 76 · 7.0 points ahead
ZeroDev leads onNo scored criterion
Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs) leads on
- Published price per user operation8 vs 7
- Exit path without the vendor7 vs 5
- Verified mainnet chain coverage7 vs 6
Largest single reason Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs) is ahead: published criteria (+6.8 display points).Scenario cost: Alchemy Smart Wallets (Gas Manager and Bundler APIs) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster)#3 of 8 · score 80 · 11.0 points ahead
ZeroDev leads on
- Verified mainnet chain coverage6 vs 5
Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster) leads on
- Published price per user operation8 vs 7
- Markup on sponsored gas10 vs 6
- Exit path without the vendor8 vs 5
Largest single reason Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster) is ahead: published criteria (+11.2 display points).Scenario cost: Etherspot (Skandha Bundler and Arka Paymaster) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 69 · gap 12.0Why Candide ranks above ZeroDev
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.
DimensionThisCandideGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight14.419.0−12.0, 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 criterionThisCandidePoints
Published price per user operation · w3078−0.96, worse
Markup on sponsored gas · w2069−1.92, worse
Exit path without the vendor · w3059−3.84, worse
Verified mainnet chain coverage · w2065+0.64, better
Net6981−12.0
Your scenario
ZeroDev 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 27 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 27 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 #5 to #6 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 27 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Published price per user operationstrength 7 · weight 30Report an error—27 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.Markup on sponsored gasstrength 6 · weight 20Report an error—27 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.Exit path without the vendorstrength 5 · weight 30Report an error—27 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.Verified mainnet chain coveragestrength 6 · weight 20Report an error—27 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
- Exit failure (ZeroDev 5/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Exit path without the vendor · 30%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Liveness 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 per user operation (30%), Markup on sponsored gas (20%), Verified mainnet chain coverage (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- "$69/mo" Launch with "100,000 Credits Included and mainnet gas sponsorship", and "$399/mo" Scale with "1,000,000 Credits Included with volume pricing"; Sandbox is "$0/mo" with "Testnet only 10,000 Credits Included". The unit is defined as "Credit pricing Wallet signature: 10 credits • UserOp (bundler): 20 credits", and the sponsorship premium row reads "Gas Sponsorship Premium 8% 8% 8% Custom" (zerodev.app/pricing, fetched 27 September 2026, HTTP 200; every figure unchanged from 7 August 2026). WORKED EXAMPLE (ChainChoice arithmetic, 27 September 2026, Base): at 20 credits per UserOp the Scale tier's 1,000,000 credits buy 50,000 bundler operations, so 50,000 operations cost 399.00 US dollars, or 0.00798 each, plus 8 percent of the gas if sponsored; a flow that also signs through ZeroDev consumes 30 credits per operation, and the same 399.00 buys 33,333 operations. Beyond the Scale allowance the page offers only "Custom credits, pricing, and transaction fees" on Enterprise.ZeroDev — official pricing page ↗ · 27 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDZeroDev — official pricing page ↗ · 27 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum One, Arbitrum Nova, Optimism, Polygon, Avalanche, BNB Chain, opBNB, Berachain, Blast, Celo, Gnosis, HyperEVM, Ink, Linea, Mantle, Mode, Monad, Scroll, Sonic, Unichain, Aurora, Aleph Zero EVM, Astar zkEVM, BOB, Cyber, Degen, Ethernity, Re.al, Shape, Plume
- 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 ZeroDev: 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.
8 methodology entries
- 27 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 69, #5 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 account_abstraction_infra:zerodev:2026.10.18:6b8236f323c9
Are you ZeroDev? 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.