FAQ
The questions readers actually ask — about the numbers, the sections, the badges, and what money does and does not buy here.
Why is my chain not listed?
We list chains that provide a stable, machine-readable daily transaction count via an API endpoint. If your chain is not listed, you can submit it via Add Your Chain. Newly submitted chains typically appear within a few business days.
Why is a chain's data marked "Stale"?
Stale means Blocktivity's automated collector could not fetch a fresh transaction count from that chain's endpoint within the expected window. The last known value is still shown, but the staleness badge tells you it may be outdated.
Why do some chains appear in an "Emerging & Unverified" section instead of the main table?
Chains in that section have not yet cleared the credibility gate (minimum market cap, minimum 24-hour volume, and the anomaly check — including chains where that check cannot be run yet for want of history). They are listed with full transparency but the gate prevents chains with fabricated or unverifiable activity from dominating the main ranking. A chain does not graduate by waiting: the gate is recomputed on every build, and a chain crosses it the moment its own numbers do.
Does a higher X'tivity or Potential score mean a chain is "better"?
Not necessarily. X'tivity measures transaction activity relative to Bitcoin (BTC = 1). Potential measures transaction volume relative to market cap, normalised to BTC = 1. Both are secondary lenses — the primary metric is raw Tx. A high Potential simply means the chain is doing a lot of transactions relative to its market cap.
The number shown for a chain looks wrong — too low or too high. What now?
Check the transaction definition first: chains count different things, and most disagreements are a definition mismatch rather than an error. We publish, per chain, whether failed, system and internal transactions are included, whether batched transactions count once or per inner transaction, which layer is counted for rollups, and whether the window is a UTC day or a rolling 24 hours. If it still looks wrong, the fastest fix is free — the foundation, official explorer or core team can claim (or re-claim) the chain and supply their own endpoint and definition, which also upgrades the chain to the Official API status label.
What stops a chain from spamming transactions to climb the ranking?
We count transactions and do not judge whether one was "economically meaningful" — that would be our opinion dressed up as data. Instead, several mechanisms make an inflated number hard to cash in. Ranking uses the 7-day average rather than a single day. A chain whose 24h count jumps past 10× its own 7-day median is flagged as an anomaly and pushed out of the main ranking until the level persists — and a chain jumping from a zero 7-day median, where that comparison has no answer at all, is judged against a fixed figure instead and clears itself once the new level survives a few days. A chain with no completed day of history to compare against is held out on exactly those grounds: a check that could not be run is never read as a check that passed. And the credibility gate requires a market-cap floor and a 24-hour volume floor, so enormous claimed activity next to almost no market value — the classic fake-chain tell — does not reach the main table. We do not publish the floors themselves: telling a fabricated chain precisely what it has to clear is worse than not disclosing, and the reason for withholding them is the honest part. Chains that fail are shown openly in Emerging & Unverified with the failed checks listed on their coin page, never deleted. If you can point at a specific chain and window with evidence, send it in; a chain can be marked Disputed while we re-check its source.
Does Blocktivity verify the numbers?
We fetch exactly what the chain's API endpoint returns. We do not independently index any chain, and we do not re-derive a single number from raw blocks. The data-status label tells you where the number came from, which is the only thing we can honestly certify: Official API means the chain's own foundation, official explorer or core team supplies it; Auditable API means the provider exposes the block and date-range endpoints that make an independent check possible, so the figure can be re-requested and compared rather than only taken on trust; Self-Reported means we take the number on trust; Public Source means we picked a public explorer ourselves because nobody has supplied one. The label is the claim — we do not claim more than the source does.
Is ranked position for sale?
No. Sponsors get a highlighted visual treatment — a label and visual cue — but their rank in the table is determined by their actual transaction data, not their sponsorship. The same holds for a beacon, which lights one chain's row for a week: the row stands out, and it stands out exactly where the chain's own numbers put it. We never sell rank position.
Why do some chains have full history and others don't?
It depends on whether the chain's data provider serves a date-range endpoint. We ask every provider for one, and the Full history badge appears as soon as one exists — no blame, no pressure, just an honest reflection of what we can verify.
Still looking? Methodology has the formulas, the data statuses and the staleness rules in full, Listing spec is the technical submission spec, and Contact reaches a person.