Insights
Real leaderboard
Ranked by raw volume, then ranked again net of measured wash — with the movement between them shown
Every x402 leaderboard on the internet ranks by the same quantity: total settled volume. It is the honest thing to publish if you only index settlement, because a payment that clears on-chain looks identical whether two independent parties made it or one wallet moved money to itself in a loop. Rank by that number and the top of the board belongs to whoever generated the most transactions — which is not the same question as who sold the most.
So we publish both rankings. The left-hand rank on every row below is the raw one, on the same all-time verified basis the rest of the market quotes. The right-hand rank is what is left after payments we can convict as non-independent are subtracted, edge by edge, under a named rule. Where a name barely moves, the raw board was telling the truth about it. Where a name falls dozens of places, it was not.
The subtraction is deliberately conservative. Only edge-level verdicts are removed — an address paying itself, a pair cycling funds, a funder fanning out to payees that sell to nobody else. Week-level concentration, which would flag most of the market, is measured but published separately as a bound, never subtracted here.
Ranked twice — by the headline, and by what survives screening
The left rank is the one every settlement explorer publishes: all-time verified volume, wash included. The right rank is the same population re-sorted after measurably synthetic payments are subtracted, edge by edge. Nothing is hidden — both numbers stay on the row.
We are not arguing about the size of the market. x402scan publishes $52.49M cumulative all-time, observed 2026-07-27. Our raw basis for these 60 sellers is $51.69M — a 1.5% difference. The disagreement is about what counts: 44.9% of that headline is payments where the two sides are not independent parties.
| Their rank → honest | Service | Raw | Net of wash | Removed · rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1→#36↓35 | ArvosListed4 arvos.xyz | $11.51M | $91.1K | 99.2% self trade |
| #2→#143↓141 | QRBase -$SCANEstablished42 qrbase.xyz | $7.00M | $1.9K | 100.0% self trade |
| #3→#1↑2 | Unidentified sellerUnrated | $5.08M | $5.08M | 0.0% |
| #4→#2↑2 | VirtualsCorroborated85 virtuals.io | $4.89M | $4.89M | 0.0% |
| #5→#3↑2 | AinX402 - Creating the world's knowledge hubEstablished44 ainalyst-api.xyz | $2.74M | $2.74M | 0.0% self trade |
| #6→#76↓70 | BarvisListed17 barvis.io | $2.60M | $14.6K | 99.4% self trade |
| #7→#40↓33 | CanzaUnrated canza.app | $2.06M | $73.2K | 96.4% self trade |
| #8→#4↑4 | CoinbaseUnrated coinbase.com | $1.95M | $1.95M | 0.3% self trade |
| #9→#5↑4 | Quick Intel x402 Gateway | Crypto APIs for AgentsListed36 quickintel.io | $1.80M | $1.80M | 0.0% self trade |
| #10→#6↑4 | MeridianEstablished45 mrdn.finance | $1.77M | $1.77M | 0.0% |
| #11→#7↑4 | PayaiCorroborated74 payai.network | $1.74M | $1.74M | 0.0% |
| #12→#8↑4 | Unidentified sellerUnrated | $1.53M | $1.53M | 0.0% |
| #13→#9↑4 | AiapeListed26 aiape.tech | $664.1K | $664.1K | 0.0% |
| #14→#10↑4 | x402 Leaderboard AwarenessListed4 okebro.fun | $497.0K | $497.0K | 0.0% |
| #15→#13↑2 | ATXPCorroborated66 atxp.ai | $458.4K | $379.0K | 17.3% self trade |
| #16→#11↑5 | LnpayCorroborated75 lnpay.ai | $433.7K | $433.7K | 0.0% self trade |
| #17→#12↑5 | The First CTO on x402 Listed6 badai.fun | $421.9K | $421.8K | 0.0% self trade |
| #18→#14↑4 | ACorroborated63 a.run.app | $347.9K | $347.9K | 0.0% |
| #19→#15↑4 | Unidentified sellerUnrated | $256.7K | $256.7K | 0.0% |
| #20→#16↑4 | Unidentified sellerUnrated | $252.3K | $252.3K | 0.0% |
| #21→#17↑4 | Buffett Signal AgentListed61 daydreams.systems | $223.9K | $223.9K | 0.0% self trade |
| #22→#18↑4 | Unidentified sellerUnrated | $210.5K | $210.5K | 0.0% |
| #23→#19↑4 | X402Listed23 x402.vip | $208.6K | $208.6K | 0.0% |
| #24→#20↑4 | $FIGHT PassEmerging39 holoworld.com | $149.9K | $149.9K | 0.0% |
| #25→#21↑4 | $PONG - x402 Utility Token Facilitator🏓Listed11 pong.wtf | $149.4K | $149.4K | 0.0% self trade |
Showing 25 of 60 sellers in the ranked slice (the top of the board by raw volume).
Biggest haircuts, in dollars
Ranked by volume removed, not by positions lost — a big name sliding a little matters more than a small one sliding a lot.
- Arvos−$11.42M · 99.2%
- QRBase -$SCAN−$6.99M · 100.0%
- Barvis−$2.58M · 99.4%
- Canza−$1.98M · 96.4%
- CodeNut - AI Web3 Builder - Ship Code, Go Nuts−$96.7K · 93.7%
Quietly under-ranked
Entities that gain the most positions once the washers above them are discounted. No explorer shows this half.
- Lnpay↑5 → #11
- The First CTO on x402 ↑5 → #12
- x402↑5 → #29
- X402Mai↑5 → #30
- PONG - First X402 Cross-chain meme↑5 → #31
Measured: a seller's haircut is the wash convicted on its own settlement edges — self-payment, two addresses cycling funds, or a funder fanning out to a fleet of exclusive payees. Direct evidence, not an inference.
Not a fraud accusation. Self-trade has legitimate uses — testing, liquidity bootstrapping, internal accounting. The claim is narrow: this volume is not two independent parties transacting, so it should not be counted as market demand.
honest_leaderboard_v0.1.0 · wash run wash_recompute_20260730 · concentration bounds are deliberately NOT subtracted — see Integrity.
How to read this
- A large fall is not an accusation.
- It says a large share of the volume published under that name is not two independent parties transacting. Testing, liquidity bootstrapping and internal accounting all produce exactly that shape and all are legitimate. The narrow claim is that it should not be counted as market demand.
- Seller haircuts are measured; facilitator haircuts are attributed.
- A seller's own edges carry the verdict directly. A facilitator only relays, so its figure is each flagged seller-day apportioned pro-rata to the signers that processed it — an estimate, and a lower bound, since flagged volume no known facilitator processed is attributed to nobody. Each row states which basis it is on.
- “Not screened” is not “clean”.
- A row with no wash run behind it shows no bar and no adjusted rank. A row that was screened and came back with nothing shows a measured 0%. Those are different findings and never share a pixel here.
- Some payees have no name.
- A payee with verified settlement that our catalog has not matched to a service shows as Unidentified seller. It keeps its rank — the volume is real and excluding it would flatter the board — but its internal key is never printed.
Check the workings
- →Integrity — the same subtraction at ecosystem scale, per chain and month, plus the concentration bound that is measured but deliberately not removed.
- →All services — the full directory on the raw basis, with per-service detail, trust tiers and payment rails.
- →Facilitators — the relayer side on its raw basis, with signer registries and evidence status. The raw totals here are that page's, rolled org-wide.
- →Coverage — per rail, what was indexed and how it was verified, so the raw basis itself can be audited before anything is subtracted from it.