P2P.org on slashing record
8.8/ 35% of the score
No slashing event on public record across its active networks; validating since 2018.
Best Staking Providers · Rank 04 of 8
P2P.org review
Wide multi-network coverage with a long operating history
Last verified August 13, 20264 scored axes
Score8.8
Documented, with gaps
The short answer
P2P.org scores 8.8 out of 10 and ranks #4 of 8 in the best staking providers table, strongest on network coverage (9.4) and weakest on fee transparency (8.4).
Among the widest network coverage of any independent operator, with years of production history across proof-of-stake chains that most competitors never touch. Commercial terms vary by network and are not always easy to compare.
Key facts on record
- Founded
- 2018
- Audience
- Institutional and large retail
- Key model
- Non-custodial delegation
What the record shows
4 axes, weighted as published in the table’s methodology. Each score below is read from the fact printed under it.
P2P.org on key management
8.6/ 25% of the score
Non-custodial delegation on supported networks with customer-held withdrawal keys.
P2P.org on fee transparency
8.4/ 20% of the score
Commercial terms vary by network and are not published as a single rate card.
P2P.org on network coverage
9.4/ 20% of the score
One of the widest active-set footprints of any independent operator, verifiable chain by chain.
Quick answers
- What is P2P.org best for?
- Wide multi-network coverage with a long operating history. Among the widest network coverage of any independent operator, with years of production history across proof-of-stake chains that most competitors never touch.
- Where does P2P.org rank among best staking providers?
- #4 of 8, scoring 8.8 out of 10 — documented, with gaps on our band scale.
- What is the weakest part of P2P.org?
- Fee transparency at 8.4. Commercial terms vary by network and are not published as a single rate card.
Strengths and weaknesses
In its favour
- Very broad network coverage operated at scale
- Long production history across multiple chains
- Non-custodial delegation on most supported networks
Against it
- Terms differ by network and are hard to compare
- Support responsiveness varies by segment
Reach as the differentiator
Few independent operators run validators in the active set across as many networks, and it has been doing so since 2018 — long enough to have been through several networks' worst days. No slashing event appears on its public record across those chains, and each claim can be checked on the chain's own validator explorer rather than taken from a page.
Non-custodial, per network
Delegation on supported networks leaves withdrawal keys with the customer. That is the arrangement to insist on and it is the arrangement offered here.
The transparency gap
Commercial terms vary by network and are not published as a single rate card, so comparing P2P.org against an operator with a public rate requires a sales conversation. Support responsiveness also varies by customer segment. Neither is unusual at this end of the market; both are why the score sits below the leaders.
Why breadth is a real advantage
An operator running the active set on dozens of chains has seen more failure modes than one running two, and that experience transfers. It also means a treasury holding a diversified basket can consolidate operations with a single counterparty instead of onboarding five.
Who it is for
Multi-chain holders at institutional size who can negotiate terms and want one operator across the whole basket.
Frequently asked questions
How many networks does P2P.org support?+
Dozens, with validators in the active set rather than merely listed — each verifiable on the relevant chain's validator explorer. It has been operating since 2018.
What does P2P.org charge?+
Terms vary by network and are not published as a single rate card, so the rate has to be obtained directly.
Is P2P.org custodial?+
No. Delegation on supported networks is non-custodial, with withdrawal keys held by the customer.
How P2P.org compares
8 services in best staking providers
- 01Chorus OneOperators who want published research behind the infrastructure9.0
- 02FigmentInstitutions that need audited infrastructure and reporting9.0
- 03KilnPlatforms embedding staking into their own product9.0
- 04P2P.orgyou are hereWide multi-network coverage with a long operating history8.8
- 05BlockdaemonEnterprises that want staking and node infrastructure from one vendor8.7
- 06EverstakeIndividuals delegating on Cosmos-family and Solana networks8.6
- 07AllnodesIndividuals who want a hosted validator without running hardware8.5
- 08StakefishEthereum delegators who want a long-running independent operator8.3