The same figures the register prints for every provider, for this one. Accuracy and vote power are the current epoch; rewards and APR are the last completed epoch. Back to the full field →
Grade
Rubric 2026-08-19.1
F
28.3/ 100 composite
Five axes at fixed published weights. Every figure underneath is measured by somebody else — the weighting is the only thing this site adds, and the rules are published so you can disagree with it precisely. Letters are cut at A ≥ 85, B ≥ 70, C ≥ 55, D ≥ 40.
Accuracy
35% of the grade
37.4/ 100
Band hit rates, ranked against the field and weighted the way the reward mechanism weights them — the primary (IQR) band carries 40% of FTSO reward value, the secondary (PCT) band 60%.
Rounds answered, plus the health of the validator nodes behind them. A node the registry cannot reach reports no uptime at all, so unreachable nodes are counted separately.
What a delegator actually receives after this provider’s fee, how steady it has been, and whether vote power sits above the 2.5% cap where it earns nothing extra.
How closely this provider’s submissions track Flare’s stock example implementation, as measured by Cerberus. A compliance signal, not an accuracy one — which is why it carries the smallest weight.
This is the first epoch we have graded this provider in. The record builds as each reward epoch closes — a grade’s direction says more than its letter, and there is no direction to show yet.
Where this provider stands
Current reward epoch
651.00
vote power (FLR)
entirely under the 2.5% network cap
20%
delegation fee
kept by the provider from delegator rewards
0.00%
delegation APR, net of fee
annualised from reward epoch #448
27.97%
primary band hit rate
anchor-feed submissions inside the reward band
95.71%
secondary band hit rate
the wider band, scored on the same rounds
100.00%
availability
rounds answered out of rounds asked
Delegation reward rate — rank in the fieldlast completed epoch, net of the provider's own fee
#100of 128 providers with a published rate
#1 · 2.89% APR99 ahead of this provider · 28 behind it#128
Ranked on the rate a delegator actually receives — gross rate less that provider's own fee — across every provider that published one for the last completed epoch. The field median is 2.24% APR. See the whole field →
Trends
One point per snapshotted reward epoch
Primary band hit rate0–100% of anchor-feed rounds
low
24.60%
latest
28.01%
high
31.38%
FigureLive data — 6 snapshotted reward epochs, #443 to #449
Delegation APR, net of feeannualised from each epoch’s net rate
low
0.00%
latest
0.00%
high
0.00%
FigureLive data — 5 snapshotted reward epochs, #443 to #449. Unchanged across every snapshot in this window.
Vote powerFLR delegated plus mirrored stake
low
0.00
latest
651.00
high
127.85K
FigureLive data — 7 snapshotted reward epochs, #443 to #449
Rewards, last completed epoch (#448)
As reported by the Flare Systems Explorer
0.00FLR
Delegation (WNat)
0.00FLR
Staking (mirror)
0.00FLR
Fees kept
0.00FLR
Self-bond
Four separate streams: delegation rewards paid on WNat, the mirrored staking reward, the fee this provider kept, and its own self-bond. They are not additive into a single "total earned" — each is claimed on its own terms.
Eligibility (FIP.10 minimal conditions)
0 of 7 snapshotted epochs met all four · 7 strikes
Swipe the table sideways for all 7 columns →
Epoch
Scaling
FastUpd
Staking
FDC
Passes
Strikes
#449
✓
✓
✗
✓
0
1
#448
✓
✓
✗
✓
0
1
#447
✓
✓
✗
✓
0
1
#446
✓
✓
✗
✗
0
2
#445
✓
✓
✗
✗
0
2
#444
—
—
—
—
—
—
#443
—
—
—
—
—
—
A strike is an epoch whose minimal conditions were not met; four strikes cost the epoch's rewards.
Validator nodes
4 nodes on the P-chain
Swipe the table sideways for all 6 columns →
Node
Uptime
Reachable
Self-bond
Delegated
Delegators
NodeID-PvoESzorptfvdheBzTN273YuMatKuJgVn
28.34%
✓
12.97M
0.00
0
NodeID-DwsTFgCHxtg1FB7Uo7b9CVyVY9g2JRvTj
—
✗
0.00
0.00
0
NodeID-Dgxq3z2yWZK9KmSr3DtwU7iTCcp3TaQXc
—
✗
0.00
0.00
0
NodeID-EFrkDEDR5e1BKWZBxsf3ucrhX9SFs16Cd
—
✗
0.00
0.00
0
3 of 4 nodes unreachable. An unreachable node reports no uptime at all rather than 0%, so the uptime column alone understates this: the lowest reading among the nodes that did report is 28.34%. Verify at Flare Registry ↗
Independence
Measured by a third party, published unadjusted
0.9810example-implementation likelihoodlikely
Cerberus’s own verdict: example provider match Their census covered 98 providers and flagged 18 as likely running the stock example.
What this measures: agreement with Flare’s stock example implementation, which itself tracks the consensus price. A provider that is accurate for entirely independent reasons will agree with it often. This is a compliance signal about how a provider is built — never a reading on whether its prices are good.
Agreement measured
Rate
Meaning
Exact same value
63.68%
rounds submitted at a value identical to the example’s
Within 5 basis points
84.36%
rounds within 0.05% of it
Same movement direction
90.66%
rounds that moved the same way it did
Same volatility response
96.48%
volatility events it reacted to the same way
Evidence coverage
99.81% of their target observation set (402,000 observations)
Channels ready
remote example ✓network test ✓regime ✓anchors ✓
Verify at Cerberus On-Chain ↗Cerberus per-provider pages require an account. This is their open census endpoint — the same record this figure was read from, for every provider at once.
classification: likely at 0.9810Verify at Cerberus On-Chain ↗Cerberus per-provider pages require an account. This is their open census endpoint — the same record this figure was read from, for every provider at once.
This provider signed a listing declaring an in-house implementation. The independent measurement places it among providers whose submissions track the stock example. Both are third-party records, each linked above; we assert neither and have not adjusted either.
This site measures nothing itself. It reads four independent sources, joins them on the provider’s on-chain identity address, and applies a published weighting. Where a source disagrees with another, both are shown rather than resolved.
Band hit rates, availability, reward rates and the FIP.10 minimal-conditions record.Read 2026-11-11 03:27 UTC.Verify at Flare Systems Explorer ↗The explorer has no per-provider page; this is the API query the figures were read from.
The independent measurement of how closely a provider tracks the stock example implementation.Read 2026-11-11 03:25 UTC.Verify at Cerberus On-Chain ↗Cerberus per-provider pages require an account. This is their open census endpoint — the same record this figure was read from, for every provider at once.
The variation in a provider’s reward rate, computed over FlareMetrics’ own history — available immediately, where a figure derived from this site’s snapshots needs many epochs before it means anything.Read 2026-11-11 03:25 UTC.Verify at FlareMetrics ↗
A figure that looks wrong is worth raising with the source that published it — they own the measurement and we do not. If the fault is in how we joined or weighted it, tell us and we will correct it.