Figment vs Allnodes: which wins in 2026?
Head-to-head on the facts that decide the purchase: real prices in the provider's own unit, minimum, KYC, proof, payment and terms - every number sourced in the linked reviews.
Short answer: Allnodes wins overall (7.2/10 vs 6.5/10). Figment is the better pick if you care most about contract terms. Facts checked 2026-09-24.
| Figment | Allnodes | |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score (0-10) | 6.5 | 7.2 |
| Vertical | Staking services | Staking services |
| Type | staking service | staking service |
| Price from | $5 | $5 per month |
| Minimum | unknown | unknown |
| KYC | not documented | optional |
| Proof | partial | partial |
| Payment | unknown | BTC, ETH, USDT, USDC, DASH, FIRO, SYS · fiat |
| Contract term | unknown | unknown |
| Maintenance / fee | unknown | unknown |
| Operator | Figment | Allnodes |
| Facts checked | 2026-09-24 | 2026-09-24 |
// Score breakdown
Figment leads on contract terms (+1) · Allnodes leads on economics (+2.5), transparency (+1.5), ease of use (+1.5).
why 6.5/10?
why 7.2/10?
// Figment at a glance
A credible, large non-custodial institutional staker with strong client names and a named Canadian entity, but it publishes no commission, caps liability at $100 and disclaims slashing losses, so retail buyers cannot price or fully de-risk it without a sales conversation.
++ What works
- Named entity (Figment, Inc.) and published Staking Terms
- Strictly non-custodial: client keeps private keys; Figment never takes custody
- 1,500+ institutional clients across 30+ protocols (operator claim)
- Broad product set: Staking App, APIs, Staking Data, White Label, Liquid Staking, Restaking
- Slashing Coverage product (3 tiers of insurance advertised)
- Institutional integrations (Ledger, Fireblocks, Anchorage, Copper, BitGo, FalconX)
-- What to watch
- No public commission/fee schedule; pricing is custom/enterprise
- Aggregate liability capped at USD $100
- Staking Terms expressly disclaim slashing-penalty liability despite marketing insurance tiers
- Unauthorized service/asset changes and disclaimers are broad
- Arbitration + class-action waiver
- KYC/payment rails not documented
// Allnodes at a glance
A long-running, genuinely non-custodial staking operator with the clearest ETH commission in the category, but the no-refund policy and severe negative-balance reward-confiscation clauses are significant buyer risks.
++ What works
- Named US entity (Allnodes Inc.) and public Terms
- Transparent ETH commission (10% via StakeWise) and 0.01 ETH minimum
- Node hosting from $5/month; example full-node tiers published
- Non-custodial: users keep keys; validators visible on-chain
- Since 2018, 25k+ hosted nodes and a published transparency report
- Multiple payment methods including crypto, card, PayPal, Alipay/WeChat
-- What to watch
- No refunds; prepaid staking time and setup fees non-refundable
- Severe negative-balance penalties (up to 100% of ETH/Gnosis priority/MEV, up to 90% of other rewards)
- Recurring charges continue until nodes are manually removed
- Network-specific commissions vary and are not all published in one place
- Community reports of slow support responses
// FAQ
Which is cheaper, Figment or Allnodes?
Figment publishes a price (from $5); Allnodes does not publish a comparable figure - and unknown is not free. Compare only the same unit before concluding anything.
Which is more verifiable, Figment or Allnodes?
Tie - both publish partial or full proof (partial).
Which needs less KYC, Figment or Allnodes?
At least one provider does not document its KYC policy - treat it as unknown, not as "no KYC".
Which has the longer track record?
Only Figment publishes a founding year (2018); the other has no verifiable history on file.
Scores and facts: meta-reviews with dated sources - Figment · Allnodes. Method: how we verify. More: all providers compared.