ABYSS Index vs Santiment: read the cycle, free and transparent
Santiment is powerful in social metrics, dev activity and on-chain behavior, with a huge catalog and a freemium model (the good stuff is paid). If what you want is to READ THE CYCLE —MVRV, NUPL and a 0–1 risk— ABYSS computes it with its own node, shows it free and lets you redistribute the data because it's ours.
Side-by-side comparison
| ABYSS Index | Santiment | |
|---|---|---|
| Price for the cycle | ✓ Core free, forever | Freemium (key metrics paid) |
| 0–1 risk index | ✓ Yes (ABYSS Risk) | Not its format |
| Social / dev-activity metrics | Not our focus | Yes, very strong |
| Cycle on-chain (MVRV/NUPL) | ✓ Yes, free, own node | Yes (plan-dependent) |
| Formula transparency | ✓ Open, versioned formula | Proprietary metrics |
| Data redistribution | ✓ Own data, free to cite and redistribute | Restrictive license |
| Composite cycle index | ✓ Yes (Score/Risk) | Individual metrics |
BTC cycle risk (0–1) at the real market turns, taken from OUR own historical series.
Near tops risk was high; near bottoms, low. In-sample scale (uses the full history); read it alongside other indicators, not as a crystal ball.
In fairness
Where Santiment is better: its social sentiment, dev activity and giant metric catalog are a genuine strength ABYSS doesn't cover. If your analysis lives on social and holder-behavior signals, Santiment is a great tool. ABYSS covers the CYCLE read, free and citable.
Frequently asked questions
Does ABYSS replace Santiment?
For reading the cycle (MVRV, NUPL, 0–1 risk), yes, and for free. For social sentiment, dev activity and its huge metric catalog, Santiment does things ABYSS doesn't. They're complementary focuses.
Is this financial advice?
No. ABYSS Index provides information and historical context for educational purposes; it is not financial advice. This comparison is factual and for informational purposes.
See the risk of all 22 assets (free) →How the ABYSS Risk is computed →See all comparisons →