Magic Eden vs MagicEden Runes
A tie, on what we measured. Both score 10/10. The difference between them is not something our probe can see, so we are not going to invent one.
Last collection 2026-08-25: probed 252 services, measured 233, over a 90-day window.
| Measured | Magic Eden | MagicEden Runes |
|---|---|---|
| Status now | Operational | Operational |
| Score On what we could measure: 100% of the criteria weight for Magic Eden, 42% for MagicEden Runes. | 10/10 | 10/10 |
| Age | 5.6 yr | — |
| Latency (our probe) | 141 ms | 452 ms |
| Median fix | — | — |
| Status feed | statuspage | statuspage |
Magic Eden
10 / 10100% measuredLive 5.6 yr (since founding (2021), public record). Most failures happen young, so time survived is real signal.
Median 141 ms to first byte from the live interface, our own probe, slowest sample discarded, single location. Compared only within this category.
Publishes a machine-readable incident archive (statuspage) — its whole record can be checked by anyone, including against us.
No incidents at all in the 90 days its feed covers — we read the feed and it is empty.
MagicEden Runes
10 / 1042% measuredNo documented launch or listing date to measure age from.
Measured 452 ms, but at a different surface from the rest of this category — not comparable, so shown as context, not scored.
Publishes a machine-readable incident archive (statuspage) — its whole record can be checked by anyone, including against us.
No incidents at all in the 90 days its feed covers — we read the feed and it is empty.
No affiliate links or ads anywhere on this site. How this is funded · Methodology · Full nft marketplaces ranking