NakedPnL vs Nansen - Off-Chain Performance vs On-Chain Analytics
How a registry of verified off-chain trader performance compares with Nansen's on-chain wallet labelling and smart-money analytics. Different data sources, different products.
- Nansen labels and analyses on-chain wallets across Ethereum, L2s, Solana, and other chains, surfacing 'smart money' clusters and PnL.
- NakedPnL ingests off-chain venue data via read-only API keys (Binance, Bybit, OKX, IBKR) and reconciles Polymarket on-chain via the subgraph, then publishes a SHA-256 chained TWR registry.
- These products solve adjacent but different problems: wallet behaviour discovery vs verified-track-record publication.
Verdict in one paragraph
Nansen is an on-chain intelligence product. Its core asset is a labelled wallet database covering hundreds of millions of addresses, with smart-money clusters, PnL estimates, and dashboards across many chains. NakedPnL is a publisher of verified individual trader performance. It pulls daily NAV snapshots through read-only API keys at centralised venues, computes TWR with Decimal.js precision, and chains every snapshot with SHA-256. They overlap on Polymarket - NakedPnL reconciles Polymarket positions against the Graph Protocol subgraph - but Nansen's centre of gravity is on-chain wallet behaviour and NakedPnL's is venue-level verified track records.
What they do differently
Nansen's value is in attribution. A wallet that has accumulated stablecoins might be a fund, a market maker, an exchange hot wallet, or a retail user; Nansen labels these and lets researchers filter for behaviour. The data source is the chain itself, so coverage is limited to what is recorded on-chain. Centralised exchange behaviour, IBKR equity trades, or Kalshi prediction-market positions are not visible to a chain-only product.
NakedPnL takes the opposite path. The trader explicitly opts in by connecting an account, NakedPnL reads daily, and the resulting TWR series is published in an append-only chain. The trade-off: NakedPnL only shows traders who chose to be listed; Nansen surfaces wallets whether or not the owner consents. For due diligence on a known trader, NakedPnL is appropriate. For discovery across the on-chain world, Nansen is appropriate.
Feature comparison
| Criterion | NakedPnL | Nansen |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Verified-performance publisher | On-chain wallet labelling and analytics |
| Primary data source | Read-only API keys at centralised venues + Polymarket subgraph | On-chain transaction data plus labelling |
| Verification mechanism | Daily TWR with SHA-256 chain and OpenTimestamps anchor | Chain data is by definition public; vendor adds labels and analytics |
| Independent re-verification | Yes - browser-side re-hash from raw responses | Chain data is public; Nansen labels are vendor attribution |
| Trader consent required | Yes - GDPR-consent gated public listing | No - any wallet on chain is observable |
| CEX coverage | Binance, Bybit, OKX (read-only API) | Limited - off-chain |
| Equities and FX coverage | Yes via IBKR Flex Web Service | No |
| Prediction market coverage | Kalshi (RSA-PSS auth) and Polymarket (wallet sig + subgraph) | On-chain prediction markets visible via wallet activity; not the focus |
| Performance metric | Time-weighted return | PnL estimates from on-chain swaps and balance deltas |
| Real-time vs daily | Daily snapshots; periodically updated | Near-real-time on-chain dashboards |
| Cost | Free registry; paid trader tiers | Subscription tiers; enterprise plans |
| Open methodology | Yes - public reference implementation for hashing/verification | Vendor-curated labels; methodology not fully public |
| Regulatory category | Publisher of verified data | Data analytics provider |
| Bitcoin anchoring | Yes - OpenTimestamps daily Merkle root | Not applicable |
Use cases
- Researcher tracking unknown smart-money wallet flows on Ethereum or Solana: Nansen is the right tool.
- Allocator who has identified a specific trader and wants a chained, re-verifiable TWR across CEX, IBKR, and Polymarket: NakedPnL is the right tool.
- Quant team measuring market-maker behaviour on-chain: Nansen.
- Family office vetting a manager's claimed crypto and equity returns over three years: NakedPnL.
- Polymarket trader who wants on-chain reconciliation visible alongside off-chain CEX activity: NakedPnL combines both.
Pricing
Nansen sells subscription access to its labelled-wallet database and analytics, with retail and enterprise tiers. NakedPnL is free for viewers; trader-side paid tiers exist for verification depth. The two products monetise different audiences: Nansen sells to researchers and traders looking for alpha; NakedPnL is structured to remain a free public registry of verified track records.
Why this comparison is hard
Nansen and NakedPnL are not direct competitors. The clearest framing: Nansen is wallet discovery and labelling; NakedPnL is consented track-record publication. The two can coexist in a serious workflow - Nansen surfaces interesting wallets, the wallet owner connects to NakedPnL to publish a re-verifiable record. They answer different questions and use different data sources.