Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
B
Nft Marketplaces

Blur Bids

Best for independently tracked marketplace

Value locked:$14.0m at this checkChains:2Audits recorded:0Audit report linked:Not foundRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Kayla PetersonKayla PetersonDeFi Research Analyst· Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence ARubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
8.1
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Counterparty & contract risk · 30%6.0
Cost transparency · 25%9.0
Market quality · 20%10.0
Transparency & track record · 15%8.0
Public documentation surface · 10%8.0
Pros
  • Accounting methodology published
  • Deployed across 2 chains
Cons
  • No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check
How this score was built

Each indicator scores 2, 1 or 0. A pillar is the points earned over the points available; the overall score is the weighted sum. Every source below is public — check any of them yourself.

Counterparty & contract risk · 30% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10
Cost transparency · 25% weight9/10 points · 9.0/10
Market quality · 20% weight10/10 points · 10.0/10
Transparency & track record · 15% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Public documentation surface · 10% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10

A professional NFT trading venue holding $14m, built around collection-wide bidding and pooled lending rather than individual listings.

Our assessment

Blur holds $14m, nearly ten times any other venue in this comparison. It won the professional NFT market by building for traders rather than collectors: collection-wide bidding, portfolio-level tools, and lending against NFTs as collateral.

Bidding on a collection, not an item

Placing a bid on any item in a collection creates the continuous liquidity NFT markets lacked. Sellers can exit instantly at a known price; bidders acquire at their number. This mechanism, more than any incentive programme, is why professional flow concentrated here.

Incentives shaped the market

Blur's token campaigns rewarded bidding volume, which produced enormous activity and a great deal of it driven by farming rather than by demand for the assets. The trading data from that period overstates genuine interest, and anyone reading NFT volumes from those months should discount them heavily.

No audit report at this check

No audit report was retrievable at a public address. For a venue that also runs NFT-collateralised lending — where liquidation of an illiquid asset is the hard problem — published review would matter considerably more than for a simple listing marketplace.

Who it suits

Blur fits active NFT traders who want collection bidding, depth and lending in one place. Collectors buying individual pieces will find the interface built for a different purpose.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

ServiceScoreBest for
NFTX9.2audited marketplace contractsRead →
Reference

Frequently asked

Does this rank marketplaces by trading volume?

No. NFT volume figures are widely inflated by wash trading and we do not rank on numbers we cannot verify. The score covers audits, methodology and independently recorded data.

Why is value locked low for large marketplaces?

Most marketplace trading settles without holding assets in contracts, so value locked understates activity. We publish it as the available independent figure, not as a measure of market share.

Are creator royalties assessed?

No. Royalty enforcement is a marketplace policy that changes frequently and is not verifiable from a single public source.