CredScore vs Arkham
Arkham is one of the best free tools in crypto: a huge attribution database, entity relationship views, and fund-flow graphs. If you investigate wallets and don't use it, start.
But Arkham ends where your hardest work begins. It shows you who a wallet is and where the money went — then the risk call, the rationale, and the write-up are yours. CredScore is built for exactly that last mile: a deterministic scored verdict with every driver cited, exportable as an audit-ready report. The free tools show you the money. CredScore writes the conclusion you can defend.
Attribution answers "who." A compliance decision answers "so what — and can I defend that call in six months?" CredScore's verdicts pin the engine version, cite every driver, and seal the raw inputs so the decision can be re-executed later, byte for byte. That property doesn't exist anywhere in the free tracing stack, because none of those tools make decisions at all.
Read the methodology →Keep Arkham — it's free and it's excellent at what it does. Add CredScore when the question stops being "who is this wallet" and becomes "do I clear it, review it, or escalate it — and how do I defend that answer later." Every workflow needs both halves. Only one of them currently has a tool.
Frequently asked questions
Is Arkham free?
Arkham's core analytics platform is free to use, which makes it one of the best starting points for wallet investigation on a small team's budget. CredScore is $99 per analyst per month with a free first analysis. They solve different problems: Arkham gives you intelligence about who a wallet is; CredScore gives you a scored, documented verdict about whether to trust it.
Does CredScore replace Arkham?
No, and it doesn't try to. Arkham's attribution database and flow visualization are excellent and free — there is no reason to give them up. CredScore starts where Arkham stops: after you've seen the graph, someone still has to make the risk call and defend it in writing. That scored, evidence-cited, replayable verdict is what CredScore produces.
What does CredScore do that Arkham doesn't?
Three things: a deterministic 0-100 risk score with a Proceed / Review / Escalate recommendation, a written rationale citing every driver with its evidence, and an audit-ready artifact — engine version and timestamp pinned, exportable for a case file, with sealed input capsules that let the verdict be re-executed months later. Arkham deliberately leaves the judgment to the analyst; CredScore's whole product is the judgment.
Should a small AML team use Arkham or CredScore first?
Use both, in sequence. Arkham (free) for attribution and following the money; CredScore for the verdict and the document you file. If budget forces a choice, ask which half of your job takes longer — seeing the flows, or reaching and writing up a defensible conclusion. Most analysts spend more time on the second.
Is Arkham suitable for AML compliance screening?
Arkham is an intelligence platform, not a compliance screening product — it doesn't produce risk scores, decision recommendations, or audit-ready reasoning. Many analysts use it as a research layer inside a compliance workflow, with a scoring tool like CredScore or an enterprise platform producing the actual determination.