FeedOracle

Specialized verticals · tested 2026-08-23 · re-test due 2026-11-23 · by the Hlido desk, not the vendor

In short: Stablecoin compliance evidence built on an unusually disciplined premise: it reports what a named source showed at a named time, marks the gaps as gaps, and refuses to hand you a verdict.

5 PASS · 0 FAIL of 5 public-surface claims

Quick answer

FeedOracle scores 80/100 (STEADY) on Hlido’s independent, hands-on test (reviewed 2026-08-23). STEADY (80) on the strength of an evidence model that is honest by construction — explicit gap states, per-field timestamps, a content hash in every response, and a stated refusal to convert evidence into a legal verdict

FeedOracle turns fragmented stablecoin disclosures and market signals into structured, timestamped evidence — MiCA register status, issuer disclosures, reserve attestation dates, peg observations, redemption terms — delivered as read-only JSON with a SHA-256 content hash and an observation timestamp in every response. Fintech product teams, compliance operations, treasury and risk functions, and builders of autonomous agents are the stated audience, and the API shape (a single GET against an asset) is exactly right for the last of those. What distinguishes this surface is the epistemics, and they are stated rather than implied. The sample response shows an explicit EVIDENCE GAP status next to a reserve attestation date — a product that renders its own missing data as a first-class value, rather than defaulting to a silent null or an optimistic pass. The page says outright that facts age at different speeds (a peg observation is minutes old, an attestation can be months old or undated) and that a decision record hiding that difference hides the risk. And it draws the boundary most compliance-adjacent vendors blur: data, policy and legal judgment are three different things; the evidence states what was found, the customer's policy classifies it, and the legal determination belongs to qualified professionals — not to a data feed, and not to FeedOracle. That is a company declining to sell the most valuable-sounding thing it could sell, which is the strongest trust signal a surface of this kind can carry. The caveats are scope and youth. Coverage breadth across issuers is not stated, the captured snapshot is explicitly not a live feed, and there is no independent audit of the collection methodology linked. The discipline is visible; the track record is not yet.

Why STEADY

STEADY (80) on the strength of an evidence model that is honest by construction — explicit gap states, per-field timestamps, a content hash in every response, and a stated refusal to convert evidence into a legal verdict. That posture is rare and directly aligned with what Hlido measures. Held out of the top band because coverage breadth is unstated, the data is explicitly snapshot rather than live, and no independent review of the collection methodology is linked; the discipline is asserted well but not yet externally corroborated.

Public-surface checklist

What we saw

4 screenshots captured by the Hlido engine during the reviewed run (run-050718475a1031db-feedoracle-io). Our own captures — not vendor marketing material.

FeedOracle — run screenshot 1 (home.png)
home.png
FeedOracle — run screenshot 2 (page_index_html.png)
page_index_html.png
FeedOracle — run screenshot 3 (page_stablecoin-preflight_.png)
page_stablecoin-preflight_.png
FeedOracle — run screenshot 4 (page_docs_mica-compliance_html.png)
page_docs_mica-compliance_html.png

What it does well

What it fails at

Best for

  • Fintech and treasury teams that must record why a stablecoin decision was made, not just what it was
  • Compliance operations needing timestamped, hashable evidence for an audit file
  • Autonomous agents that need machine-usable status vocabulary rather than prose disclosures
  • EU entities working through MiCA and DORA obligations

Not recommended for

  • Anyone wanting a single pass/fail verdict on an asset — the product deliberately refuses to give one
  • Real-time trading decisions requiring live feeds
  • Non-EU regulatory frameworks
  • Buyers needing an audited methodology before adoption

Pricing & access

Derived from Hlido-held evidence only (engine checklist + editorial text); quotes are verbatim from the scorecard; not vendor-supplied; re-derived daily. Verify current prices on the vendor's pricing page. Last verified 2026-08-23.

Compared to

Agent relevance

API Behavioral-testable

Agentic-Commerce Readiness 58/100 · INTEGRABLE

Independent readiness for agent delegation & transaction. How it’s scored · check live

A documented read-only REST API (GET api.feedoracle.io/api/v3/stablecoin/mica/{asset}) returning structured JSON with an explicit status vocabulary, per-field timestamps and a content hash — directly consumable by an agent with no scraping. The product explicitly names 'developers of autonomous agents' as a target audience. No MCP server or webhook surface is published.

Agent-friendly score: 8/10

Evidence

scorecard.json · transparency passport · registry · methodology

More: compare agents · best of · developer tools · incident registry

Verdict by Hlido Editor, our automated editorial system · Method: public-surface-tier-1+editorial-narrative-v2 · Methodology version 2026.05 · Next review due 2026-11-23

How this page was produced. The scores, claim verdicts and evidence come from automated hands-on testing of the product’s public surface. The written analysis is drafted by an AI system, and pages publish without a person reviewing each one. Hlido publishes this record and answers for it — tell us if anything here is wrong and we will correct it.

Embed this trust badge

Hlido trust score

Live, always-current independent score — free to embed on your site or README. No vendor pays for placement.

Markdown

[![Hlido trust score](https://hlido.eu/badge/feedoracle.svg)](https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=feedoracle)

HTML

<a href="https://hlido.eu/check/?agent=feedoracle"><img src="https://hlido.eu/badge/feedoracle.svg" alt="Hlido trust score"></a>