Best Mining Pools in 2026: Comparing Fees, User Ratings and Supported Coins
Choosing a mining pool is about more than finding the smallest fee. A pool can offer an attractive fee while providing a less suitable experience for a particular miner, especially if reliability, payout consistency, coin support, or community feedback does not match the miner’s priorities.
This comparison uses Minector’s internal pool data to review ten mining pools by average fee, user rating, number of raters, and supported coins. The figures provide a useful starting point, but miners should also evaluate payout methods, minimum payout thresholds, uptime history, server locations, and whether the pool supports their hardware and preferred algorithm.
Mining Pool Comparison
The table below presents the available data in a single view. Ratings are shown out of 5, while the number of raters indicates how many user reviews contributed to each average rating.
| Mining pool | Average fee | User rating | Number of raters | Supported coins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cruxpool | 1.00 | 4.80/5 | 20 | BTC, ETC, RVN, ERGO, FLUX, FIRO, ETHW, BEAM |
| Ethertrench | 0.00 | 4.20/5 | 21 | ETH, ETC, EXP |
| Whalesburg | 0.90 | 4.10/5 | 21 | ETH, ETC, UBQ, ELLA, EXP, PIRL |
| MinerGate | 1.25 | 4.00/5 | 205 | ETH, LTC, XMR, BCN, ETC, ZEC, BTG, XMC |
| UniPool | 0.17 | 4.00/5 | 20 | BCN, TRTL, XMR |
| MaxHash | 0.00 | 4.00/5 | 20 | ETH, UBQ, EXP, MUSIC |
| HashLoft | 1.47 | 4.00/5 | 18 | BTC, LTC, AUR, BCH, CANN, FLO, GAME, DGB, ZEN |
| Bit Pool Mining | 0.38 | 4.00/5 | 11 | MONA, HUSH, VTC, KMD, EXP, ETH, ETC, ZCL, BTG, BTCP |
| Nanopool | 1.00 | 3.90/5 | 44 | ETH, ETC, ZEC, XMR, RVN, CFX, ERG |
| 2Miners | 1.25 | 3.80/5 | 71 | ETH, ETC, EXP, MUSIC, PIRL, ETP, WHL, DBIX, BTG, ZEC, ZCL, ZEN, ELLA, CLO, YOC, AKA, HUSH, BTCP, BTCZ |
Top Pools by Average Fee
Zero-fee options
Ethertrench and MaxHash have the lowest listed average fee at 0.00. Ethertrench has a 4.20/5 rating from 21 raters and supports ETH, ETC, and EXP. MaxHash has a 4.00/5 rating from 20 raters and supports ETH, UBQ, EXP, and MUSIC.
A zero fee can make a pool appealing, particularly for miners operating on tight margins. However, the fee alone does not establish which pool will deliver the best overall results. Miners should still investigate payout consistency, pool stability, supported payment options, and the quality of monitoring tools before directing substantial hashrate to a pool.
Lowest non-zero fees
UniPool has an average fee of 0.17, followed by Bit Pool Mining at 0.38 and Whalesburg at 0.90. UniPool’s 4.00/5 rating comes from 20 raters and its coin selection is focused on BCN, TRTL, and XMR.
Bit Pool Mining combines a 0.38 average fee with a 4.00/5 rating from 11 raters. It supports a broad selection that includes MONA, HUSH, VTC, KMD, EXP, ETH, ETC, ZCL, BTG, and BTCP. Whalesburg has a 4.10/5 rating from 21 raters and supports ETH, ETC, UBQ, ELLA, EXP, and PIRL.
Top Pools by User Rating
Cruxpool has the highest rating in this dataset at 4.80/5, based on 20 raters. Its average fee is 1.00, and it supports BTC, ETC, RVN, ERGO, FLUX, FIRO, ETHW, and BEAM, giving it a varied selection across several mining ecosystems.
Ethertrench ranks second by rating at 4.20/5 from 21 raters. Whalesburg follows with 4.10/5 from 21 raters. MinerGate, UniPool, MaxHash, HashLoft, and Bit Pool Mining each have a 4.00/5 rating, although their numbers of raters range from 11 to 205.
Nanopool records a 3.90/5 rating from 44 raters, while 2Miners records 3.80/5 from 71 raters. These ratings should be read together with the number of raters rather than treated as a definitive ranking. A rating based on 205 raters offers a different level of review volume from one based on 11 or 18 raters, but neither figure alone proves future performance.
Supported Coins and Pool Selection
Coin support is one of the most practical differences between these pools. A miner focused on Bitcoin can consider Cruxpool or HashLoft, while miners looking for Litecoin support can examine MinerGate or HashLoft. Miners interested in privacy-focused coins have options such as MinerGate, UniPool, and Nanopool for XMR.
2Miners lists the largest number of supported coins in this comparison, including ETH, ETC, EXP, MUSIC, PIRL, ETP, WHL, DBIX, BTG, ZEC, ZCL, ZEN, ELLA, CLO, YOC, AKA, HUSH, BTCP, and BTCZ. HashLoft also offers a varied list, including BTC, LTC, AUR, BCH, CANN, FLO, GAME, DGB, and ZEN.
Broader coin support can be useful for miners who switch networks as profitability changes. However, a long coin list is not automatically better. The right choice depends on whether the pool supports the exact coin, algorithm, wallet, and payout arrangement required by the mining setup.
Why the Lowest Fee Is Not Always Best
Pool fees reduce the gross value of mining rewards, so they are a legitimate part of profitability calculations. Nevertheless, the cheapest pool may not be the most suitable choice if it has inconsistent payouts, unstable servers, limited reporting, or insufficient support for the miner’s region and coin.
Reliability and payout consistency matter because a miner needs predictable accounting over time. A pool with a slightly higher fee may be preferable if its payment process, dashboard, server performance, and operational history better fit the mining operation.
Miners should also remember that user ratings are a signal, not a guarantee. Before switching pools, compare recent user feedback, payout records where available, payment thresholds, pool software compatibility, and the effect of stale or rejected shares. Profitability calculators should account for the pool’s fee alongside electricity costs, hardware efficiency, network difficulty, and coin price volatility.
How to Choose Among These Pools
- Start with coin and algorithm support. Remove pools that do not support the asset or mining method used by your hardware.
- Compare the listed average fee. Use the fee as one input in a profitability estimate, not as the only selection criterion.
- Review ratings and rating volume. Consider both the average score and the number of raters shown in the comparison.
- Check payout conditions. Confirm minimum payouts, payment schedules, wallet requirements, and any applicable operational rules.
- Test before committing. A short trial can help identify stale shares, connection problems, dashboard limitations, or payout issues.
Conclusion
The best mining pool depends on the coin, hardware, location, payout preferences, and risk tolerance of each miner. Cruxpool leads this dataset by user rating at 4.80/5, Ethertrench and MaxHash have the lowest listed average fee at 0.00, and 2Miners offers the broadest listed coin selection.
Those distinctions are useful, but they should not be treated as a definitive recommendation. Compare fees with reliability, payout consistency, supported coins, and user feedback before choosing a pool, and reassess the decision as network conditions and mining economics change.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which mining pool has the lowest average fee?
Ethertrench and MaxHash both have a listed average fee of 0.00. Ethertrench has a 4.20/5 rating from 21 raters, while MaxHash has a 4.00/5 rating from 20 raters.
Which pool has the highest user rating?
Cruxpool has the highest rating in the provided data at 4.80/5, based on 20 raters. Its listed average fee is 1.00, and it supports BTC, ETC, RVN, ERGO, FLUX, FIRO, ETHW, and BEAM.
Which pool supports the most coins?
2Miners has the largest listed supported-coin selection in this comparison, with 19 coins: ETH, ETC, EXP, MUSIC, PIRL, ETP, WHL, DBIX, BTG, ZEC, ZCL, ZEN, ELLA, CLO, YOC, AKA, HUSH, BTCP, and BTCZ.
Should miners always choose the pool with the lowest fee?
No. A low fee can improve the gross reward retained by a miner, but reliability, payout consistency, server performance, coin support, and the quality of pool tools also matter. The best pool is the one that provides a suitable overall balance for the specific mining operation.
