Home / Compare / dragon-smm.com vs fans1688.com

dragon-smm.com vs fans1688.com

Two SMM panels side by side, on the figures we measure — age from the registries, the public price list, the order counter, reviews on named platforms — not on what either says about itself. Updated September 9, 2026.

Trust Score
51 / 100 · Fair
46 / 100 · Fair
Online since
2023
2022
Engine
Perfect Panel
Perfect Panel
Services listed
680
292
Lowest price
$0.0008 per 1,000
$0.03 per 1,000
Order counter
162,229 orders
not shown
Growth, 30 days
+4,147 orders in 30 days, about 138 a day
User rating
no reviews read
3.0 of 5 · 1,688 reviews
Review platforms
Trustpilot
Owner
unclaimed
unclaimed
Reseller API
yes
yes
Status
online
online
Open dragon-smm.com Open fans1688.com the better figure of the two

Verdict

dragon-smm.com scores 51 of 100 on the Trust Score, fans1688.com 46 — a 5-point gap. fans1688.com is the older of the two, online since 2022; dragon-smm.com since 2023. dragon-smm.com lists 680 services from $0.0008 per 1,000, fans1688.com 292 from $0.03. On the 8 services both sell, dragon-smm.com is cheaper on 8. dragon-smm.com shows a public counter — 162K orders, +4,147 orders in 30 days, about 138 a day — while fans1688.com shows none. fans1688.com is rated 3.0 of 5 across 1,688 reviews on the platforms we read; we found no reviews of dragon-smm.com there. dragon-smm.com is the stronger pick on the figures, with fans1688.com close behind. Whichever you choose, start with a small order.

Prices on the services both sell

The lowest public rate per 1,000 for each service, in US dollars at the day's rate. Cheapest is not always fastest — refill and drop stand on each listing.

Service
dragon-smm.com
fans1688.com
Instagram followers
$0.925
$13.90
Instagram likes
$0.044
$0.81
Instagram views
$0.0008
$0.06
Instagram comments
$0.75
$29.42
Instagram shares
$0.549
$0.87
TikTok followers
$3.58
$20.60
TikTok likes
$0.068
$0.38
TikTok views
$0.0056
$0.17

Other comparisons

The nearest panels on the Trust Score to each side, online today.

dragon-smm.com vs fans1688.com: questions and answers

Straight answers about dragon-smm.com vs fans1688.com, built from what we measured — the counter, the price list, the registries and the review platforms. Updated September 9, 2026.

dragon-smm.com scores 51 of 100 on the Trust Score, fans1688.com 46 — a 5-point gap. fans1688.com is the older of the two, online since 2022; dragon-smm.com since 2023. dragon-smm.com lists 680 services from $0.0008 per 1,000, fans1688.com 292 from $0.03. On the 8 services both sell, dragon-smm.com is cheaper on 8. dragon-smm.com shows a public counter — 162K orders, +4,147 orders in 30 days, about 138 a day — while fans1688.com shows none. fans1688.com is rated 3.0 of 5 across 1,688 reviews on the platforms we read; we found no reviews of dragon-smm.com there. dragon-smm.com is the stronger pick on the figures, with fans1688.com close behind. Whichever you choose, start with a small order.

Comparing the lowest public rate per 1,000 on the services both sell — Instagram followers: $0.925 on dragon-smm.com against $13.90 on fans1688.com; Instagram likes: $0.044 on dragon-smm.com against $0.81 on fans1688.com; Instagram views: $0.0008 on dragon-smm.com against $0.06 on fans1688.com; Instagram comments: $0.75 on dragon-smm.com against $29.42 on fans1688.com. dragon-smm.com is cheaper on 8 of the 8; the cheapest offer on any service is not always the fastest or the most stable, so check refill and drop on each listing.

dragon-smm.com since 2023, 162K orders on its counter; fans1688.com since 2022, no public counter. Age comes from the registry record or the web archive and counts towards the Trust Score; a counter that keeps moving counts more than a large frozen one.

dragon-smm.com: unclaimed, no reviews read, Trust Score 51. fans1688.com: unclaimed, rated 3.0 across 1,688 reviews, Trust Score 46. dragon-smm.com has the stronger evidence behind it, and neither figure is a guarantee: start with a small order, check the delivery, and read the reviews behind each rating on the listing.