mundosmm.com vs smmservice.org
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 30, 2026.
| 2 panels |
36/ 100 · Guarded
|
39/ 100 · Guarded
|
|---|---|---|
| Online since | 2024 | 2026 |
| Engine | Perfect Panel | Perfect Panel |
| Services listed | 368 | 3,265 |
| Lowest price | $0.0019 per 1,000 | $0.0005 per 1,000 |
| Order counter | not shown | 237,096 orders |
| Growth, 30 days | — | about 1,939 a day (+5,818 over 3 days) |
| User rating | no reviews read | no reviews read |
| Review platforms | — | — |
| Owner | unclaimed | verified |
| Reseller API | yes · /api/v2 | yes · /api/v2 |
| Payment methods | unknown | Visa / Mastercard, USDT / BTC / ETH, Binance Pay, Cryptomus, Heleket, UPI, bKash, Nagad, Bank transfer, Other |
| Status | online | online |
Prices on shared services
The lowest public rate per 1,000 on services at least two of these panels sell. The cheapest is not always the fastest: refill and drop are on each listing.
Cheapest across 12 rows: smmservice.org 11 · mundosmm.com 1
| Service |  mundosmm.com |  smmservice.org |
|---|---|---|
| Instagram followers | $3.36 | $0.218 |
| Instagram likes | $0.077 | $0.036 |
| Instagram views | $0.0019 | $0.0007 |
| TikTok followers | $2.30 | $0.734 |
| TikTok likes | $0.202 | $0.063 |
| TikTok views | $0.029 | $0.0025 |
| TikTok comments | $9.60 | $0.642 |
| TikTok shares | $0.154 | $0.012 |
| YouTube likes | $1.54 | $0.127 |
| YouTube views | $0.96 | $0.155 |
| YouTube comments | $3.46 | $1.08 |
| YouTube shares | $0.576 | $0.844 |
| Telegram views | $0.019 | $0.0015 |
| Telegram members | $0.768 | $0.012 |
| Facebook followers | $1.89 | $0.094 |
| Facebook likes | $1.54 | $0.072 |
| Facebook views | $0.384 | $0.017 |
| Facebook members | $2.11 | $0.185 |
| Facebook comments | $34.56 | $1.45 |
| Facebook shares | $0.576 | $0.098 |
Other comparisons
The nearest panels on the Trust Score to each side, online today.
mundosmm.com vs smmservice.org: questions and answers
Answers about mundosmm.com vs smmservice.org from what we measured: the order counter, the price list, the registries and the review platforms. Facts last read September 30, 2026.
smmservice.org scores 39 of 100 on the Trust Score, mundosmm.com 36 — a 3-point gap. mundosmm.com is the older of the two, online since 2024; smmservice.org since 2026. mundosmm.com lists 368 services from $0.0019 per 1,000, smmservice.org 3,265 from $0.0005. On the 8 services both sell, smmservice.org is cheaper on 8. smmservice.org shows a public counter — 237K orders, about 1,939 a day (+5,818 over 3 days) — while mundosmm.com shows none. Neither has reviews on the platforms we read. smmservice.org's owner has verified the listing on smm.guide; mundosmm.com is unclaimed. Of the 6 measures compared, smmservice.org leads 5 and mundosmm.com 1. Whichever you choose, start with a small order.
Comparing the lowest public rate per 1,000 on the services both sell — Instagram followers: $3.36 on mundosmm.com against $0.218 on smmservice.org; Instagram likes: $0.077 on mundosmm.com against $0.036 on smmservice.org; Instagram views: $0.0019 on mundosmm.com against $0.0007 on smmservice.org; TikTok followers: $2.30 on mundosmm.com against $0.734 on smmservice.org. smmservice.org 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.
mundosmm.com since 2024, no public counter; smmservice.org since 2026, 237K orders on its 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.
mundosmm.com: unclaimed, no reviews read, Trust Score 36. smmservice.org: owner verified, no reviews read, Trust Score 39. smmservice.org 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.