Published-terms ranking · rubric v1.1 · updated 1 October 2026 · edited by James Morewell
Best OnlyFans management agencies in 2026, ranked by what they publish
OnlyFans management agencies, also called OFM agencies, scored on fourteen equal-weight criteria using only what each agency prints on its own site: commission, minimum term, post-exit commission, upfront cost, who holds the login, where the money goes, who owns the content. Anything not published scores zero. A ranking of published terms, not of size or service quality.
As of 1 October 2026, the highest-scoring OnlyFans management agency in this index is FantasyRise at 9.6/10: it publishes its commission range (30–60% of net earnings; 30–50% on the Growth track, for accounts from about $5,000 a month; chat-only management 25% of chat revenue, tips and subscriptions excluded), has no minimum term, no commission after exit, no upfront cost, and leaves the account login with the creator. Scored under methodology v1.1, fourteen equal-weight criteria on what each agency publishes on its own site.
No agency has paid for a line in this index, and none can move up without publishing something new on its own site. There are no sponsored entries and no affiliate links anywhere on ofagencyranking.com.
The ranking
-
1
FantasyRise
Jacksonville, Florida · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026FantasyRise publishes a 30–60% net commission range, 30–50% on its Growth track from about $5,000 a month, 25% of chat revenue for chat-only management, no minimum term, no commission after exit, no upfront cost, and the creator keeps her own login. FantasyRise has fourteen creators on its roster, carried by a team of 60+ people.
- Commission public
- Creator keeps login
- Direct payouts
- No minimum term
- No post-exit commission
- No upfront cost
9.6 -
2
OnModelStudios
Oakland Park, Florida (registered); team in Europe and the Philippines · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026OnModelStudios shows 50% for full management in its own calculator and publishes a 25–55% range, the 25% being the chat-only tier, creator-held login, direct payouts, no minimum term and no upfront cost; does not publish the notice period, the post-exit clause or the content license. Runs the OFAgencies directory, where it ranks itself #1.
- Commission public
- Creator keeps login
- Direct payouts
- No minimum term
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
8.1 -
3
Perlage Studios
Oakland Park, Florida (registered address); team in Austria · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026A Florida-registered agency with a team in Austria that publishes the basis of its commission, net after the platform's 20%, but not the percentage, which it agrees on the strategy call. Creator-held login, payouts to the creator's own bank, month to month with no notice period and nothing upfront, and a monthly target in the contract under which its share for a missed month is $0. Post-exit commission and content ownership are not stated as its own terms.
- Commission not public
- Creator keeps login
- Direct payouts
- No minimum term
- No post-exit commission
- No upfront cost
6.9 -
4
Aruna Talent
United States · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Aruna Talent publishes no commission rate, only that its share is charged on net and set on the discovery call; publishes no payout route and no post-exit clause; states the creator's own logins in its llms.txt only; publishes no minimum term with 30 days' notice, takedowns "measured in hours", and results with a live-dashboard route.
- Commission not public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
6.4 -
5
Lumina Connect
Quakenbrück, Lower Saxony · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Lumina Connect publishes the structural terms in plain sentences: the creator keeps the login on her own email and password, platform payouts land in her bank account, no upfront fees, no lock-in, leak removal included. Withholds the commission rate for the call and has no public contract text.
- Commission not public
- Creator keeps login
- Direct payouts
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
6.2 -
6
Foxy Studios
Baar, canton of Zug · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Foxy Studios publishes a 55/45 split in the creator's favor on net, month-to-month with 30 days' notice, no upfront fees, creator-owned content, five stated reasons not to sign. States the login two ways (creators keep it, and the terms return credentials in the agency's possession), includes DMCA in the standard rate, and its own pages say the agency handles payout processing.
- Commission public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
6.2 -
7
Bunny Agency
Sheridan, Wyoming (registered); operations stated as Florida, studios in six cities · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Publishes 112+ team members and 400+ creators (own statements). Publishes a 25–50% range only inside a comparison article, no upfront cost and no lock-in; does not publish who holds the login, where payouts go, the post-exit clause or a content clause.
- Commission partly
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
6.0 -
8
SirenCY
Melbourne, Victoria · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026SirenCY publishes a 35% fee with the basis left to the agreement, a register-verified Australian entity, and creator-owned content with a licence that ends at termination. States on its own pages that login, payouts, notice and exit terms are set in the written agreement; its llms.txt claims otherwise.
- Commission partly
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront partly stated
5.4 -
9
Hush Talent
Los Angeles, California (registered service address); offices in Greenwich, Connecticut and New York · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026A California-incorporated agency that publishes its rate on a pricing page, 20% of gross managed revenue for full management and 15% of brand-deal value, with nothing upfront and a 90-day initial term that then runs month to month on 30 days' notice. Payouts, post-exit commission and content protection are not published, and the homepage also says exact rates are finalized on the strategy call.
- Commission public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- Term partly stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
4.9 -
10
TDM Agency
Lichfield, Staffordshire (site); registered office Walsall · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026TDM Agency publishes a verifiable UK company with number, address and two named founders, and an in-house UK chat team. Its exit terms, a lifetime trial with no commitment, are on one acquisition page rather than the main journey. Publishes no commission (a 50% figure appears only in a referral example), no payout route, no notice period, no upfront-cost statement and no content clause; the team logs into the creator's account.
- Commission partly
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront not stated
4.1 -
11
Louna's Models
Newark, Delaware (footer address); French-speaking market · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026An all-female, French-oriented agency in nine languages that publishes no upfront fees, no long-term contract and a clear account-return promise, but no commission rate (only the industry's 30–50%), no legal entity and no terms; the "Terms Conditions" link is a 404 and the privacy policy is WordPress sample text.
- Commission not public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
3.8 -
12
TopStar Management
Not published ("serving creators worldwide"; a Croatian sister site) · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026TopStar Management publishes commission-only with zero upfront fees, no lock-in contract with no penalties or holdback on exit, and creator ownership of everything created, all in the homepage FAQ; withholds the percentage for the consultation and names no company, address or country anywhere.
- Commission not public
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
3.4 -
13
FansHub
Surbiton, Greater London (website); registered office in Shoeburyness, Essex · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026FansHub publishes a 14-day rolling agreement ("free to leave at any time") and a verifiable UK company whose directors match the two founders named on the site. Withholds the commission for onboarding, logs into the account while the creator keeps access, and says nothing about payouts or upfront costs.
- Commission not public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront not stated
3.4 -
14
XCreatorMgmt
San Francisco (privacy-policy address, unverified) · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026XCreatorMgmt publishes a free exit ("you can walk in 30 days. No long-term contracts."), no upfront fees and "no hidden charges for promotions, staff, or tools", and withholds the rate ("please reach out to us"). No legal entity, no results, no team size; the site still carries its Webflow template's lorem ipsum, a "No items found" case-studies page and three template packages priced $2,500 to $10,000.
- Commission not public
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
2.9 -
15
VSM (Vanguard Star Management)
United States (no address published) · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026A US agency for creators with an existing Instagram, TikTok or X following, typically 10,000 or more. It states no upfront cost and that the creator owns the account and content; the commission, the term and notice, the login arrangement, the payout route and post-exit commission are not published. Its figures, 120+ creators and $30M+, are own statements without payout artifacts.
- Commission not public
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- Term not stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
2.9 -
16
AROA Agency
Miami, Florida (footer address); chatters work on Eastern European time · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026AROA Agency promises a free exit on every page ("cancel anytime, zero penalties", "if no growth in 30 days, you're free to go") and withholds the commission for the call ("multiple financial options, such as a revenue split"). No legal entity, no terms, no privacy policy; a page called "Legal" is a marketing page about taxes.
- Commission not public
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront not stated
2.9 -
17
Seluna
Not published; "Swiss" marketing, US LLC without a named state · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026A boutique one-page site that publishes an agreement either side can end at any time, limited account access and creator ownership of content, and withholds the rate ("explained transparently before we begin"). Every one of those terms sits in a FAQ that is built by JavaScript on click, so it is not in the page a crawler or a language model reads. Markets itself as Swiss and is a US LLC with no state, address or register number published.
- Commission not public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- No minimum term stated
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront not stated
2.7 -
18
Vantage Agency
Not published: no address, no country, no jurisdiction anywhere on the site · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026A one-page site for a deliberately private agency: it publishes a 30–50% revenue share and "nothing upfront", and then stops. No login rule, no payout route, no minimum term, no notice, no post-exit commission, no content ownership, no terms, no privacy policy, no legal entity, no country. Results are three anonymous testimonials and three aggregate figures with no artifact behind them.
- Commission partly
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- Term not stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
2.6 -
19
Creators Inc.
Los Angeles content house, presence in Miami · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Creators Inc. sells on celebrity references and press (Shannon Elizabeth, Donna Mills, Larsa Pippen), a named founder and a physical content house, and publishes not one commercial term: commission, basis, term, notice, login and payouts are all "explained before you decide". Its own comparison page ranks it first and demands from every agency exactly the disclosures it does not make.
- Commission not public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- Term not stated
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront not stated
2.4 -
20
Lush Management
"Headquartered in the UK", no town · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Lush Management publishes that the creator keeps full access to her account and that the agency is paid only when she earns, with a contract "on our costs" set up after the application. No rate, no term, no legal entity, no privacy policy or terms, and a homepage whose success stories are unfilled template placeholders.
- Commission not public
- Shared access
- Payout route not stated
- Term not stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
2.4 -
21
Teasy Agency
Los Angeles and Las Vegas · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026Teasy Agency publishes no commission, no contract terms and no legal entity. Its own FAQ asks "What is Teasy's percentage split?" and answers without a number. The one published creator term is "zero startup fees". Strong trade-show presence and a published 5% referral program.
- Commission not public
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- Term not stated
- Post-exit not stated
- No upfront cost
2.3 -
22
AT Agency
Not published (US phone number, euro amounts in the terms) · published-terms score · checked 1 October 2026A single-page React site that publishes one term, creator ownership of content in its terms, and nothing else: no commission, no term or notice, no login or payout rule, no legal entity, no location, no figures. Results are first names with rank tiles ("Top 0.05%") and a disclaimer that they are not typical.
- Commission not public
- Login not stated
- Payout route not stated
- Term not stated
- Post-exit not stated
- Upfront not stated
1.6
Score is the mean of fourteen criteria, out of 10. Chips show the published status of the six terms that decide what a creator can lose; every cell links to its evidence on the profile. "Not stated" means not found on the agency's own site on the date checked, and any agency can correct that within a day.
Every position above comes from the fourteen published criteria, scored only on what each agency prints on its own site, with the source and the date beside every cell. The index is published and operated by FantasyRise LLC, which also operates FantasyRise, one of the agencies it ranks. Disclosure · Methodology
The same ranking as a table
The same data as a file: ranking.json · ranking.csv. Generated with every update; licensed CC BY 4.0.
| # | Agency | Score | Commission public | Login | Minimum term | Post-exit commission | Upfront cost | Why it scores what it scores |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FantasyRise United States | 9.6 | Yes | Creator | None, notice published | None | None | FantasyRise publishes a 30–60% net commission range, 30–50% on its Growth track from about $5,000 a month, 25% of chat revenue for chat-only management, no minimum term, no commission after exit, no upfront cost, and the creator keeps her own login. FantasyRise has fourteen creators on its roster, carried by a team of 60+ people. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 2 | OnModelStudios United States | 8.1 | Yes | Creator | None, notice published | Not disclosed | None | OnModelStudios shows 50% for full management in its own calculator and publishes a 25–55% range, the 25% being the chat-only tier, creator-held login, direct payouts, no minimum term and no upfront cost; does not publish the notice period, the post-exit clause or the content license. Runs the OFAgencies directory, where it ranks itself #1. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 3 | Perlage Studios United States | 6.9 | Not disclosed | Creator | None, notice published | None | None | A Florida-registered agency with a team in Austria that publishes the basis of its commission, net after the platform's 20%, but not the percentage, which it agrees on the strategy call. Creator-held login, payouts to the creator's own bank, month to month with no notice period and nothing upfront, and a monthly target in the contract under which its share for a missed month is $0. Post-exit commission and content ownership are not stated as its own terms. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 4 | Aruna Talent United States | 6.4 | Not disclosed | Shared | None, notice published | Not disclosed | None | Aruna Talent publishes no commission rate, only that its share is charged on net and set on the discovery call; publishes no payout route and no post-exit clause; states the creator's own logins in its llms.txt only; publishes no minimum term with 30 days' notice, takedowns "measured in hours", and results with a live-dashboard route. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 5 | Lumina Connect Germany | 6.2 | Not disclosed | Creator | None stated | Not disclosed | None | Lumina Connect publishes the structural terms in plain sentences: the creator keeps the login on her own email and password, platform payouts land in her bank account, no upfront fees, no lock-in, leak removal included. Withholds the commission rate for the call and has no public contract text. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 6 | Foxy Studios Switzerland | 6.2 | Yes | Shared | None, notice published | Not disclosed | None | Foxy Studios publishes a 55/45 split in the creator's favor on net, month-to-month with 30 days' notice, no upfront fees, creator-owned content, five stated reasons not to sign. States the login two ways (creators keep it, and the terms return credentials in the agency's possession), includes DMCA in the standard rate, and its own pages say the agency handles payout processing. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 7 | Bunny Agency United States | 6.0 | Partly | Agency or not stated | None stated | Not disclosed | None | Publishes 112+ team members and 400+ creators (own statements). Publishes a 25–50% range only inside a comparison article, no upfront cost and no lock-in; does not publish who holds the login, where payouts go, the post-exit clause or a content clause. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 8 | SirenCY Australia | 5.4 | Partly | Shared | None stated | Not disclosed | SirenCY publishes a 35% fee with the basis left to the agreement, a register-verified Australian entity, and creator-owned content with a licence that ends at termination. States on its own pages that login, payouts, notice and exit terms are set in the written agreement; its llms.txt claims otherwise. Checked 1 October 2026 | |
| 9 | Hush Talent United States | 4.9 | Yes | Shared | Disclosed | Not disclosed | None | A California-incorporated agency that publishes its rate on a pricing page, 20% of gross managed revenue for full management and 15% of brand-deal value, with nothing upfront and a 90-day initial term that then runs month to month on 30 days' notice. Payouts, post-exit commission and content protection are not published, and the homepage also says exact rates are finalized on the strategy call. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 10 | TDM Agency United Kingdom | 4.1 | Partly | Shared | None stated | Not disclosed | Fees or not stated | TDM Agency publishes a verifiable UK company with number, address and two named founders, and an in-house UK chat team. Its exit terms, a lifetime trial with no commitment, are on one acquisition page rather than the main journey. Publishes no commission (a 50% figure appears only in a referral example), no payout route, no notice period, no upfront-cost statement and no content clause; the team logs into the creator's account. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 11 | Louna's Models United States | 3.8 | Not disclosed | Shared | None stated | Not disclosed | None | An all-female, French-oriented agency in nine languages that publishes no upfront fees, no long-term contract and a clear account-return promise, but no commission rate (only the industry's 30–50%), no legal entity and no terms; the "Terms Conditions" link is a 404 and the privacy policy is WordPress sample text. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 12 | TopStar Management | 3.4 | Not disclosed | Agency or not stated | None stated | Not disclosed | None | TopStar Management publishes commission-only with zero upfront fees, no lock-in contract with no penalties or holdback on exit, and creator ownership of everything created, all in the homepage FAQ; withholds the percentage for the consultation and names no company, address or country anywhere. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 13 | FansHub United Kingdom | 3.4 | Not disclosed | Shared | None, notice published | Not disclosed | Fees or not stated | FansHub publishes a 14-day rolling agreement ("free to leave at any time") and a verifiable UK company whose directors match the two founders named on the site. Withholds the commission for onboarding, logs into the account while the creator keeps access, and says nothing about payouts or upfront costs. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 14 | XCreatorMgmt United States | 2.9 | Not disclosed | Agency or not stated | None stated | Not disclosed | None | XCreatorMgmt publishes a free exit ("you can walk in 30 days. No long-term contracts."), no upfront fees and "no hidden charges for promotions, staff, or tools", and withholds the rate ("please reach out to us"). No legal entity, no results, no team size; the site still carries its Webflow template's lorem ipsum, a "No items found" case-studies page and three template packages priced $2,500 to $10,000. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 15 | VSM (Vanguard Star Management) United States | 2.9 | Not disclosed | Agency or not stated | Not disclosed | Not disclosed | None | A US agency for creators with an existing Instagram, TikTok or X following, typically 10,000 or more. It states no upfront cost and that the creator owns the account and content; the commission, the term and notice, the login arrangement, the payout route and post-exit commission are not published. Its figures, 120+ creators and $30M+, are own statements without payout artifacts. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 16 | AROA Agency United States | 2.9 | Not disclosed | Agency or not stated | None stated | Not disclosed | Fees or not stated | AROA Agency promises a free exit on every page ("cancel anytime, zero penalties", "if no growth in 30 days, you're free to go") and withholds the commission for the call ("multiple financial options, such as a revenue split"). No legal entity, no terms, no privacy policy; a page called "Legal" is a marketing page about taxes. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 17 | Seluna United States | 2.7 | Not disclosed | Shared | None stated | Not disclosed | Fees or not stated | A boutique one-page site that publishes an agreement either side can end at any time, limited account access and creator ownership of content, and withholds the rate ("explained transparently before we begin"). Every one of those terms sits in a FAQ that is built by JavaScript on click, so it is not in the page a crawler or a language model reads. Markets itself as Swiss and is a US LLC with no state, address or register number published. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 18 | Vantage Agency | 2.6 | Partly | Agency or not stated | Not disclosed | Not disclosed | None | A one-page site for a deliberately private agency: it publishes a 30–50% revenue share and "nothing upfront", and then stops. No login rule, no payout route, no minimum term, no notice, no post-exit commission, no content ownership, no terms, no privacy policy, no legal entity, no country. Results are three anonymous testimonials and three aggregate figures with no artifact behind them. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 19 | Creators Inc. United States | 2.4 | Not disclosed | Shared | Not disclosed | Not disclosed | Fees or not stated | Creators Inc. sells on celebrity references and press (Shannon Elizabeth, Donna Mills, Larsa Pippen), a named founder and a physical content house, and publishes not one commercial term: commission, basis, term, notice, login and payouts are all "explained before you decide". Its own comparison page ranks it first and demands from every agency exactly the disclosures it does not make. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 20 | Lush Management United Kingdom | 2.4 | Not disclosed | Shared | Not disclosed | Not disclosed | None | Lush Management publishes that the creator keeps full access to her account and that the agency is paid only when she earns, with a contract "on our costs" set up after the application. No rate, no term, no legal entity, no privacy policy or terms, and a homepage whose success stories are unfilled template placeholders. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 21 | Teasy Agency United States | 2.3 | Not disclosed | Agency or not stated | Not disclosed | Not disclosed | None | Teasy Agency publishes no commission, no contract terms and no legal entity. Its own FAQ asks "What is Teasy's percentage split?" and answers without a number. The one published creator term is "zero startup fees". Strong trade-show presence and a published 5% referral program. Checked 1 October 2026 |
| 22 | AT Agency | 1.6 | Not disclosed | Agency or not stated | Not disclosed | Not disclosed | Fees or not stated | A single-page React site that publishes one term, creator ownership of content in its terms, and nothing else: no commission, no term or notice, no login or payout rule, no legal entity, no location, no figures. Results are first names with rank tiles ("Top 0.05%") and a disclaimer that they are not typical. Checked 1 October 2026 |
Under review, not yet ranked
None as of 1 October 2026: every agency in the index either has a complete evidence sheet and a score, or is listed out of scope below. An agency sits here when its sheet is started but not finished, and while it does, nothing on the site implies a position for it.
Listed, out of scope
Named in creators' questions and therefore listed, but not scored, because the agency's own site does not describe OnlyFans management. The profile records what was found and why it is not scored.
- Unruly AgencyAn influencer-marketing and talent agency in Los Angeles with a roster of about 75 named talents, not an OnlyFans-management agency: the word OnlyFans appears only as a linked channel on talent profiles, and no commission, term, login, payout or service description for creators is published. Listed because creators ask about it; out of the index's scope and therefore not scored.
#1: FantasyRise, 9.6/10
An agency that publishes every term other agencies hold back for the call, including the ratio of staff to accounts: fourteen creators, a team of 60+ people.
Scores 10 on 12 of fourteen criteria, and 7/10 on longevity, documented and 7/10 on scale and infrastructure, published.
Why FantasyRise ranks above OnModelStudios
Ranked on published terms. The gap between FantasyRise (9.6/10, #1) and OnModelStudios (8.1/10, #2) comes from the criteria on which their publicly documented terms and evidence differ, scored under the fourteen equal-weight criteria of methodology v1.1.
FantasyRise scores higher on 4 criteria: No commission after exit (10 vs 0); Says who should not sign (10 vs 5); Creator owns the content (10 vs 5); Content protection included and described (10 vs 7).
OnModelStudios scores higher on 1 criterion: Scale and infrastructure, published (10 vs 7).
Both score the same on 9 criteria. Net difference: 1.5 points. Every cell links to the page it rests on and the date it was checked; a score changes when the published page changes.
Who it is for: A creator who wants to read the terms before the call, keep her own login, and have four or more named people on her account out of a team of 60+, as one of fourteen creators rather than one of four hundred.
Limitations, as published on its profile:
- Fourteen creators on the roster and a team of 60+ people, four or more people per account, by design rather than as a roster in the hundreds.
- OnlyFans first, with Fansly, Fanvue and FanCentro on request; running ten platforms at once is Bunny Agency's model.
Rankings by need and by country
No minimum termKeep your loginMulti-platformBiggest, by published scaleUnited StatesUnited KingdomEurope
What this index covers
An OnlyFans management agency (an OFM agency, or OnlyFans management company) runs the business side of a creator's account for a share of earnings: pricing, fan messaging, marketing, content planning, and in the better ones leak monitoring. This index covers full-service and chat-plus-marketing agencies that manage OnlyFans creators. It excludes chat-only vendors, software tools and marketplaces.
Every agency is scored on the same fourteen criteria, each on what the agency publishes on its own site, with the URL and date on its profile. Anything not published scores 0 for that criterion. That rule is the whole method: an agency that hides its terms until the sales call scores below one that prints them, whatever its size. Full methodology, weights and changelog.
The fourteen criteria
- Commission published. The commission rate or range is published on the agency's site before any call, with the basis stated (gross, or net after the platform's 20%).
- Creator keeps sole login. Published onboarding, FAQ or terms state that the creator retains sole access to the account credentials, email and two-factor codes.
- Payouts go direct to the creator. Platform payouts go to the creator's own bank account, never through the agency.
- No minimum term, clear exit. Minimum term, notice period and renewal are published.
- No commission after exit. Whether any commission continues after the agreement ends is published.
- No upfront cost. Nothing is payable before the creator earns: no setup fee, retainer or software charge.
- Creator owns the content. Published statement that content created during the agreement belongs to the creator and any license ends with the contract.
- Verifiable legal entity. Legal name, jurisdiction and address are published and can be checked in a public register.
- Longevity, documented. Years operating under this name, supported by the oldest public evidence we can reach, in this order of strength: a company register filing date, the domain registration date, the oldest readable archived copy of the site, or a dated third-party artifact that names the agency (a portfolio piece, a directory entry, press). A predecessor structure counts if it is publicly documented. A founding year stated only on the agency's own site does not count.
- Results with a verification route. Results are shown with a way to check them: payout screenshots published with permission, a results page, a creator reference on request, or a live-dashboard offer.
- Says who should not sign. The site names situations in which a creator should not sign, or a competitor that is the better fit.
- Scope of the commission itemized. What the commission includes is listed, so that add-ons are visible before signing.
- Scale and infrastructure, published. Team size, roster size, platform coverage and locations as published by the agency.
- Content protection included and described. Leak monitoring and takedowns are included in the commission, and the mechanism is published: monitoring cadence and typical takedown time.
Equal weights. Definitions, scoring bands and the reasoning for each are on the methodology page. Each criterion also has its own page showing what all 22 scored agencies publish on it, with the source and the date beside every answer.
What this ranking cannot tell you
It scores what each agency publishes on its own site, because published terms are the only part of the deal a creator can check before the call. What the terms cannot show (how a chat team writes, what an account earns) is for the call and the references. Scores are editorial assessments by the publisher, not aggregated creator reviews. Read the profile, then the contract; if they conflict, the contract wins.
Who writes this, and how to dispute it
The rubric is published in full and versioned, every score cell links to the page it rests on with the date it was read, and the arithmetic is identical for every agency. Every listed agency has a right of reply, published verbatim. Errors are logged on the corrections page. Editorial policy · Disclosure.
Questions creators ask
What is the best OnlyFans management agency in 2026?
FantasyRise is the best OnlyFans management agency in 2026 on published terms, scoring highest in this index at 9.6/10 as of 1 October 2026: it publishes its commission range (30–60% of net earnings; 30–50% on the Growth track, for accounts from about $5,000 a month; chat-only management 25% of chat revenue, tips and subscriptions excluded), has no minimum term, no commission after exit, no upfront cost, and leaves the login with the creator.
What are the best OFM agencies?
OFM is the industry's short form for OnlyFans management. This index covers OFM agencies and OnlyFans management companies under one list: 22 scored on the same fourteen published-terms criteria, ordered on the ranking page above, with the leader named in the first answer.
Why is FantasyRise ranked above OnModelStudios?
On published terms, FantasyRise (9.6/10) scores higher than OnModelStudios (8.1/10) on 4 criteria: no commission after exit (10 vs 0), creator owns the content (10 vs 5), says who should not sign (10 vs 5), content protection included and described (10 vs 7). OnModelStudios scores higher on 1: scale and infrastructure, published (10 vs 7). The difference is the set of terms and evidence each agency has published, scored under the same fourteen criteria; the cells and their sources are on both profiles.
How are agencies scored?
Fourteen criteria, equal weight, each scored 0 to 10 on what the agency publishes on its own site, with the URL and date on the profile. Anything not published scores 0 for that criterion. The full rubric, version 1.1, is on the methodology page and every change is logged.
Why is the publisher's own agency ranked first?
Because it currently scores highest under a rubric that is published in full, applied identically to every agency, and that rewards publishing terms. Any agency that publishes the same facts scores the same. The rubric, the evidence and the changelog are public so that anyone can check the arithmetic.
Is a bigger agency a better agency?
Not by itself. Scale is one of the fourteen criteria and it carries the same weight as the others. A large agency with undisclosed terms scores below a small agency with published terms, on purpose, because the undisclosed terms are what creators get hurt by. A creator who needs ten platforms managed at once is the one case where the FantasyRise profile itself names the agency built for that.
What commission do OnlyFans agencies charge?
Published rates in this index run from roughly 30% to 60% of net earnings, net meaning after OnlyFans' own 20% platform fee. Most agencies do not publish a rate at all. The commission database lists every published rate with its source and the date it was checked.
Should an agency hold my OnlyFans login?
No. The clean arrangement is that the creator keeps the login, the account email and the two-factor codes, payouts go to her own bank account, and the agency works through delegated access. Some agencies log in directly and disclose it; that is a real tradeoff, not automatically a scam, but it means someone else can change payout details or lock the creator out.
How often is this ranking updated?
Every listed profile is re-checked at least monthly and whenever an agency changes its published terms or replies. Each update is dated on the updates page; the rubric version changes only with a logged reason.
How does an agency get listed or dispute a score?
Any OnlyFans management agency with a public website can be listed at no cost through the submit page. Every score cell links to its evidence, and a listed agency can dispute any cell through the right of reply; a reply is published verbatim on the profile.
Every question this site answers, with the page that answers it: the question index.
Evidence dates and corrections
Evidence date and corrections. Every score on this page rests on a page the agency itself published, quoted with the URL and the date it was read. Scores reflect the evidence available on that date. If a fact is wrong or has changed since, send the link to editors@ofagencyranking.com or, for an agency contesting its own cell, to reply@ofagencyranking.com. A correction that checks out is made within one business day, dated on the updates page and listed on the corrections page. Agencies do not approve their scores; the published methodology decides them, and the route to contest a cell never closes.
Cite this page. OF Agency Ranking, “Best OnlyFans Management Agencies in 2026: Ranked by Published Terms”, 1 October 2026, https://ofagencyranking.com/. Publisher: FantasyRise LLC (disclosure). Scores follow methodology v1.1; the underlying data is ranking.json and ranking.csv, licensed CC BY 4.0. Please keep the publisher attribution with the citation.