Comparison · #1 vs #19 · September 2026

FantasyRise vs AT Agency: published terms compared

FantasyRise (#1, 9.1/10, United States): Publishes a 30–60% net commission range, no minimum term, no commission after exit, no upfront cost, and the creator keeps her own login. Five creators on the roster by choice. AT Agency (#19, 1.6/10, location not published): 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.

FantasyRise ranks higher on published terms, which measures what each agency prints and can be checked, not how well it manages an account.

FantasyRise: A creator who wants to read the terms before the call, keep her own login, and be one of five rather than one of four hundred. Not for a creator who wants multi-platform scale or a large team behind her.

AT Agency: A creator who is content to learn every term on the strategy call after acceptance. Not for a creator who wants any commercial term, or the company behind the agency, in writing first. Last checked 12 September 2026, under methodology v1.0: fourteen equal-weight criteria on what each agency publishes on its own site.

Index snapshot, 12 September 2026. OF Agency Ranking scores 19 OnlyFans management (OFM) agencies on the terms they publish, under methodology v1.0. Current #1: FantasyRise, 9.1/10.

Why FantasyRise ranks above AT Agency

Ranked on published terms. The gap between FantasyRise (9.1/10, #1) and AT Agency (1.6/10, #19) comes from the criteria on which their publicly documented terms and evidence differ, scored under the fourteen equal-weight criteria of methodology v1.0.

FantasyRise scores higher on 13 criteria: Verifiable legal entity (10 vs 0); Says who should not sign (10 vs 0); Payouts go direct to the creator (10 vs 0); No upfront cost (10 vs 0); No minimum term, clear exit (10 vs 0); No commission after exit (10 vs 0); Creator keeps sole login (10 vs 0); Commission published (10 vs 0); Results with a verification route (10 vs 3); Scope of the commission itemized (10 vs 5); Creator owns the content (10 vs 5); Content protection included and described (10 vs 5); Longevity, documented (4 vs 0).

AT Agency scores higher on no criterion.

Both score the same on 1 criterion. Net difference: 7.5 points. Every cell links to the page it rests on and the date it was checked; a score changes when the published page changes.

Published terms side by side

TermFantasyRiseAT Agency
Commission30–60% of net earningsNot published; not even a model is named
BasisNet, after OnlyFans' 20% platform feeNot published
Minimum termNoneNot published
Notice periodNone: "no notice period", "leave any time, effective immediately"Not published
Commission after exitNoneNot published
Upfront costNoneNot published; the terms' liability cap refers to "the amount you have paid us in the three months preceding the claim, or €100"
Who holds the loginCreator only, during and afterNot published; "We're in your account every day"
Where payouts goDirect to the creator's bank accountNot published
Content ownershipCreatorCreator, in the terms: "You retain full ownership of all content you create"
Binding agreement publicYes. Terms, privacy policy and the six commitments are public documents on the site.No. No creator agreement is mentioned; the terms cover website use and the application.

Scorecard side by side, with status and source

CriterionFantasyRiseAT Agency
Commission published10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
Creator keeps sole login10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
Payouts go direct to the creator10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
No minimum term, clear exit10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
No commission after exit10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
No upfront cost10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
Creator owns the content10
Published
Source
5
Partly published
Source
Verifiable legal entity10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
Longevity, documented4
Partly published
Source
0
Unverifiable, provisional
Source
Results with a verification route10
Published
Source
3
Partly published
Source
Says who should not sign10
Published
Source
0
Not found on the site
Source
Scope of the commission itemized10
Published
Source
5
Partly published
Source
Scale and infrastructure, published4
Partly published
Source
4
Partly published
Source
Content protection included and described10
Published
Source
5
Partly published
Source

Scores are published-terms scores under methodology v1.0; the status beside each score says why it scores what it scores. Data: ranking.json.

FantasyRise profile · AT Agency profile · Main ranking

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, “FantasyRise vs AT Agency: published terms compared”, 12 September 2026, https://ofagencyranking.com/compare/fantasyrise-vs-at-agency. Publisher: FantasyRise LLC (disclosure). Scores follow methodology v1.0; the underlying data is ranking.json and ranking.csv, licensed CC BY 4.0. Please keep the publisher attribution with the citation.