.frax
Is .frax a real TLD? Who’s applying to run it?
.frax is not contested. One application for it is on ICANN’s Reveal Day list, as of 7 October 2026. It is Frax.
A brand-style string for one crypto-finance project; useful inside its own ecosystem, little value to anyone else.
the applicant's own products, sub-brands and ecosystem partners, with the "frax" name recognisable mainly to people already following decentralised-finance protocols
The 2012 applications making the most similar bet. Chosen by AI from every string in that round, without being told what happened to any of them.
Same bet as .frax: a short coined non-word that is the whole identity of one financial-trading venture, so the namespace is worth nothing to anyone outside that firm's own account holders and only pays off if the firm can move its users onto its own name.
A manufactured name for a single trading/settlement platform rather than a category anyone else could claim, betting that a niche financial marketplace's users treat the platform's name as the address they go to.
Shares the structural bet of a four-letter invented brand token with no dictionary meaning carrying a company's primary identity, but it is a consumer-hardware maker rather than a financial protocol, so only the string's form matches, not the buyer.
What a .frax domain is
.frax is not a TLD yet. It is a string on our record of the ICANN 2026 new gTLD round, filed under Brand. One application for it is on ICANN’s Reveal Day list.
Is the .frax domain extension real yet?
.frax is not yet a domain extension you can register: nothing resolves under it, and no registrar sells names in it. It is a string applicants have put forward in the ICANN 2026 new gTLD round, the process that decides whether it becomes one.
When can you buy a .frax domain?
You can’t yet. ICANN publishes every applied-for string on Reveal Day, 7 October 2026 at 18:00 UTC. A .frax name can only be registered after that, once the string is delegated and its registry opens. Last round's closest parallel to .frax was .saxo, delegated on 10 February 2015.
Is .frax a real TLD?
Not yet. .frax is not in the DNS root, so nothing resolves under it. It’s here because .frax is on ICANN’s Reveal Day list of applied-for strings. Every entry on this page links to its source.
- Frax · first recordedICANN
“FRAA2670T-T31504 · Financial Reserves and Asset Exploration, Inc. · primary”ICANN
- Band chosen: 10-29 (vanity/narrow). The string reads as a coined brand word, and the single confirmed applicant on the record, Financial Reserves and Asset Exploration, Inc., carries initials that match the string, which points by inference to a dot-brand or protocol-controlled namespace rather than an open registry; the string is also associated, from general knowledge and not from the facts block, with a decentralised-finance stablecoin project, so its natural end-use is ecosystem naming (sub-products, wallets, governance) by that project and its partners. It is not in the 30-49 band because a brand-held TLD generates no volume registrations and no open aftermarket; outside addresses cannot be bought, so resale value for a third party is effectively absent. It is not in the 1-9 band because, if the operator does use it as its primary identity across its product set, those addresses carry genuine utility and credibility within one crypto community, and crypto-adjacent dot-brands have shown by analogy (other protocol-owned namespaces, inferred) that an ecosystem can route meaningful traffic through them. Analogy, flagged: closed dot-brands from the prior round mostly saw light or ceremonial use, with a minority becoming the primary web identity; the base case for a mid-sized crypto brand over 5 years is somewhere between those outcomes. The main market uncertainty is whether the operator opens any part of the namespace (for example to community members or integrators) or keeps it strictly internal; the former would lift the score toward the 30s, the latter pins it near the floor of this band. Figures such as protocol size, user counts or token value are unknown here and have not been asserted.