EVE Online alliance rankings

How well does each alliance use the nullsec it holds? EO-Map's Alliance Rankings ranks every EVE Online alliance that holds sovereign nullsec, compares up to four of them side by side, charts how they change day by day, and paints each one's real territory on a 3D map of New Eden, free in your browser, with no account and no download.

Open Alliance Rankings

If you wanted the map of who owns nullsec

This panel ranks and compares sovereignty holders. Opening it paints current nullsec so a score has a picture behind it, and clicking an alliance isolates that territory. The map of who holds each system, with live campaigns and history back to 2007, is the sovereignty map.

If you were looking for an influence map, that name usually means Verite Rendition's painted daily pictures, where influence spreads into neighbouring systems. EO-Map does not generate that picture. The sovereignty map shows the actual holder of each system. A coalition map is a further step: player blocs, not in-game alliances. This page ranks alliances.

Who is ranked

The cohort is every alliance holding at least one sovereign nullsec system, taken from EVE's public sovereignty data, roughly seventy to eighty alliances at the time of writing. That boundary is by construction, not judgment: famous wormhole, lowsec and highsec powers are not on the board because sovereignty is the thing being measured, and they do not hold any. An alliance enters the board by taking a system and leaves it by losing its last one.

The Sovereignty Index

The headline number is the EO Sovereignty Index, and it deliberately is not "who owns the most systems". Raw system count is a poor measure of a sovereign power: space that is claimed but never used, rented out, or taken last week is not the same as space that is lived in, developed and held for years. The index instead measures one stated thing, how much long-held, well-developed, active nullsec an alliance currently holds, as a weighted blend of five subscores: Territory (30%), Development (25%), Activity (25%), Stability (10%) and Geography (10%).

Territory blends an alliance's absolute share of all claimed nullsec with its percentile in the cohort, so shedding systems into a holding alliance genuinely lowers the score. Development averages the game's own per-system development ratings (the Activity Defense Multiplier, or ADM, and its military and industrial indices), counting only systems held longer than thirty days, so a fresh conquest at ADM 1 does not punish the conqueror. Activity is seven-day traffic in the alliance's territory: jumps, NPC kills, and ship kills plus pod kills, half as totals and half as per-system rates. Stability is the median age of its claims, and Geography measures how connected and defensible the territory is: one contiguous block scores better than scattered fragments.

The whole computation is transparent and versioned. The formula is published as eo-sovereignty-index-v1, it runs in your own browser from the published data feed, and the panel shows a drill-down of exactly what drove each alliance's score. An alliance missing a required input is listed as unranked rather than quietly scored on what remains. This is a stated measurement model, not an official league table. If you disagree with a weighting, the drill-down gives you the numbers to argue with.

Resources, PvP and Organisation: visible but not scored

Three dimensions appear in the panel without being weighted into the index, each for a stated reason. Resources, meaning Power and Workforce potential plus ice and gas, track system count almost perfectly across the cohort, so scoring them would double-count territory. PvP stays out even though a 7-day window is now complete. On 21 September 2026, participated kills among sovereignty holders mostly followed how many members an alliance had, the 30-day window was still a few days short, and about half of all counted participation belonged to alliances that hold no nullsec. Putting that into the Sovereignty Index would make the index mean two things. Organisation membership counts appear only once every corporation in an alliance has been confirmed. Version one of the index is frozen. A different formula would be an explicit version two, with its own history, not a silent edit of the old scores.

Fighting, without a second score

The Fighting view places each holder's Sovereignty Index against attributed ISK destroyed in the longest PvP window the feed has actually finished (7 days until the 30-day window completes, then 30, then 90). Right means a higher index; up means more ISK destroyed. Dashed lines mark the cohort medians and cut the plot into four labelled quarters: holds more or less, fought more or less, always relative to the typical holder in that window. Neither axis predicts the other; a quarter is only a position against two medians. A table below picks out the two quarters worth a second look, holds less but fought more and holds more but fought less, using the same labels as the plot. A holder that destroyed nothing is counted as fought less but has no dot on the logarithmic axis, and its quarter tile says how many. Missing ISK is left off the plot. Kill count is not the axis, because a pod run or a pilot who barely scratched a mail would otherwise look busy. Hovering a dot names the alliance; clicking it opens a card of numbers, shows kills per day across the window and says whether one day carried an unusually large share of them, and withholds efficiency until the alliance has touched at least 20 killmails. This is a reading, versioned eo-combat-reading-v1, not a power score.

Rankings, one dimension at a time

The Rankings view leaves the composite behind and ranks the whole cohort on one named metric at a time: systems held, average ADM, level-5 systems, Power and Workforce potential, jumps and kills in territory, claim age, border share and many more, across eight categories: territory, development, resources, activity, PvP, stability, organisation and geography. "Rank 1" always means one specific stated thing. Averages and ratios default to alliances holding ten or more systems, because a one-system alliance at ADM 6 would otherwise read as the most developed power in New Eden; a visible toggle shows the full cohort if you want it. Time-windowed metrics offer 1, 7, 30 and 90-day windows only once the underlying collection has actually covered the window.

Compare

Pick up to four alliances with the + control anywhere in the panel and the Compare view puts them side by side: Sovereignty Index and subscores first, then the metrics of whichever category you came from, each row with a bar scaled to the row's best value so "who is bigger" reads at a glance. Columns share the width equally regardless of name length.

Trends: the history

The Trends view charts one metric at a time as a daily series (systems held, Sovereignty Index, average ADM, activity, members or PvP) for up to four alliances over 7, 30 or 90 days or the whole record. Alongside the chart, Sovereignty movers lists gross systems gained and lost per alliance over the selected range. Gains and losses stay separate because +9 gained and −49 lost is 58 holder changes with a net of −40, which a simple net −40 would hide. EO therefore shows gained, lost and net separately. Those numbers do not say why the systems changed hands. Membership movers appear once at least two genuine daily snapshots exist in the range.

Every series is exactly as old as its real recording. Systems held and sovereignty changes are reconstructed from EO-Map's own continuous ownership record, so they reach back furthest. Development, activity, membership and PvP series each begin on the day EO-Map first captured them, and the Sovereignty Index history begins on the day daily recording started. The index needs development and activity inputs that were never retained before then, so earlier scores cannot be reconstructed honestly and are not invented. A gap in a chart means "not recorded", never zero. Each stored score is permanently tagged with its formula version, so a future formula cannot silently rewrite old history.

On the map

This is a map feature, not a table with a map attached. Opening the panel paints current nullsec alliance sovereignty behind it. Clicking any alliance in the rankings, the comparison or the trends isolates that alliance's current sovereign territory on the 3D map in the alliance's familiar sovereignty colour. Ranking a scalar metric such as ADM colours each selected system by its value. A PvP ranking has no spatial metric yet, so a selected alliance still shows its ordinary territory. And every view writes its full state into the URL, so a link reproduces exactly the board, comparison or chart you were looking at. Made for settling arguments.

Where the data comes from

Sovereignty, per-system development indices and alliance identities come from EVE Online's official public API (ESI), fetched on a schedule by EO-Map's own collector and served as cached snapshots, so your browser never hammers the game's API directly. Activity uses the game's official per-system hourly figures; PvP counts come from zKillboard's public feed; member counts are official per-corporation figures aggregated per alliance; resource potentials come from the pinned official Static Data Export. The panel always states how fresh the data is and publishes its coverage start dates. EVE's developer, Fenris Creations (formerly CCP Games), computes the ADM and index values themselves; EO-Map reads and aggregates them.

How to open it

  1. Open EO-Map and pick Alliance Rankings from the Tools Library, or use the direct link below.
  2. The Overall view shows the Sovereignty Index board; expand any row to see what drove the score.
  3. Open Fighting to see that index against reported PvP, without a second score.
  4. Switch to Rankings and pick a category and metric to rank the cohort on one dimension.
  5. Use + to collect up to four alliances, then open Compare or Trends.
  6. Click any alliance to isolate its territory on the map; click again to restore the full field. Share the URL to share the exact view.
Rank the alliances now

Part of EO-Map

Alliance Rankings is one panel of EO-Map's interactive 3D map of New Eden. The same session shows current sovereignty, live kills and per-system activity, so a ranking can be read against the actual space it describes.

Related tools

Frequently asked questions

Why is a famous alliance missing from the rankings?

The board ranks alliances that hold sovereign nullsec, and only those. Wormhole, lowsec and highsec powers hold no sovereignty by definition, so they are outside the cohort by construction. It is a scope boundary, not a judgment of strength.

Is the Sovereignty Index an official EVE Online ranking?

No. It is EO-Map's own transparent measurement model, computed in your browser from public game data. The formula, weights and exclusions are published, versioned as eo-sovereignty-index-v1, and deliberately open to argument; the drill-down shows exactly what drove every score.

Why isn't it just "who owns the most systems"?

Because claimed space and used space are different things. The index weighs how developed the systems are (the game's own ADM ratings), how much traffic they carry, how long they have been held and how defensible the territory's shape is, alongside its size. Raw system count is still available as its own ranking in the Territory category.

I was looking for a sov map or a political map. Is this it?

Not quite. This page ranks and compares the alliances that hold nullsec. The sovereignty map is the picture of who owns each system, with campaigns and history. Opening Rankings still paints current territory so you can read a score against the space. EO-Map is not Verite's influence map and not a coalition map.

How far back does the history go?

It depends on the metric, and the panel says so per series. Systems held and sovereignty gains/losses reach back furthest, reconstructed from EO-Map's continuous ownership record. Development, activity, membership, PvP and the Sovereignty Index each begin on the day EO-Map first recorded them. Earlier values were never captured anywhere authoritative, so they are not invented. A gap means not recorded, never zero.

Why isn't PvP part of the Sovereignty Index?

Because it measures a different thing. The index is how much long-held, developed, active nullsec an alliance holds. Reported PvP mostly follows alliance size, a short completed window lets one operation dominate, and many of the alliances that fight hold no nullsec at all. The Fighting view shows the relationship. It does not invent a combat score, and it does not rewrite the index.

Why do the movers show gains and losses separately instead of one net number?

Because the churn is information. +9 gained and −49 lost is 58 gross holder changes and a net of −40. A simple net of −40 hides that churn, so EO shows gained, lost and net separately. The feed does not say why those systems changed hands.