Our Evidence-Based Methodology

We evaluate crypto projects using a standardized, transparent scoring system across six key areas. Our methodology is designed to surface risk indicators, not make definitive claims.

How We Score Projects

Each project receives a score from 0-100, where higher scores indicate higher concern levels. We evaluate six main categories, each weighted according to their importance in risk assessment.

1. Research

Collect data from multiple sources

2. Analyze

Evaluate against our rubric

3. Score

Assign weighted scores

4. Review

Cross-check findings

Scoring Categories

Team Transparency (20%)

High: 15-20
Medium: 8-14
Low: 0-7

Code & Audits (20%)

High: 15-20
Medium: 8-14
Low: 0-7

Tokenomics (15%)

High: 11-15
Medium: 6-10
Low: 0-5

Liquidity & Custody (15%)

High: 11-15
Medium: 6-10
Low: 0-5

On-Chain Anomalies (15%)

High: 11-15
Medium: 6-10
Low: 0-5

Communications (15%)

High: 11-15
Medium: 6-10
Low: 0-5

Review & Update Process

1

Initial Assessment

We conduct thorough research when a project is first submitted or identified, gathering data from all available sources.

2

Community Input

We consider community feedback and tips submitted through our platform, verifying claims with evidence.

3

Regular Updates

We periodically review and update assessments, especially when significant changes occur or new evidence emerges.

4

Correction Process

Projects can submit corrections or additional evidence through our submission form for review.