ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Polity Phase 1 – Methodological Appendix Cohort Dataset (V.3.7.0)
2
3
About this spreadsheet
4
This spreadsheet is the companion artefact to the Polity Phase 1 Methodological Appendix (V.3.7.0). It contains the named cohort against which the framework's quantitative claims (Articles 1–4) are calibrated. The Methodological Appendix document carries the full methodology, inclusion criteria, exception treatment, data-quality discussion, and use boundaries. This spreadsheet does not duplicate that text; it summarises the dataset-specific conventions readers need to interpret the cohort rows below.
5
6
Companion document
7
Polity_Phase_1_V.3.7.0_Methodological_Appendix.docx – full methodology, inclusion criteria, exception treatment, data-quality discussion, and use boundaries. This spreadsheet should be read alongside that document.
8
9
Cohort scope (one-line summaries; full text in companion document)
10
11
Cohort definition
12
Web3 infrastructure projects: (i) raised ≥$10m institutional round 2020–2024; (ii) regulated- or institutional-finance thesis at raise; (iii) reached mainnet/equivalent live state by end-2024.
13
14
Categories included
15
Category 1 – Regulated-finance L1 / L2 chains; Category 2 – Permissioned / hybrid finance chains. Five further categories (RWA, custody, exchanges, stablecoins, RWA tokenisation) deliberately excluded – see §2 of the companion document.
16
17
Cohort size
18
15 named projects, of which 14 are substantive cohort members for the framework’s explanatory analysis (Provenance Blockchain is the sponsoring-entity exception carved out per Article 4 §4.6a). The cohort carries five named inclusion exceptions in total – see row 21.
19
20
Inclusion exceptions (named)
21
JPMorgan Onyx/Liink/Kinexys (bank-funded); SIX Digital Exchange (exchange-funded); VMware Blockchain (corporate-funded, discontinued); Provenance Blockchain (chain bank-funded by Figure rather than via independent rounds, per Article 4 §4.6a); Aztec Network (current-incarnation timing exception). See §5 of the companion document for treatment.
22
23
Selection process
24
Option B – search-then-cull: candidate list assembled from credible secondary sources and trackers, then culled by the Vision Officer to the named fifteen. Distinguishes from Option A (Polity-proposed) and Option C (analyst-judgement-on-row, also adopted).
25
26
Judgement convention
27
Option C – analyst judgement is surfaced explicitly via the 'Judgement notes' column on the Cohort dataset tab rather than concealed in clean rows. Three rows carry explicitly low-confidence funding figures: Hedera, Provenance, and SDX (see §7 of the companion document).
28
29
Sources used
30
Project communications; industry trackers (Tracxn, Dropstab, Crunchbase, RWA.xyz, Chainspect, Cryptorank); credible secondary sources (Coindesk, Blockworks, Ledger Insights, Reuters, Forkast, Cointelegraph). Per-row source citations are in the 'Public-source citations' column on the Cohort dataset tab.
31
32
Disclaimer
33
Purpose and scope. This dataset and its companion document are published for informational and educational purposes only. They do not constitute, and shall not be construed as, investment advice, legal advice, tax advice, financial advice, or an endorsement of any product, service, or security. Nothing in this dataset constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any security, financial instrument, or crypto-asset, nor an inducement to engage in any investment activity. Readers should not rely on this dataset in making any investment, financial, or commercial decision; readers should conduct their own due diligence and consult qualified professionals before acting on any of its content.
34
Polity status and conflict of interest. Polity is a B2B technology vendor that develops substrate infrastructure for the operators of regulated digital finance networks. Polity does not provide investment advice, custody services, crypto-asset services under Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA), or any other regulated activity under any regulatory regime; operator-customers are the regulated entities for any service delivered on Polity substrate. Polity has a commercial interest in the adoption of the framework that this dataset accompanies; this conflict of interest is disclosed for transparency and is not cured by it.
35
Forward-looking statements. Statements in this dataset or the article corpus relating to future events – including the Article 4 §4.6b research hypotheses about cohort outcomes over the prediction window – are forward-looking statements based on current expectations and assumptions that may prove materially incorrect. Past patterns observed in the named cohort are not a guarantee of future outcomes. The §4.6b research hypotheses are stated for the purpose of falsification and not as investment recommendations, financial promotions, or solicitations within the meaning of any applicable regulatory regime.
36
Jurisdiction, MiCA Art. 27, GDPR. This dataset is published from the European Economic Area and is not directed at, and should not be relied on by, any person in a jurisdiction where its publication or availability would be contrary to local law or regulation. This dataset is not a marketing communication relating to any specific crypto-asset within the meaning of Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA). Personal data of natural persons appearing here (typically corporate officers in the named cohort projects) is processed under legitimate-interest grounds (GDPR Article 6(1)(f)) and confined to information already in the public commercial record; no special-category data within the meaning of GDPR Article 9 is processed.
37
Cohort references and source provenance. Inclusion of a project in this dataset does not imply any commercial relationship between Polity and that project, nor any endorsement, partnership, or affiliation. Third-party sources where cited are included for reference; their inclusion does not imply endorsement by or affiliation with Polity. Where this dataset characterises causes, mechanisms, or outcomes of named cohort projects, those characterisations are this framework’s analytical interpretation of the public record, not statements of fact about any named entity’s strategy, decisions, or financial condition. Any quantitative figures in this dataset are sourced from publicly-available materials and have not been independently audited.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100