CryptoRated.com - Rating Checklist / Score Card
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
Comment only
 
 
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Values
12345
2
2.7Documentation (10%)
3
3ComprehensivenessIt's a brochure.Very limited information.Minimally sufficient information provided.Satisfactory coverage.All issues addressed thoroughly.
4
3ReadabilityIncomprehensible, incoherent. Pervasive errors, incorrect use of terms, extreme disorganization, etc.Very difficult to understand.May take some time to get through, or be somewhat long or complicated, but gets the point across.Relatively easy to read and understand, even if complex. Clear, comprehensible, coherent, consistent, concise. Professionally organized and well articulated.
5
2TransparencyAppearing to misinform or deliberately obfuscate critical information. Hiding the real nature or state of the project. Ambiguous non-disclosure. Glossing over important issues.Basically honest, but hyped up or potentially misleading.Informative disclosure. Necessary information provided.Full transparency and disclosure. All resources, repositories, references, etc. available & accessible.
6
3Presentation of Business Plan and Token ModelSeverely lacking; business and token models are too vague to assess.Missing critical information; discussion is brief or very basic, or based on unfounded claims or promises.More information required. Discussion is based on unverified assumptions, business and token models are are not fully laid out, or some key issues remain unaddressed.Clear, well thought out, realistic. Business and token models are well-developed and clearly presented. Thorough, viable, convincing, promising.
Business and token models are discussed thoroughly and in detail (including company's overall business plan as well as its token economy).
7
2Presentation of Platform Technology and Use of BlockchainSeverely lacking; little or no technical discussion.Missing critical information; discussion is brief or very basic, does not address the underlying issues.More information required. Discussion is primarily in layman terms, specifications only partly provided, or some key issues remain unaddressed.Clear, well thought out, realistic. Specific technical information and considerations of design and implementation are discussed.Thorough, viable, convincing, promising. Technical information and considerations of design and implementation are discussed in thorough detail (including dependencies, scaling, consensus, etc.)
8
3Legal Review and Risk AssessmentNone available.Insufficient or unprofessional (e.g., only a short disclaimer).
Semi-professional (e.g., includes standard disclaimer, terms and conditions, and risk factors).Professional legal documents are provided, project employs professional legal counsel and financial auditing services.Professional, top-tier legal structure and counsel; project utilizes a SAFT, IPO-level due diligence, etc.
9
2.5Product (25%)
10
3DifferentiationVery difficult to determine. No significant distinguishing features stand out.Minimal or contrived, unconvincing.Some; has a certain edge or angle.Evident and relevant.A unique solution with distinguishing features insightfully designed to appeal to the target user base.
11
2Readiness Nothing yet, just an idea, for the product as a whole.Product (including core components) in proof of concept or limited testing phase only.Prototype / MVP / alpha of full product; Traditional platform exists, blockchain integration still in conceptualization.Beta or initial rollout of full product; Traditional platform exists, blockchain integration in testing or proof-of-concept.Fully operational; Traditional platform exists, blockchain integration in alpha or even beta.
12
2Concreteness of Development PlansNo real concrete plans or milestones.Vague and noncommittal, few milestones with few details provided.An overall plan, major milestones stated with some relevant details.Down to earth. Milestones sufficiently detailed and correlated with business and technology development plans.Professional. Clear timeline for biz/tech development plans, funding-dependent milestones, details provided, etc.
13
3Current Position within RoadmapNowhere yet. Critical obstacles ahead.Getting there.Past a few hurdles.Well on the way.
14
2Feasibility A pipe dream.Very ambitious. Optimistic. Realistic.Conservative.
15
3Blockchain InnovationNone; simple, basic Ethereum based token (ERC20 with minimal smart contract functionality).Limited added value, some additional smart contract functionality.Specific, platform-related automation via smart contract functionality.Original, innovative use of smart contract functionality or blockchain technology as part of the platform. Infrastructural innovation. Novel blockchain and service (original platform with smart contract functionality, consensus protocol, etc.)
16
3.2Market (20%)
17
4Target User Base Tiny or indeterminate.Small audience / niche market.Has growth potential.Large audience / wide market.General audience / mass market.
18
3Market Penetration PotentialVery difficult, highly unlikely.Somewhat difficult or unlikely.Moderate, a good strategy is essential.The notion of gaining hold over a significant share of the market is not unreasonable.Realistic possibility of establishing considerable market dominance.
19
2Direct CompetitionMany / much better competitors (e.g., over 10, most further ahead). Overabundance of blockchain solutions flooding the sector.Quite a few / somewhat better competitors (e.g., 7-10, some further ahead). Blockchain solutions are trendy in the sector.Some normal competition (e.g., 5-7, similarly positioned). Blockchain solutions already evidently present in the sector. Few direct competitors (e.g., less than 5), or a leading solution. Blockchain solutions only starting to surface in the sector.Hardly any direct competition (e.g., hard to find, or solution is highly advanced). Blockchain solutions still rare in the sector.
20
2Solution AdvantageNone / indeterminate.Unexceptional / weak.Moderate.Clear, evident.Undeniable.
21
4Blockchain DisruptionNone / indeterminate.Unexceptional / weak.Moderate.Clear, evident.Undeniable.
22
4Long-Term VisionCapitalizing on the hype around crypto. Using the ICO vehicle to raise funds for a project with very limited scope or no viability. Monetization and network growth, increasing engagement. Project with somewhat limited scope or questionable viability. Gain hold over a particular market segment, expand global outreach, possibly expand into other segments or sectors. Long term market dominance / leadership. Development of the sector's flagship solution.Global, infrastructural leadership. Establishment of technological foundations and guidelines. Paving the way for the future.
23
2.5Company & Team (30%)
24
3Company Stage and Foundation No registered company yet.Initial stages of formation.Company structure in place.Established with some fundraising history (at least one notable previous investment round).Well established, has raised significant funds.
25
2Team Assembly and CommitmentHaphazard or uncommitted.Lacking in key areas.Mostly assembled and committed.Sufficiently assembled and committed. Fully assembled and committed.
26
2Background of Lead/Core Team MembersUnverifiable (many absent online profiles or hardly any information).Fragmented or inconclusive.Minimally sufficient.Verifiable relevant experience.Accomplished, recognized.
27
3Relevance of Team's Previous Experience and Skill SetUnrelated or irrelevant, if any.Lacking or inconsistent.Correlated to project requirements.Well suited to project requirements.Meeting and exceeding project requirements.
28
3Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain)Severely skewed.Somewhat skewed.Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.Good, sufficient for each aspect.Excellent, all aspects covered.
29
2Strategic PartnershipsNone really.A couple of partnerships connected to founders or advisors.A few SMB's; may include founder or advisor related ventures but shows ability to expand beyond.Numerous partnerships in place; credible partners with a substantial user base.Large-scale, well-known enterprises.
30
2.5Token Economics (15%)
31
2Value Proposition of TokenToken issued for fundraising purposes only. Unclear how or when token will have any kind of real value.Token issued primarily for fundraising purposes or network effect.
Inherent value is minimal or contrived.
Limited or uncertain; some risk with regard to actual value, but issuing a custom token is justifiable.Token entitles holder to valuable or useful rights (such as access to services), and is essential to platform.Tokens have tangible, inherent, utility-based, functional value.
32
2Token EconomyPractically undefined, or has identifiable critical flaws.Loosely defined, uncertain or faulty, raises cause for concern.Some aspects still undetermined, or potentially but not necessarily problematic.Mostly or essentially determined, well thought-out and healthily structured.Full-fledged, viable. Ways to earn and spend tokens are well defined for all participating roles. Judicious use of deflation/inflation mechanisms (if any).
33
3System Decentralization (besides token)Essentially centralized without due consideration of the broader issue.Centralized with some vague plans to decentralize, or decentralization treated more as trend than as a paradigm shift.Hybrid; use of decentralized / centralized components is broadly justified; decentralization not a core aspect.Mostly decentralized, or centralized components can be justified by business and technology models.Fully decentralized, or centralized components fully justified by business and technology models.
34
2Fundraising Goals (Min/Max Raise Amounts)Very greedy or nonsensical.Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.Justifiable.Reasonable, funding goals make overall sense.Totally sensible, well suited to requirements.
35
3Use of Proceeds (Fund Allocation)Not clear how funds will be used.Use of funds only loosely defined.Rough estimates, but looks okay.Well defined and reasonable.Carefully planned and fully transparent.
36
3Token AllocationObfuscated, or giving company control of market value.Unclear or suspicious.Sufficient company/community interest balance.Most tokens sold, vesting periods on kept tokens.Majority of tokens sold, strict vesting periods, clear plans for reserves, performance or milestone dependent release, etc.
37
38
2.67Simple Average
39
#REF!Weighted Average
40
41
Relative Occurrence
42
0%1
43
43%2
44
47%3
45
10%4
46
0%5
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
Loading...
Main menu