Each of our ICO reviews and rating system provides a concise summary of information collected from the project’s website, whitepaper, press or blog coverage, LinkedIn profiles, prototype or code repository, and more, and we also point out where critical information is absent, questionable, or arouses suspicion.
These reviews, although unbiased, are subjective with regard to what information is deemed important or seen as dubious. The ratings given along with each review provide a quick-and-easy metric for evaluation and comparison of ICOs, along five parameters:
Market Need – How much of a perceived necessity is the offered solution, and how well does it answer the perceived need.
Blockchain Fit – How well does the project utilize blockchain technology and is it in line with blockchain values and principles.
Founding Team – Who are the founders and core team members, what are their backgrounds, how transparent is their involvement, how well-rounded and trustworthy does the team seem to be.
Blockchain Talent – Similar to the Founding Team rating, but concentrating on blockchain development expertise and contribution.
Equitability – How seemingly likely is it that the project can live up to its claims and that its tokens can deliver on their purported value.
These ratings reflect informed opinions based on conclusions and insights drawn from the reviews – there are no additional, hidden influences. Most importantly, however, our ratings are not recommendations or forecasts, and provide no guarantees as to the likelihood of the project’s success or its investment potential.