Audit Methodology

At launch, healthy projects keep team and advisor tokens locked so insiders cannot sell into the first wave of buyers. This measures how much of that allocation is instead liquid on day one and free to be sold, which lets insiders cash out and walk away early. A lower share is safer, and foundation tokens are left out since some early foundation liquidity is normal for funding the project.

Only a fraction of the supply is actually tradeable when a token launches, and this measures how much of that initial float sits with investors. Investors usually bought in early and cheaply, so when they hold a large share of the thin launch supply they can push the price down fast. A project can still pass with a big investor allocation overall, as long as most of it stays locked at launch.

The initial float is supposed to be freely tradeable at launch. Foundation tokens usually sit with the foundation rather than being liquid, so when a large part of that float is foundation controlled, the genuinely tradeable supply is smaller than the headline float suggests. A high reading means the float has been filled with tokens that are not actually circulating.

This tracks investor control of the circulating supply across the first four years and reads whether it is trending up or down. The more of the supply investors control, the easier it is for them to move the price or swing governance votes, so a climbing trend means power is concentrating in investors instead of spreading out as it should. A low or steady control trend passes, while a rise into elevated territory is flagged, gently for a slow climb and harshly for a fast one.

This scans investor control at each of the 48 monthly checkpoints and flags every month it exceeds 30% of circulating supply. Each of those months is a window where investors hold enough of the supply to move the price or tip a governance vote on their own. The verdict is about duration: a brief breach during peak vesting is far less severe than control that stays over the line for years.

This tracks team, advisor, and foundation control of the circulating supply across the first four years and reads whether it is trending up or down. The more of the supply this group controls, the easier it is for them to move the price or swing governance votes, so a climbing trend means power is concentrating in insiders instead of spreading out as it should. A low or steady share passes, while a rise into elevated territory is flagged, gently for a slow climb and harshly for a fast one.

This scans team, advisor, and foundation control at each of the 48 monthly checkpoints and flags every month it exceeds 45% of circulating supply. The bar is deliberately harsh because many projects sit near it, and control above 45% means a small group holds close to a majority of everything circulating, enough to move the price or carry a governance vote on its own. The verdict is about duration: a brief breach during peak vesting is far less severe than one that drags on for years.

This is the slice of the entire supply set aside for the wider community through airdrops, rewards, ecosystem programs, and staking, with the public sale counted separately. A large community share means ownership is spread across the people who actually use the project, rather than concentrated in insiders and investors. The bigger this slice, the more the token belongs to its users, which is the goal of a fair distribution.

This is the slice of the entire token supply, once everything has vested, that is promised to investors across the seed, private, and strategic rounds. Investors are in it to sell at a profit, so a large investor allocation is mostly supply that exists to be sold onto the market over time. The smaller their share of the whole, the less built-in selling pressure the token carries.

This is the share of the entire supply held by the team and advisors who build the project. A healthy middle keeps the builders motivated and aligned with holders, while too large a share concentrates control and leaves a lot of future selling hanging over the market. Too little can mean the team has little skin in the game, so this rewards a balanced range rather than simply less.

This is the share of the entire supply held by the foundation that stewards the project. There is a healthy middle here, enough to fund development and the ecosystem for years, but not so much that one entity quietly controls the token. Both too little and too much are problems, which is why this scores a range rather than simply rewarding more.

This is the share of supply that ordinary buyers could purchase directly, through a public sale, IDO, or ICO. It is often the only point where regular people get in near the same price as insiders and investors, instead of buying later and higher from those early holders. Having any genuine public sale at all is the big step, so even a small slice beats none.