{"id":155734,"date":"2025-04-30T16:19:46","date_gmt":"2025-04-30T13:19:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cryptodnes.bg\/en\/?page_id=155734"},"modified":"2025-05-22T13:26:43","modified_gmt":"2025-05-22T10:26:43","slug":"rating-methodology","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/cryptodnes.bg\/en\/rating-methodology\/","title":{"rendered":"CryptoDnes\u2019 Rating Methodology for Blockchain and Crypto Projects"},"content":{"rendered":"
CryptoDnes evaluates blockchain projects through our CHAIN Analysis Framework<\/strong>\u2122 \u2013 a system designed to identify genuine innovation and sustainable value. Unlike traditional rating systems focused primarily on market metrics, our methodology prioritizes technological innovation, real-world application, and long-term sustainability factors.<\/p>\n Projects receive a Dynamic Rating between 1-10<\/strong> (with decimal precision) that evolves alongside industry developments and project maturation.<\/p>\n Our analysts conduct thorough investigations across eight distinct dimensions, combining technical audits, governance evaluation, and practical implementation assessment.<\/p>\n Rather than emphasizing historical performance, our methodology identifies projects positioned to thrive amid emerging technological paradigms and regulatory landscapes. This anticipatory approach helps readers discover value before mainstream recognition.<\/p>\n We assign substantial importance to genuine technological advancement over short-term market performance. Projects introducing novel solutions to significant blockchain limitations receive enhanced consideration in our framework.<\/p>\n Projects demonstrating environmental consciousness, energy efficiency, and alignment with broader sustainability goals receive favorable evaluation. We recognize that long-term viability increasingly depends on responsible resource utilization.<\/p>\n Our proprietary evaluation model examines projects across eight critical dimensions, each represented by a letter in our CHAIN<\/strong> methodology:<\/p>\n We conduct comprehensive assessment of project codebases, examining:<\/p>\n Evaluation Scale: Experimental \u2192 Revolutionary<\/em><\/p>\n We evaluate the teams behind projects with emphasis on:<\/p>\n Evaluation Scale: Emerging \u2192 Established<\/em><\/p>\n We analyze real-world implementation through:<\/p>\n Evaluation Scale: Speculative \u2192 Mainstream<\/em><\/p>\n We assess technological differentiation through:<\/p>\n Evaluation Scale: Derivative \u2192 Pioneering<\/em><\/p>\n We evaluate economic design via:<\/p>\n Evaluation Scale: Extractive \u2192 Regenerative<\/em><\/p>\n As quantum computing advances, we assess projects for:<\/p>\n We evaluate environmental considerations through:<\/p>\n Beyond marketing claims, we measure actual decentralization via:<\/p>\n We assess preparedness for evolving compliance landscapes:<\/p>\n To ensure a consistent and objective evaluation, CryptoDnes applies sector-specific criteria tailored to the unique characteristics of each blockchain project category.<\/p>\n The following frameworks outline how different types of projects:<\/p>\n Base blockchain platforms undergo specialized assessment of:<\/strong><\/p>\n Decentralized finance projects face scrutiny regarding:<\/strong><\/p>\n RWA projects are evaluated based on:<\/strong><\/p>\n AI-blockchain hybrid projects receive specialized assessment of:<\/strong><\/p>\n Our analysts collect data directly from:<\/p>\n We employ proprietary algorithms to analyze:<\/p>\n We incorporate natural language processing across:<\/p>\n Rather than applying rigid numerical weightings, CryptoDnes employs a dynamic rating algorithm that adapts to changing market conditions and technological developments. This approach recognizes that the relative importance of different factors evolves alongside the blockchain ecosystem itself.<\/p>\n Ratings undergo continual refinement through:<\/p>\n Every rating undergoes a rigorous multi-stage review process:<\/p>\n CryptoDnes maintains strict editorial independence, with absolute separation between analytical teams and business operations. Analysts must disclose all digital asset holdings and recuse themselves from evaluating projects where conflicts exist.<\/p>\n The CryptoDnes evaluation framework undergoes continuous improvement through:<\/p>\n Our research team collaborates with external blockchain specialists, economists, and regulatory experts to refine and enhance our approach.<\/p>\n Blockchain projects may submit methodological suggestions through our transparent improvement proposal system, ensuring our approach remains relevant.<\/p>\n Introduced specialized evaluation criteria for Artificial Intelligence\/blockchain integration projects and expanded sustainability metrics.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n Implemented advanced on-chain analytics for more granular assessment of network health indicators and user adoption patterns.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n Added quantum resistance evaluation framework to address emerging concerns about cryptographic security in post-quantum computing environments.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" CryptoDnes evaluates blockchain projects through our CHAIN Analysis Framework\u2122 \u2013 a system designed to identify genuine innovation and sustainable value. Unlike traditional rating systems focused primarily on market metrics, our methodology prioritizes technological innovation, real-world application, and long-term sustainability factors. Projects receive a Dynamic Rating between 1-10 (with decimal precision) that evolves alongside industry developments […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_lmt_disableupdate":"no","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-155734","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nCore Evaluation Pillars<\/h2>\n
Comprehensive Assessment<\/h3>\n
We reject one-dimensional analysis in favor of a multifaceted approach that examines both quantitative metrics and qualitative aspects of each project.<\/p>\n
Forward-Looking Perspective<\/h3>\n
Technological Innovation Priority<\/h3>\n
Sustainability Integration<\/h3>\n
The CHAIN Analysis Framework\u2122<\/h2>\n
C: Code Foundation<\/h3>\n
\n
H: Human Capital<\/h3>\n
\n
A: Adoption Trajectory<\/h3>\n
\n
I: Innovative Capacity<\/h3>\n
\n
N: Network Economics<\/h3>\n
\n
Advanced Evaluation Dimensions<\/h2>\n
Quantum Resistance Readiness<\/h3>\n
\n
Climate Impact Profile<\/h3>\n
\n
Decentralization Reality Index<\/h3>\n
\n
Regulatory Adaptation Capacity<\/h3>\n
\n
Sector-Specific Evaluation Frameworks<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Research Methodology<\/h2>\n
Primary Source Integration<\/h3>\n
\n
Advanced On-Chain Analytics<\/h3>\n
\n
Sentiment Analysis Integration<\/h3>\n
\n
Dynamic Rating Formulation<\/h2>\n
\n
Editorial Oversight<\/h2>\n
\n
Methodology Evolution<\/h2>\n
Quarterly Methodology Symposiums<\/h3>\n
Open Consultation Process<\/h3>\n
Recent Framework Enhancements<\/h2>\n