Investment Rating Review
This is one of the most effective ways to attract the attention of real investors on ICO and pre-ICO stages
Detailed Review
& in-depth Audit
That is delivered to 25 crypto funds and
15,000 private investors
Private Investors
Crypto Funds
Total AUM of Crypto funds

Case Studies of Investment Attraction

Investment Rating provides an independent and unbiased assessment of a project. It enables professional investors to benchmark new ICOs with their peers and is invaluable for making an investment decision.

They publish Investment Ratings on their website, offering high visibility to investors and the crypto community and also promote rated projects via social media channels (30k+ followers), and in their investor newsletter, read by more than 15,000 retail investors and 25 crypto funds with a total AUM of US$2 bln.
Pricing of Investment Rating Review
Total Price
Talk with our manager to get the personalized offer
PR Increases the
Image and Trust of Investors
If the investor sees that the project was mentioned in the main media, they have more confidence in the project. This significantly increases conversion. Trust is the most important point for the success ICO.

Get publicated in the TOP Worldwide Media

About Investment Rating Review

Any rating should answer specific questions from potential investors. Taking into account the specifics of the industry, and more precisely the quality of preparation in startups attracting investments, when writing an Investment Rating we aim to develop an approach relevant to the current level of development of the industry.

This approach should take into account the youth of the market, the innovative nature of projects, as well as the lack of analogues in traditional market segments.

Investment Rating answers the following questions:

▪ Whether the stated information on the current state of the project, the team, the market and the degree of development of the technological component of the product is accurate.

▪ What are the team's chances of implementing the product or service with the stated (officially confirmed) set of developments, team competencies, business model, current market development and competitive environment.

At the same time, we understand that the ecosystem of blockchain and of blockchainbased projects that are entering the market, significantly differs from all known market segments. Our assessment approach takes into account all the main aspects of traditional practice for evaluating startups, and identifying the unique features of the blockchain ecosystem, predicting its development and focusing on technological analysis allowing us to significantly update it.

Currently, our experts clusterize the projects that are launching their products on the basis of distributed ledger technology as follows:

▪ Decentralized application platforms (Ethereum, EOS, NEO, etc.)
▪ Interoperability (Polkadot, Cosmos, ICON, etc.)
▪ Oracles (Oracles Network, etc.)
▪ Decentralized Exchange Protocols (0x, SWAP, etc.)
▪ User controlled Internet (Blockstack, Status, etc.)
▪ Smart Contracts (Etherparty, Blockcat, Agrello.)
▪ Dapps (the most common categories — Financial services, Business Services, Value Exchange.)

Assessment of the technological component and the potential role of the token in the system

Evaluating projects that create developer tools, such as platforms for the development of smart contracts and Dapp (NEO, Ethereum) or startups that provide interoperability (Polkadot, Cosmos), requires an individual approach because of the greater scaling and potential prevalence of the token (this factor can affect the price growth of the token).

Such projects (unlike Dapps) are analyzed differently: With a strong emphasis on the technological component and the ability of the team to solve the existing problems with the blockchain ecosystem. Now this area has a high potential due to the market readiness, the existing need for change and development and a lesser influence of external forces during the project implementation.

Dapps (decentralized applications) we evaluate separately because of restrictions which can be imposed on them by the platform on which they are developed (blockchain scalability). To evaluate them it is necessary to define a project's environment qualitatively (whether the project will be able to function in it, whether it will receive user and partner support, whether its plans for entering the world market are realistic). We pay special attention to the analysis of the market and future stakeholders in the project.

Moreover, we divide the overall approach to project evaluation into two areas — qualitative and quantitative components.

Qualitative characteristics

Technological operation environment — assessment of a project's impact on the blockchain infrastructure and its development, solution of current problems, the possibility of integration with other products or use as a basis for building new products (reduction of technological risks).

▪ Market positions – assessment of the current market segment, its growth rate, competitive analysis (reduction of market risk).

▪ Legal preparation of the project — compliance with regulatory frameworks, support from the government, the existence of a legal entity, necessary and sufficient documentation, KYC, AML procedures (reduction of legal risks).

▪ Project management — whether the team has the required competence to implement the project (reducing risk of non-execution).

▪ The probability of support (analysis of early investments in the project).

▪ The stage of technical development of the project — the existence of a prototype of the product, its technical characteristics, protocol or application operation mechanism, key components (reduction of production risks).

▪ Analysis of the token, its functionality and forecast of its value change in the long-term perspective (investment attractiveness of the asset) based on key principles of token economics.

Forecasting demand and supply for the digital asset offered for sale by the company (determining the presence of factors creating a supply overhang or artificial deficit of the asset).

Analysis of the distribution of raised funds (an estimation of project costs, verifying that the requested financing is in accordance with the project's objectives and expenditure items by comparing it with open market cases) and tokens (determination of risk for investors in the ICO.

The metrics of this parameter is divided into 10 levels:

The higher the rate assigned to the project, the better the overall quality of the project's documentation, and the lower the number of risks for future investors.

When writing a review and assigning a rating, our experts check the validity of all figures and facts provided by the project team, using all relevant sources of information which are freely available. The lack of any necessary information in the public domain leads to a decrease in the rating score.

Our team consists of professionals in the financial industry. We strive to provide impartial reviews based on our long-term experience with ICO analytics. Analysts are open for communication with project representatives during an audit. Each review is itself subject to reviewing and additional verification. We assess more than 20 projects staging ICOs monthly; our assessment is not automated and is based on a deep understanding of the market.