As part of our responsibility to the community, we rank various aspects of projects so that people interested in any project can get a brief overview of the state of the project. This may sound a bit like an audit, but we are neither auditors, police, nor judges. We just independently classify a few key aspects of projects which we list on our pages. Aspects under our scrutiny are listed below. To each of these aspects, we assign a traffic-like colour code rank (see explanations below).

If we consider a project aspect as red, it does not necessarily mean the project is bad. For example, a project can be in the planning stage and therefore the implementation cannot be classified any better than red.
Similarly, even a project with a lot of green lights can impose some risks.

If you represent and work for a project which we colour rank and if you have some related feedback or questions, please do not hesitate to contact us in our Telegram group.

Founders

You should ask yourself questions like: Who does fund the project development, promotion, or operation? Who will significantly benefit from the project?/

Explanations of colour ranks for these aspects:

	The identity of project founders is unknown, though they may be present or active through communication channels (Telegram, Twitter, or similar).
	Project founders were interviewed publicly, 3rd party KYC also fits here.
	Project founders are doxed or interviewed publicly and they showed faces and/or real-world names are known.
	Information is not available at the moment.

Note: By project founders we also mean a company or legal entity behind the project.

Team

You should ask yourself questions like: Are there multiple people working on the project? Who are they? Do they have needed skills? Can I address them, if needed, in the real world?

Explanations of colour ranks for these aspects:

	The project team or developers are unknown.
	The project team or developers were interviewed publicly or they are present or active through communication channels (Telegram, Twitter, or similar).
	The project team is doxed or interviewed publicly and they showed faces and/or provide real life are known.
	Information is not available at the moment.

Plan

You should ask yourself questions like: Is there a clear description of what project tries to solve or do? Are there clear milestones - what end when should be delivered?

Note: These aspects can be subjectively perceived, to minimise our bias we focus only on existence of obvious artifacts.

Explanations of colour ranks for these aspects:

	The project doesn't have description or significant part of what project is going to deliver is kept as secret.
	Project has publicly available description (e.g. whitepaper, presentation) covering majority of project aspects and there is at least approximate description when and what is going to be delivered.
	Project has publicly available and detailed documentation (e.g. technical documentation, user manual/guides, tutorial videos, presentations etc.) and project stages are clearly communicated
	Information is not available at the moment.

Implementation

You should ask yourself questions like: Does the project exist only on paper? Can I try it myself? Is it a finished or at least nearly finished product?

Explanations of colour ranks for these aspects:

	The project exists only as a vision or on paper.
	The project team claims they do development, provide screenshot, videos or demonstrations, but nothing can be tested publicly or there is something one can test, but there is just basic functionality.
	The project has publicly testable deployment (includes Testnet deployments) with a reasonable level of maturity.
	Information is not available at the moment.

Audit

You should ask yourself questions like: Has there been any independent technical and/or financial audit of the project?

Explanations of colour ranks for these aspects:

	The project doesn't have any kind of independent technical or financial review.
	The project team claims an independent audit is planned or in progress, or they claim they forked existing project which was audited.
	The project has technical and/or financial audit or review by and independent body (company or community).
	Information is not available at the moment.