Cookie DAO COOKIE

Roadmap On Time Delivery Rate?Lack of publicly available roadmap delivery data.Weight 35%Insufficient data · 35 / 100

Last 4 upgrades achieved?The project has undergone multiple transformations recently, with some functions ceasing operations.Weight 30%There are major adjustments · 25 / 100

Milestones to Deliver?The project is in a transitional phase, with unclear public milestones.Weight 20%No clear public milestones during the transformation · 25 / 100

History Extension Record?There is a lack of clear documentation, but the project transformation suggests plans to change.Weight 15%Insufficient data, and project transformation · 30 / 100

Consensus Mechanism?It relies on mature Ethereum and BSC consensus mechanisms.Weight 30%Dependence on underlying chains (PoS/PoSA) · 85 / 100

Main network years of operation?The main network operation time of the project is relatively short.Weight 15%About 1.5 years · 60 / 100

Recent upgrades?The project is in a period of transformation and lacks details of recent technological upgrades.Weight 35%Project transformation, with no recent technical upgrade details · 40 / 100

Client Diversity?It inherits the good client diversity of the underlying public blockchain.Weight 20%Relying on the diversity of underlying chain clients · 80 / 100

Deflationary Mechanism?The data does not mention a clear token deflation mechanism.Weight 30%No explicit deflation mechanism · 5 / 100

Inflation rate?Economic models lack value capture and demand logic.Weight 25%Defects in economic model design · 5 / 100

Staking rate/position lock-up rate?There is a lack of clear staking or lock-up data, and the lock-up ratio is extremely low.Weight 25%Extremely Low (0E-8) · 5 / 100

Supply Upper Limit?Although there is an upper limit, flaws in economic model design affect its value.Weight 20%1 billion · 20 / 100

Core Development Team?Limited disclosure of core team information, background unknown.Weight 30%Limited team information · 30 / 100

Governance mechanisms?There is a decentralized autonomous organization governance mechanism with good authenticity.Weight 25%DAO Governance (Good) · 80 / 100

Financial Transparency?Funds are highly transparent, with publicly available financing information.Weight 25%Good · 80 / 100

Concentration of key people?Contract ownership is limited to a single address, resulting in a very low multi-signature ratio.Weight 20%There is a risk of single-point control · 20 / 100

Active Address?The number of daily active addresses performed well.Weight 30%Good · 86 / 100

Ecological chain/L2 quantity?The project has been deployed on multiple mainstream public blockchains and L2s.Weight 25%5+ (Multi-chain) · 85 / 100

DeFi TVL?Lack of TVL data for projects themselves, and they are not core DeFi projects.Weight 25%Insufficient data / non-core business · 40 / 100

Developer community?Lack of public codebase, and extremely low developer activity data.Weight 20%Low activity / insufficient data · 15 / 100

Historical Major Failure?There are no publicly available records of significant safety incidents.Weight 25%No major public faults · 90 / 100

Regulatory Attitude?Lack of clear regulatory compliance information results in lower compliance scores.Weight 30%Insufficient data / biased caution · 40 / 100

Sec Attitude?The lack of clear SEC statements and a generally cautious regulatory environmentWeight 30%called “correct sequence of measures”. · 40 / 100

Client Bug Frequency?Relying on the stability of the underlying chain, the contract passes security score audits.Weight 15%Depends on the underlying chain / Auditing is good · 90 / 100