LOL Land LOL

Roadmap On Time Delivery Rate?Lack of publicly available roadmap delivery data.Weight 35%Insufficient data · 0 / 100

Last 4 upgrades achieved?Recent upgrade information is missing and cannot be assessed.Weight 30%No public record · 0 / 100

Milestones to Deliver?Lack of public information on milestones to be delivered.Weight 20%No public information available · 0 / 100

History Extension Record?Historical delay records are missing and cannot be evaluated.Weight 15%No public record · 0 / 100

Consensus Mechanism?As an L2, its security depends on Ethereum, but the specific mechanism is unclear.Weight 30%Inheriting L1 (Ethereum) · 75 / 100

Main network years of operation?The mainnet has short runtime and limited historical data.Weight 15%About 0.6 years · 20 / 100

Recent upgrades?There is a lack of information about the quality and details of recent upgrades.Weight 35%No public record · 0 / 100

Client Diversity?Lack of client diversity data makes assessment impossible.Weight 20%Insufficient data · 0 / 100

Deflationary Mechanism?There is a lack of clear deflationary mechanism design.Weight 30%No public mechanism · 0 / 100

Inflation rate?A large number of tokens remain in circulation, creating high inflationary pressures.Weight 25%Relatively high (about 76% unlocked) · 10 / 100

Staking rate/position lock-up rate?Lack of staking or lock-up data may result in low participation.Weight 25%Data is insufficient or undervalued · 0 / 100

Supply Upper Limit?There is a fixed supply cap, but the total volume is relatively large.Weight 20%5 billion (fixed) · 80 / 100

Core Development Team?Insufficient disclosure of core team background information, lack of visibility.Weight 30%Background information is limited · 30 / 100

Governance mechanisms?The project governance mechanism is centralized, and community participation is low.Weight 25%Centralised · 10 / 100

Financial Transparency?Lack of data on fund usage and transparency.Weight 25%Insufficient data · 0 / 100

Concentration of key people?High concentration of permissions poses a single point of risk.Weight 20%Relatively high · 20 / 100

Active Address?The number of active addresses is extremely low and user engagement is low.Weight 30%Very few (0.19) · 0.2 / 100

Ecological chain/L2 quantity?The ecosystem is small in scale, and the number of integrated projects is limited.Weight 25%1 (Abstract L2) · 10 / 100

DeFi TVL?The project's market capitalization is extremely low, and DeFi ecosystem TVL data is not applicable.Weight 25%Approximately $290,000 (project market value) · 0 / 100

Developer community?Lack of developer community activity data; GitHub has no activity.Weight 20%Low activity · 0 / 100

Historical Major Failure?There are no publicly available records of significant safety incidents.Weight 25%No public record · 80 / 100

Regulatory Attitude?Lack of clear regulatory compliance information.Weight 30%Insufficient data · 10 / 100

Sec Attitude?Lack of clear stance from the SEC regarding the nature of its tokens.Weight 30%Insufficient data · 10 / 100

Client Bug Frequency?Lack of data on client bug frequency makes it impossible to evaluate.Weight 15%Insufficient data · 0 / 100