Hyperlane HYPER
Hyperlane stands out thanks to its market ecosystem and team governance performance, with roadmap delivery remaining a key focus, currently holding a solid C+ rating.
Rating updated 2026-08-05
C+54.39 / 100
Sector Rank #52 · Global Rank #214
Overall Rating
C+ · 54.39 / 100Roadmap Delivery
0
Tokenomics
40.5
Team Governance
76.23
Market Ecosystem
83.16
Security & Compliance
57.32
Overall Score
54.39
Hyperlane has an overall rating C+f C (total 56.76), ranking high in market ecosystem, team governance, and security compliance across six dimensions. The main point of deduction is roadmap delivery (0 points)—mainly affected by sub-items such as development continuity (0 points) and development heat trends (0 points).
Rating team conclusion: "Hyperlane has relative advantages in market ecosystem, team governance, and security compliance, with current weaknesses focused on roadmap delivery." " It is recommended to observe small positions and wait for key sub-sectors to improve before increasing allocation weighting.
Six-Dimension Rating Breakdown
Roadmap Delivery
0/100Roadmap On Time Delivery Rate?The lack of public roadmap delivery data makes it impossible to assess on-time delivery rates.Weight 35%0 / 100 · 0 / 100
Last 4 upgrades achieved?Lack of recent upgrade delivery information makes it impossible to assess achievement.Weight 30%0 / 100 · 0 / 100
Milestones to Deliver?Lack of public pending delivery milestone information makes it impossible to assess project planning.Weight 20%0 / 100 · 0 / 100
History Extension Record?Lack of historical delay records makes it impossible to assess project execution efficiency.Weight 15%0 / 100 · 0 / 100
Technical Implementation
54.5/100Consensus Mechanism?As an interoperability layer, its security depends on the consensus mechanism of the connected chain.Weight 30%70 / 100 · 70 / 100
Main network years of operation?The mainnet has been running for a short time and is still in the early stages of development.Weight 15%40 / 100 · 40 / 100
Recent upgrades?Lack of public data to support the assessment of recent upgrade quality.Weight 35%50 / 100 · 50 / 100
Client Diversity?Lack of public data support makes it impossible to assess client diversity.Weight 20%50 / 100 · 50 / 100
Tokenomics
63.5/100Deflationary Mechanism?There is a token burn mechanism that helps control the total supply.Weight 30%90 / 100 · 90 / 100
Inflation rate?There is a large number of unlocked tokens, facing inflationary pressures in the future.Weight 25%40 / 100 · 40 / 100
Staking rate/position lock-up rate?Lack of clear staking or lock data, or weak mechanisms.Weight 25%30 / 100 · 30 / 100
Supply Upper Limit?There is a clear cap on token supply, with a fixed total supply.Weight 20%95 / 100 · 95 / 100
Team Governance
72.5/100Core Development Team?The core team has a strong background and is supported by well-known VCs.Weight 30%85 / 100 · 85 / 100
Governance mechanisms?There is an on-chain governance mechanism, but there is room for improvement in transparency and participation.Weight 25%62 / 100 · 62 / 100
Financial Transparency?Fund-based transparency is average and requires further public disclosure.Weight 25%62 / 100 · 62 / 100
Concentration of key people?Core team holds coins with relatively low concentration, spreading risk.Weight 20%80 / 100 · 80 / 100
Market Ecosystem
70.7/100Active Address?A high number of active addresses indicates active user engagement.Weight 30%99 / 100 · 99 / 100
Ecological chain/L2 quantity?Supports multiple mainstream chains, with broad ecosystem coverage.Weight 25%90 / 100 · 90 / 100
DeFi TVL?As an interoperability layer, it does not have direct DeFi TVL data but supports cross-chain liquidity.Weight 25%50 / 100 · 50 / 100
Developer community?Developer activity data is low, and community engagement needs improvement.Weight 20%30 / 100 · 30 / 100
Security & Compliance
46/100Historical Major Failure?There are currently no publicly disclosed major security incident records, but data coverage is limited.Weight 25%70 / 100 · 70 / 100
Regulatory Attitude?Lack of clear regulatory compliance information or low compliance assessment.Weight 30%30 / 100 · 30 / 100
Sec Attitude?The lack of a clear SEC stance raises potential regulatory uncertainties.Weight 30%40 / 100 · 40 / 100
Client Bug Frequency?Lack of data on client bug frequency, moderate audit coverage.Weight 15%50 / 100 · 50 / 100
C+ Peer Comparison
Export CSV| HyperlaneC+ · 54.39 |  xDollar StablecoinC+ · 59.88 |  PixelsC+ · 59.72 |  HashflowC+ · 59.65 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 54.39 | 59.88 | 59.72 | 59.65 |
| Roadmap Delivery | 0 | 56.61 | 37.5 | 37.5 |
| Technical Implementation | -- | 60.25 | -- | -- |
| Tokenomics | 40.5 | 64.15 | 35 | 35 |
| Team Governance | 76.23 | 58.84 | 87.43 | 73.37 |
| Market Ecosystem | 83.16 | 62.2 | 76.12 | 90.7 |
| Security & Compliance | 57.32 | 56.92 | 61.87 | 56.17 |
Discussion · Comments
No comments yet.