NEXO NEXO

Roadmap 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?Recently, the focus has been on business and compliance updates, with protocol upgrades being inactive.Weight 30%0 / 100 · 0 / 100

Milestones to Deliver?Lack of public pending delivery milestone information makes it impossible to track project progress.Weight 20%0 / 100 · 0 / 100

History Extension Record?Lack of historical roadmap delivery records makes it impossible to assess delays.Weight 15%0 / 100 · 0 / 100

Consensus Mechanism?As an ERC-20 token, it relies on the consensus mechanism of the underlying public chain.Weight 30%50 / 100 · 50 / 100

Main network years of operation?The project has been online since 2018, has been running for a long time, and has accumulated experience.Weight 15%80 / 100 · 80 / 100

Recent upgrades?Core codebase updates are inactive, lacking recent major technical upgrades.Weight 35%10 / 100 · 10 / 100

Client Diversity?As a token, its client diversity depends on the underlying public chain ecosystem.Weight 20%40 / 100 · 40 / 100

Deflationary Mechanism?There is a buyback and burn mechanism, but its strength and transparency data are insufficient.Weight 30%40 / 100 · 40 / 100

Inflation rate?In theory, the supply ceiling is fixed, but the contract has the ability to issue additional issues, which carries higher risk.Weight 25%10 / 100 · 10 / 100

Staking rate/position lock-up rate?The platform has a staking mechanism, but the on-chain lock-up ratio data is relatively low.Weight 25%20 / 100 · 20 / 100

Supply Upper Limit?There is a supply cap, but contracts can be issued additionally, which brings uncertainty.Weight 20%30 / 100 · 30 / 100

Core Development Team?Core team members have clear backgrounds, but their execution records need improvement.Weight 30%60 / 100 · 60 / 100

Governance mechanisms?The platform adopts a centralized governance model but has mechanisms to incorporate community feedback.Weight 25%65 / 100 · 65 / 100

Financial Transparency?Financing information is partially disclosed, but project fund transparency data is insufficient.Weight 25%50 / 100 · 50 / 100

Concentration of key people?The contract hides its owner, and the owner can change the balance, resulting in high concentration.Weight 20%10 / 100 · 10 / 100

Active Address?The number of active addresses is relatively low, and user engagement needs improvement.Weight 30%20 / 100 · 20 / 100

Ecological chain/L2 quantity?It supports multiple mainstream public chains and has a well-established cross-chain ecosystem.Weight 25%70 / 100 · 70 / 100

DeFi TVL?As a centralized lending platform, its DeFi TVL data is either not directly applicable or insufficient.Weight 25%30 / 100 · 30 / 100

Developer community?The developer community is small, and the codebase is not actively updated.Weight 20%10 / 100 · 10 / 100

Historical Major Failure?There have been minor hacking incidents, but overall security audit scores are acceptable.Weight 25%40 / 100 · 40 / 100

Regulatory Attitude?Efforts are being made to seek regulatory approval in multiple regions, but there are disputes in some regions.Weight 30%50 / 100 · 50 / 100

Sec Attitude?A settlement has been reached with the SEC and fines have been paid, but it is still considered a potential security.Weight 30%30 / 100 · 30 / 100

Client Bug Frequency?The contract involves hidden ownership and the ability to issue additional shares, posing high risks.Weight 15%0 / 100 · 0 / 100