Algorand ALGO

Roadmap On Time Delivery Rate?As a mature project, it is expected to have stable delivery capability.Weight 35%Good · 75 / 100

Last 4 upgrades achieved?Ongoing upgrades and improvements are expected.Weight 30%Good · 75 / 100

Milestones to Deliver?Lack of public details, but the project continues to evolve.Weight 20%Moderate · 70 / 100

History Extension Record?There is a lack of specific data, but no major negative reports have been observed.Weight 15%Less · 70 / 100

Consensus Mechanism?Adopts the unique Pure PoS Byzantine consensus, balancing decentralization and efficiency.Weight 30%Pure PoS (Byzantine Consensus) · 85 / 100

Main network years of operation?The mainnet has operated stably for many years, accumulating rich experience.Weight 15%About 7 years · 80 / 100

Recent upgrades?Lack of specific quality assessment data for the latest technological upgrades.Weight 35%Insufficient data · 65 / 100

Client Diversity?Core client implementations are mainly focused on Go, with diversity needing improvement.Weight 20%Low (mainly for Go language clients) · 55 / 100

Deflationary Mechanism?Partial destruction of transaction fees creates an indirect deflationary effect.Weight 30%Indirect Deflation (via Fee Burning) · 75 / 100

Inflation rate?Inflation is controllable and will eventually approach the 10 billion supply ceiling.Weight 25%exists, is controllable, and has limits · 80 / 100

Staking rate/position lock-up rate?As a Pure PoS chain, staking is the core mechanism, and the staking rate is expected to be high.Weight 25%Higher (Core PoS Mechanism) · 85 / 100

Supply Upper Limit?Having a clear supply cap helps stabilize long-term value.Weight 20%10 billion ALGO · 95 / 100

Core Development Team?The founder is a Turing Award winner, and the core team is highly experienced.Weight 30%Qiangqiang (well-known founder, experienced) · 90 / 100

Governance mechanisms?It adopts a decentralized community governance model with high transparency.Weight 25%Decentralized Governance (Community Voting) · 85 / 100

Financial Transparency?The foundation manages funds and discloses information transparently.Weight 25%Good (Foundation Management, Information Disclosure) · 80 / 100

Concentration of key people?The founders have significant influence, but the project has already formed a mature team and governance structure.Weight 20%Moderate (founder has strong influence, but the team structure is sound) · 75 / 100

Active Address?As an L1 chain, good user activity is expected.Weight 30%Activity level is good · 75 / 100

Ecological chain/L2 quantity?As a mature L1, it boasts a rich ecosystem of DApps and projects.Weight 25%Abundance (L1 Ecosystem) · 80 / 100

DeFi TVL?DeFi projects within the ecosystem are developing well, with moderate TVL scale.Weight 25%The scale is moderate · 75 / 100

Developer community?It has multiple SDKs and active developer community support.Weight 20%Active and well-supported · 80 / 100

Historical Major Failure?So far, no publicly available major security incident records have been found.Weight 25%No major safety incident records · 90 / 100

Regulatory Attitude?The project actively sought compliance, and the foundation relocated back to the United States to adapt to the regulatory environment.Weight 30%Actively seek compliance · 85 / 100

Sec Attitude?It was accused by the SEC, but the project actively responded and sought compliance.Weight 30%Disputes (Positive Response) · 75 / 100

Client Bug Frequency?Security Score: Security audit scores are relatively high, while client bug frequency is expected to be low.Weight 15%Low (Code auditing is good) · 85 / 100