Ethena ENA

Roadmap On Time Delivery Rate?Lack of publicly available near-term roadmap delivery data.Weight 35%Insufficient data · 50 / 100

Last 4 upgrades achieved?There is a lack of publicly available details about recent upgrade deliveries.Weight 30%Insufficient data · 40 / 100

Milestones to Deliver?Lack of publicly available milestone information to be delivered.Weight 20%Insufficient data · 50 / 100

History Extension Record?Lack of public records of historical extensions.Weight 15%Insufficient data · 60 / 100

Consensus Mechanism?Protocol security depends on the mature Ethereum PoS mechanism.Weight 30%Relying on Ethereum PoS · 90 / 100

Main network years of operation?The main network operation time of the project is relatively short, but some experience has already been accumulated.Weight 15%About 2 years · 70 / 100

Recent upgrades?There is a lack of public information about the quality of recent core protocol upgrades.Weight 35%Insufficient data · 50 / 100

Client Diversity?As a protocol on Ethereum, its client diversity depends on Ethereum.Weight 20%Not applicable (depends on Ethereum) · 70 / 100

Deflationary Mechanism?The project has a clear buyback and burn mechanism that contributes to token value.Weight 30%Existence (buyback and burn) · 90 / 100

Inflation rate?There is a token unlock plan, which may bring short-term inflationary pressure.Weight 25%There is an unlocking and additional release · 60 / 100

Staking rate/position lock-up rate?There is a lack of public data on ENA token staking or lock-up rates.Weight 25%Insufficient data · 40 / 100

Supply Upper Limit?There is a clear cap on token supply, which helps stabilize its long-term value.Weight 20%15 billion (hard top) · 95 / 100

Core Development Team?Core team members are open and transparent, have good backgrounds, and rich experience.Weight 30%The core team is open and experienced · 95 / 100

Governance mechanisms?There are governance mechanisms, but the project still tends toward centralization.Weight 25%Existence of governance mechanisms (high degree of centralization) · 75 / 100

Financial Transparency?Secured multiple rounds of funding from well-known institutions, with high transparency of fund information.Weight 25%High (multiple rounds of financing, information disclosure) · 90 / 100

Concentration of key people?The contract has a single owner, but there is no risk of hiding permissions.Weight 20%Medium (contract with a single owner) · 70 / 100

Active Address?The number of daily active addresses is strong, indicating high user engagement.Weight 30%Active (DAA performs well) · 80 / 100

Ecological chain/L2 quantity?The project has been deployed on multiple mainstream chains, with broad ecosystem coverage.Weight 25%18+ (Multi-chain Deployment) · 95 / 100

DeFi TVL?As a stablecoin protocol, its TVL scale is enormous and it enjoys high market recognition.Weight 25%Approximately $4.49 billion · 90 / 100

Developer community?GitHub activity is low, and developer community engagement needs improvement.Weight 20%Low (low GitHub activity) · 30 / 100

Historical Major Failure?The core product USDe experienced a depegging event, so risk management should be closely monitored.Weight 25%Existence (USDe once depegged) · 40 / 100

Regulatory Attitude?Actively seeking compliance, but overall regulatory attitudes remain uncertain.Weight 30%Disputes exist (actively seeking compliance) · 40 / 100

Sec Attitude?The lack of a clear SEC stance raises potential regulatory risks.Weight 30%called “correct sequence of measures”. · 40 / 100

Client Bug Frequency?There is a lack of public data on the frequency of client bugs.Weight 15%Insufficient data · 50 / 100