SoSoValue SOSO
SoSoValue leads in team governance and economic modeling, with security and compliance remaining the main focus, currently firmly holding a D rating.
Rating updated 2026-07-30
D28.29 / 100
Sector Rank #524 · Global Rank #1079
Overall Rating
D · 28.29 / 100Roadmap Delivery
37.5
Tokenomics
41.25
Team Governance
71.12
Market Ecosystem
23.54
Security & Compliance
0
Overall Score
28.29
SoSoValue overall rating D (total 28.03), ranking high in team governance, economic model, and roadmap delivery across six dimensions. The main point of deduction is safety compliance (0 points)—mainly affected by regulatory compliance (0 points), multiple-entry ratio (0 points), and other sub-items.
Rating Team Conclusion: "SoSoValue has relative advantages in team governance, economic modeling, and roadmap delivery, but current shortcomings focus on security and compliance." " It is recommended to observe cautiously and not use it as a core configuration basis for now.
Six-Dimension Rating Breakdown
Roadmap Delivery
37.49/100Roadmap On Time Delivery Rate?There is a lack of publicly available near-term roadmap delivery data, but the overall assessment is moderate.Weight 35%Data is insufficient and moderate · 57.1 / 100
Last 4 upgrades achieved?Recent development activity and upgrade deliveries are zero.Weight 30%Very Low · 0 / 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 · 50 / 100
Technical Implementation
54.5/100Consensus Mechanism?The project itself lacks an independent consensus mechanism and relies on the underlying chain security.Weight 30%Dependence on Underlying Chains (Base/Ethereum) · 70 / 100
Main network years of operation?The mainnet has been running for a short time but has been running stably for over a year.Weight 15%About 1.3 years · 60 / 100
Recent upgrades?Lack of detailed information and quality assessment of recent upgrades.Weight 35%Insufficient data · 30 / 100
Client Diversity?The project itself has no independent client and relies on the diversity of underlying chain clients.Weight 20%Depends on the underlying chain · 70 / 100
Tokenomics
41.25/100Deflationary Mechanism?There is a token burn mechanism, but its strength rating is moderate.Weight 30%Exists, but the strength is average · 50 / 100
Inflation rate?Contracts can be issued additionally, but the short-term unlocking pressure is low, and inflation risk is moderate.Weight 25%There is a risk of additional issuance, but short-term pressure is manageable · 63 / 100
Staking rate/position lock-up rate?The token lock-up ratio is extremely low, and the tokens are highly concentrated.Weight 25%Extremely low, with concentrated chips · 10 / 100
Supply Upper Limit?Although there is a theoretical upper limit, contracts can be issued additionally, and the upper limit is subject to uncertainty.Weight 20%There is a risk of additional issuance, but there is a theoretical upper limit · 40 / 100
Team Governance
71.11/100Core Development Team?The core team has a strong background and is supported by well-known venture capital institutions.Weight 30%The team has a strong background and is backed by well-known VCs · 78.7 / 100
Governance mechanisms?Governance mechanisms are sound, with high transparency in proposal voting and funding.Weight 25%Governance mechanisms are sound and highly transparent · 91 / 100
Financial Transparency?High transparency in fund usage and proposal voting processes.Weight 25%High transparency of funds · 91 / 100
Concentration of key people?The contract hides the owner, and the owner can change the balance, with centralized permissions.Weight 20%There is a hidden owner and centralized permissions · 10 / 100
Market Ecosystem
22.45/100Active Address?The number of daily active addresses is relatively low, indicating that market activity needs improvement.Weight 30%to be on the low side · 41.5 / 100
Ecological chain/L2 quantity?The project mainly relies on the underlying chain, with zero third-party integrations.Weight 25%Relying on the underlying chain and having little third-party integration · 10 / 100
DeFi TVL?DeFi TVL is moderate, but the transaction volume-to-TVL ratio is relatively low.Weight 25%About $158 million, a mediocre performance · 30 / 100
Developer community?Developer communities are extremely low in activity and lack of public development activities.Weight 20%Very low activity · 0 / 100
Security & Compliance
0/100Historical Major Failure?The contract hides ownership and additional issuance rights, posing significant security risks.Weight 25%There is a risk of privilege leakage · 0 / 100
Regulatory Attitude?Lack of clear regulatory compliance data, assessment is biased prudent.Weight 30%Insufficient data, leaning toward caution · 0 / 100
Sec Attitude?The lack of a clear SEC stance on its projects raises potential controversy.Weight 30%There is insufficient data, and there is controversy · 0 / 100
Client Bug Frequency?There is a lack of publicly available data on client bug frequency, making it impossible to evaluate.Weight 15%Insufficient data to evaluate · 0 / 100
D Peer Comparison
Export CSV| SoSoValueD · 28.29 |  VOOID · 33.28 |  ColonyD · 33.27 |  IMOD · 33.25 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 28.29 | 33.28 | 33.27 | 33.25 |
| Roadmap Delivery | 37.5 | 37.5 | 11.25 | 37.5 |
| Technical Implementation | -- | -- | -- | -- |
| Tokenomics | 41.25 | 0 | 3.58 | 29.52 |
| Team Governance | 71.12 | 95.96 | 86.63 | 44 |
| Market Ecosystem | 23.54 | 66.15 | 18.32 | 6.96 |
| Security & Compliance | 0 | 0 | 52.51 | 50.06 |
Discussion · Comments
No comments yet.