Encryption Token Market Rating Analysis: Quality Projects are Scarce, Ecosystem Differentiation is Obvious

Recently, the overall trend of the encryption market has shown a downward movement, with many Token prices dropping by 80%-90% from their historical highs. A data analysis firm has conducted a comprehensive assessment of 2 million Tokens in the market using artificial intelligence algorithms based on 16 indicators, establishing a system to measure project credibility and market health.

Latest data analysis shows that the reputation scores of Tokens exhibit a significant pyramid structure. The vast majority of Tokens are concentrated in the "average" and "poor" ranges, while high-scoring Tokens are extremely rare. This phenomenon not only reflects the high degree of market differentiation but also reveals the deep-seated differences in Token quality across different blockchain platforms. This article will delve into the influencing factors of reputation scores and their implications for future market trends.

Token Reputation Index: High-quality projects are rare.

From the overall data, Ethereum remains the main platform for Token issuance. Among all the tokens surveyed, the number of tokens issued on Ethereum accounts for as much as 54.56%, far surpassing the second-ranked Polygon (21.88%) and the third-ranked Base (16.32%). The shares of Avalanche and Linea are relatively small, at 5.85% and 1.37%, respectively.

The reputation scoring data of Tokens presents a typical pyramid structure. The vast majority of Tokens are concentrated in the "average" and "poor" mid-low rating segments. Taking Ethereum as an example, about 116,347 Tokens are at an average level, while 573,739 Tokens are rated as poor. In the excellent and good ratings, the number of Tokens from various blockchain platforms is extremely limited. Ethereum has only 7 Tokens that achieve an excellent rating, and 310 Tokens rated as good.

The situation with Polygon and Base is similar. Among the 450,000 Tokens on Polygon, only 5 are rated as "excellent," while those in the "poor" and "very poor" categories account for as much as 96.7%. On Base, out of 336,000 Tokens, the "poor" category accounts for 75.6% (254,482), and there are only 67 Tokens in the "average" category.

It is worth noting that although the total number of Avalanche tokens is only 10.7% of Ethereum's (120,587), the proportion of tokens in its "average" range (4,865) reaches 4.03%, significantly higher than Ethereum's 0.34% (116,347).

These data reflect that although the Ethereum ecosystem has attracted a large number of projects, it has also seen a serious "long tail effect"—a few high-quality projects coexist with a large number of low-quality Tokens. In contrast, emerging public chains such as Polygon and Avalanche perform relatively well in the "average" range.

Reputation Score Impact Factor: Common Weaknesses of Low-Scoring Tokens

The Token reputation index is composed of multiple dimensions, including issuance time, liquidity pool size, holder distribution, and 16 other influencing factors. By comparing the characteristics of Tokens in high and low scoring ranges, it can be observed that low-scoring Tokens generally have the following issues:

1. Insufficient liquidity and low market participation

The liquidity pool size and the number of participants for low-scoring tokens are generally low. For example, the median liquidity pool size for "poor" range tokens on the Ethereum chain is only 1/5 of that of high-rated tokens, and the number of participants is also relatively small. Insufficient liquidity directly leads to sharp fluctuations in token prices, further undermining market confidence.

2. The concentration of coin holders is too high.

The distribution of token holders is a core indicator of the degree of decentralization of a Token. Data shows that the top 10 holders of tokens in the "poor" range of Ethereum account for an average proportion far exceeding that of "excellent" rated tokens. A highly concentrated holding structure is prone to market manipulation risks, which is also one of the main reasons why low-rated tokens are avoided by investors.

3. Inadequate trading activity and profitability

In terms of trading dimensions, low-scoring tokens lag significantly in trading volume ratings and profitable trader ratings. High-scoring tokens attract more long-term investors through stable trading volume and positive profit expectations.

Market Share and Ecological Strategy

The correlation between the number of tokens and reputation scores reveals the ecological strategy differences among various blockchain platforms. As one of the most mature blockchains, Ethereum has both ecological advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, Ethereum has become the preferred platform for token issuance due to its comprehensive development tools, large user base, and rich DeFi infrastructure; on the other hand, its high Gas fees and network congestion issues have forced many projects to turn to low-cost chains such as Polygon and Base, which still need to strengthen their liquidity depth and user stickiness.

The Polygon and Base ecosystems are also expanding rapidly. The total amount of tokens on the Base chain is nearing three times that of Avalanche, but many projects in the ecosystem are still in the early stages. Avalanche and Linea attract specific projects through technological differentiation, but are still limited by their user base.

Conclusion

Since the last bull market, the number of Tokens has shown exponential growth, but the current market exhibits significant polarization. In the future, as regulations tighten and investors become increasingly professional, the Token reputation index may become an important tool for screening quality assets. Only those projects that develop in a balanced manner across dimensions such as liquidity, holder distribution, and trading sustainability will be able to gain an advantage in the next stage of market reshuffling and become leaders in the encryption field.