methodology v1
How we score transparency
What measures transparency should itself be transparent. This rubric is literally the product's scoring engine — anyone looking at a project (human or engine) reaches the same score. Not opinion, rules.
Claridex measures verifiability: are the claims behind a token provable, and can you check them? It does not measure investment quality, price outlook, or whether it's a good buy.
Reserve proof — 25%gate pillar
Can you verify the backing asset exists, right now, independently?
| score | criteria |
|---|---|
| 90–100 strong | real-time / continuous on-chain proof of reserve, independently attested, asset-level, reconciles to supply |
| 70–89 good | periodic (monthly/quarterly) third-party attestation, public, reserves reconcile to supply |
| 40–69 partial | issuer self-reported reserves / dashboard, no independent confirmation or infrequent (>quarterly) |
| 0–39 weak / none | marketing claim only / undetailed PDF / no disclosure at all |
Custody & segregation — 20%
Where is the real asset held, by whom, and is it protected?
| score | criteria |
|---|---|
| 90–100 strong | named, regulated, insured custodian; bankruptcy-remote and legally segregated; independently confirmed |
| 70–89 good | named insured custodian, segregation stated, but bankruptcy-remoteness not legally confirmed |
| 40–69 partial | custodian named but no insurance/segregation detail, or controlled self-custody |
| 0–39 weak / none | vague 'stored securely' / custodian undisclosed |
Independent audit — 15%
Has an independent, reputable party verified it, and is the report current and public?
| score | criteria |
|---|---|
| 90–100 strong | reputable independent firm, current report, full scope, publicly downloadable |
| 70–89 good | independent and public but stale, or limited scope |
| 40–69 partial | audit exists but not public / not independent / one-off and old |
| 0–39 weak / none | 'audited' claim, no report / none at all |
On-chain verifiability — 15%
Are the contract and supply transparent on-chain, and are admin controls disclosed?
| score | criteria |
|---|---|
| 90–100 strong | verified contract source; transparent supply & mint/burn; admin via disclosed multisig/timelock; upgradeability disclosed |
| 70–89 good | verified contract + visible supply, but single admin key / unclear timelock |
| 40–69 partial | contract verified but opaque controls / hidden mint authority |
| 0–39 weak / none | unverified contract / no public contract |
Redemption rights — 15%
Can holders actually redeem for the underlying asset, with clear terms?
| score | criteria |
|---|---|
| 90–100 strong | legal redemption right for the underlying; public terms; demonstrated/tested redemptions; reasonable minimums |
| 70–89 good | redemption right exists, terms public, but high minimums / lightly tested / slow |
| 40–69 partial | only to fiat / at issuer discretion / unclear terms |
| 0–39 weak / none | no real redemption, secondary-market exit only / synthetic |
Issuer & legal — 10%
Who is the issuer, in which jurisdiction, and are the risks disclosed?
| score | criteria |
|---|---|
| 90–100 strong | named legal entity, jurisdiction, regulatory status, risk disclosures, identifiable team |
| 70–89 good | entity + jurisdiction + risks disclosed, team partially anonymous |
| 40–69 partial | entity named, thin legal/risk disclosure |
| 0–39 weak / none | anonymous, minimal disclosure |
Overall grade
| grade | score | meaning |
|---|---|---|
| A | 85–100 | highly verifiable |
| B | 70–84 | largely verifiable |
| C | 55–69 | partially verifiable |
| D | 40–54 | weak |
| F | 0–39 | unverifiable |
Two hard rules
1. The gate. If reserve proof is below 40, the overall grade is capped at D (54) — no matter how strong the other pillars are. For an asset-backed token, no verifiable reserve means no trust.
2. "Not rated". If data is insufficient we don't guess; the project is explicitly marked not rated. A low grade is not the same as missing data.
Disclosure
Claridex is operated by Aurum Ledger, which also issues the Auxite precious-metal tokens (AUXG, AUXS, AUXPT, AUXPD). These affiliated assets are clearly labeled "affiliated" wherever they appear and are rated by the exact same public methodology as every other token — no preferential treatment, no exceptions. Ranking is never for sale, and the score cannot be bought.