Theory defines the standards, 96 criteria explain the questions, and assessment weighs the evidence.
Does it preserve purchasing power, support payments, pricing and long-term obligations?
Who issues units, changes rules and receives new supply?
Can users control, privately use, verify and reliably settle their money?
The same rule can create different outcomes. Fixed supply improves issuance predictability without ensuring stable purchasing power; a public ledger makes direct inspection easier while exposing transaction links.
The 96 criteria use concise names and explanations, preserving findings and gaps without direct averaging. New criteria do not automatically receive scores. Ten core properties support weighted value and Alpha scenarios. Early projects have no 70% admission gate; unknown evidence and cap assumptions remain separate. These are not fair-value estimates.
Issuance and demand-adaptation mechanisms support falsifiable hypotheses. Verify implementation and deployment, then behavior and stability effects. Future potential does not fill historical purchasing-power scores or offset material authority risks.
Inspect project mechanism researchK = Qₗ / CC is assessed-weight share; K describes that subset only. Full-property bounds preserve unknowns, and shared assessments use one denominator. Research stays open below 70%; a few good observations do not establish overall quality.
M′ = M × 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5The baseline is a dated provider quote or a user assumption; scenarios change entry valuation only. Relative size is M′ ÷ reference cap, with no low-cap bonus ceiling or blended Alpha priority score. Missing cap stays unknown.
Thesis → evidence gap → next verificationExamine HAC supply and depth, PRL native-token demand, and QTC allocation and authority. Scenarios do not alter factual scores, equate a lower cap with better money, or turn reference market sizes into targets.
Alpha research retains every project regardless of quote availability or coverage. The gated value-research index below is a separate screener and is not used for these early valuation judgments. Editorial conclusions are not return forecasts, statistical probabilities or a buying order.
Qₗ = 100 × Σ(wᵢ × sᵢ / 4) / ΣwᵢScored properties are editorial 0–4 bands. Unknowns stay unknown; 0 and 4 bound their uncertainty. A lower bound is not a zero assessment of missing evidence.
Qᵤ = Qₗ + 100 × unknown weight share. This is not a statistical confidence interval.
S = clamp(log₁₀(Mᵦ / M) / 4, 0, 1)M is circulating market cap; Mᵦ is BTC cap in the same batch. Being 10, 100, 1,000 or 10,000 times smaller gives S = 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 or 1; the benefit then stops.
P = Qₗ × (0.4 + 0.6 × S)P ranges from 0 to 100 and ranks assets passing value-research gates; others remain comparable in Alpha discovery. The 0.4 / 0.6 mix and four-order cap are disclosed research choices, without backtest validation.
This screens for stronger monetary properties and smaller relative market cap. It is not fair value, an upside probability or a return forecast. Small size can also reflect weak demand, security or liquidity. The value universe has seven assets; Alpha comparison has nine projects.
Monetary constitution / Simple explanations & research questions
Under what conditions are new units created and put into circulation?
Who receives new units and issuance benefits? Report fees and other income separately.
Can future quantities or calculation rules be known in advance? Fixed rules need not imply fixed future quantities.
How many units exist and circulate? How are locks, burns, lost coins and cross-chain tokens counted?
Is there a supply cap? Does issuance eventually stop or continue at a low rate?
When price rises, how difficult is it to expand new supply? What time and cost does that require?
Can supply adjust when people want to hold more or less money? How is changing demand identified?
Who can change issuance, allocation or other monetary rules? What limits that power?
Native asset, layer, custody arrangement and protocol version.
Define the desired property without confusing mechanisms and outcomes.
Link source material and distinguish facts, inference and missing data.
Record limits, falsifying evidence, observation windows and review dates.
Code, specifications and on-chain data, with versions and methods.
State sample, time window, geography, uncertainty and reproduction method.
Project statements establish what is claimed; unverified outcomes remain open.
Evidence levels are not asset grades. A rule may be well established while its future economic outcome remains unknown.