Polkadot

DOTL1 / platform

scored from the board run of 2026-10-08. polkadot. Run a live analysis

🏷️ Smart-contract platform: ecosystem TVL, adoption, and dev activity lead.

82.7/100

A (high conviction)

coverage 36%, medium confidence, 100% tier-stable, rank #1/15

Share:Post on X

Compare with other tokens

Price

$1.18

Market cap

$2.01B

FDV

$2.01B

24h volume

$134.25M

24h change

+1.5%

From ATH

-98%

Circulating

1.71B

Total supply

1.71B

Price

Domain scores

0 to 100. Each domain is the mean of its scored features' percentiles against this asset class's reference basket; the working is tabled below.

tokenomics

78.6

social

67.6

dev

93.2

Cross-chain & resources

Present on 0 chain(s).

Links

🦎 CoinGecko

Data sources

What each source supplied for this token, with a link to its own page so every figure below can be checked at the source.

coingeckook

price, market cap, supply, volume, community up-votes, watchlists, repo links

defillamaempty

fees, revenue, holders revenue, TVL, audit record (protocol, or chain for an L1)

santimentempty

daily active addresses (90-day trend, 30-day means) and dev-activity level (events/day over 90 days)

githubokparitytech

most recent push across the project's accounts (dead-token gate)

ethploreroff

top-10 holder shares (Ethereum ERC-20s only)

sourcifyoff

contract source verification

cryptorankoff

vesting schedule / unlock overhang (Pro plan)

Key

ok: returned data for this token; it is in the score

empty: reachable, but has nothing on this token (not tracked there); scored without it

error: the request failed this run (rate limit or outage); scored without it and retried next refresh

off: not queried: no identifier for this token, or the source needs a key or plan we do not have

stale: the source failed this run; the last stored values were carried forward (dated in the advisory) so the score does not move on an outage

How the score is built

L1 / platform. Each feature is computed from the raw figures shown, then ranked as a percentile (0 to 100) against the l1 reference basket; features average within a domain; domains are weighted, with the weights renormalized over the domains that have data (a domain the class is defined by is floored, not skipped, when it has none); any gate that trips caps the result. Points are percentile times weight; they add up to the raw score.

FundamentalsValuation and cash flow: is it cheap relative to real economic activity?

weight 18%, 0/4 features, domain score n/a(no data, weight redistributed)

MC / TVL
lower is better, defillama
not scored
defillama has no data for this token
P/F
lower is better, defillama
not scored
defillama has no data for this token
P/S
lower is better, defillama
not scored
defillama has no data for this token
Real yield
higher is better, defillama
not scored
defillama has no data for this token

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
MC / TVL lower is better, defillama	n/a	defillama has no data for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a
P/F lower is better, defillama	n/a	defillama has no data for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a
P/S lower is better, defillama	n/a	defillama has no data for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a
Real yield higher is better, defillama	n/a	defillama has no data for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a

TokenomicsSupply structure: dilution, unlocks, float, and value accrual to holders.

weight 20%, 35% of what is present, 2/4 features, domain score 78.6

FDV / MCAP
lower is better, coingecko
pct 79 vs 15
17.5% weight, +13.8
Total supply: 1.71B
Circulating supply: 1.71B
1.71B ÷ 1.71B = 1.00x
Unlock overhang
lower is better, cryptorank
not scored
vesting data needs a CryptoRank Pro plan
Float
higher is better, coingecko
pct 79 vs 15
17.5% weight, +13.8
Circulating supply: 1.71B
Total supply: 1.71B
1.71B ÷ 1.71B = 100.0%
Token sink
higher is better, defillama
not scored
defillama has no data for this token

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
FDV / MCAP lower is better, coingecko	Total supply: 1.71B Circulating supply: 1.71B	1.71B ÷ 1.71B = 1.00x	79 vs 15 peers	17.5%	+13.8
Unlock overhang lower is better, cryptorank	n/a	vesting data needs a CryptoRank Pro plan	n/a	n/a	n/a
Float higher is better, coingecko	Circulating supply: 1.71B Total supply: 1.71B	1.71B ÷ 1.71B = 100.0%	79 vs 15 peers	17.5%	+13.8
Token sink higher is better, defillama	n/a	defillama has no data for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a

On-chainUsage and distribution: active-address growth and holder concentration.

weight 25%, 0/2 features, domain score n/a(no data, weight redistributed)

Top-10 holders
lower is better, ethplorer
not scored
ethplorer feed off: no identifier for this token
Active-address growth
higher is better, santiment
not scored
santiment has no data for this token

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
Top-10 holders lower is better, ethplorer	n/a	ethplorer feed off: no identifier for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a
Active-address growth higher is better, santiment	n/a	santiment has no data for this token	n/a	n/a	n/a

SocialAttention: is social interest rising ahead of price?

weight 12%, 21% of what is present, 2/3 features, domain score 67.6

Social trend
higher is better, santiment
not scored
Santiment social volume needs DYOR_SANTIMENT_API_KEY
Sentiment
higher is better, coingecko
pct 64 vs 15
10.5% weight, +6.7
Community up-votes: 90.9%
90.9% ÷ 100 = 90.9%
Watchlists
higher is better, coingecko
pct 71 vs 15
10.5% weight, +7.5
CoinGecko watchlists: 636.04K
636.04K = 636.04K

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
Social trend higher is better, santiment	n/a	Santiment social volume needs DYOR_SANTIMENT_API_KEY	n/a	n/a	n/a
Sentiment higher is better, coingecko	Community up-votes: 90.9%	90.9% ÷ 100 = 90.9%	64 vs 15 peers	10.5%	+6.7
Watchlists higher is better, coingecko	CoinGecko watchlists: 636.04K	636.04K = 636.04K	71 vs 15 peers	10.5%	+7.5

DevelopersBuilder activity: is the team still shipping, especially in a downturn?

weight 25%, 44% of what is present, 1/1 features, domain score 93.2

Dev activity
higher is better, santiment
pct 93 vs 15
43.9% weight, +40.9
Dev-activity events in window: 43.97K
days with data: 90
43.97K ÷ 90 = 488.6/day

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
Dev activity higher is better, santiment	Dev-activity events in window: 43.97K days with data: 90	43.97K ÷ 90 = 488.6/day	93 vs 15 peers	43.9%	+40.9

Composite

Domain	Weight	Renormalized	Domain score	Points
Fundamentals	18%	n/a	no data	n/a
Tokenomics	20%	35.1%	78.6	+27.6
On-chain	25%	n/a	no data	n/a
Social	12%	21.1%	67.6	+14.2
Developers	25%	43.9%	93.2	+40.9
Raw score = Σ points				82.7

Gate: hard disqualifiers

Each rule is checked against the figures shown; missing data never trips a rule. The strictest tripped rule sets the ceiling.

unverified_contractinactive
Contract verified (Sourcify): n/a, trips when False
If tripped: zeroes the score
anonymous_teaminactive
Team anonymous: n/a, trips when True
If tripped: caps the score at 40
no_auditpass
Audit on record (DefiLlama): n/a, trips when False
If tripped: caps the score at 50
extreme_fdv_mcappass
FDV / MCAP: 1.00x, trips above 10x
If tripped: caps the score at 40
dead_tokenpass
Days since last GitHub push (paritytech): 1, trips at 180 days or more
Santiment dev events in window: 43.97K, > 0 overrules a stale GitHub org
24h volume: $134.25M, trips below $1,000
If tripped: zeroes the score

No rule tripped, so the final score is the raw score: 82.7

Rule	Evidence	If tripped	Result
unverified_contract	Contract verified (Sourcify): n/a, trips when False	zeroes the score	inactive
anonymous_team	Team anonymous: n/a, trips when True	caps the score at 40	inactive
no_audit	Audit on record (DefiLlama): n/a, trips when False	caps the score at 50	pass
extreme_fdv_mcap	FDV / MCAP: 1.00x, trips above 10x	caps the score at 40	pass
dead_token	Days since last GitHub push (paritytech): 1, trips at 180 days or more Santiment dev events in window: 43.97K, > 0 overrules a stale GitHub org 24h volume: $134.25M, trips below $1,000	zeroes the score	pass
No rule tripped, so the final score is the raw score			82.7

Tier

A (high conviction) 80+B (qualified) 60+C (watchlist) 40+D (avoid) 0+

82.7 maps to A (high conviction). 100% of plus or minus 20% weight perturbations keep this tier. Coverage 5/14 of this class's features (36%). medium confidence.

Peer comparison

⭐ polkadot

82.7

A (high conviction)

avalanche-2

65.1

B (qualified)

internet-computer

62.9

B (qualified)

ethereum

58.6

C (watchlist)

solana

58.5

C (watchlist)

sei-network

57.0

C (watchlist)

near

55.2

C (watchlist)

sui

53.8

C (watchlist)

cardano

45.3

C (watchlist)

the-open-network

44.4

C (watchlist)

aptos

42.5

C (watchlist)

cosmos

40.1

C (watchlist)

In one paragraph

Polkadot (DOT), L1 / platform: score 82.7/100, tier A (high conviction), rank #1 of 15 same-class peers. Domains, 0 to 100, with each one's weight in this class's composite: fundamentals no data (its 18% weight redistributed), tokenomics 78.6/100 (weight 20%), on-chain no data (its 25% weight redistributed), social 67.6/100 (weight 12%), developers 93.2/100 (weight 25%). Data coverage 5/14 features (36%), confidence medium, 100% tier-stable. Gate flags: none. All figures are already on a 0 to 100 scale; do not rescale.

About this page

This is Polkadot's permanent DYOR page, scored from the board run of 2026-10-08 against 14 other L1 / platform tokens. Scores are 0 to 100; the tier maps A at 80 or above, B at 60, C at 40, D below. Every figure above shows its raw inputs, formula, percentile and weight; see the methodology for how the classes, gates and weights work. For today's numbers, run a live analysis. Research aid, not financial advice.

Other L1 / platform tokens on the board: avalanche-2 (65.1/100), internet-computer (62.9/100), ethereum (58.6/100), solana (58.5/100), sei-network (57/100), near (55.2/100), sui (53.8/100), cardano (45.3/100). All scored tokens