๐ŸงญDYORCryptoOpsec

Sushi

SUSHIDeFi protocolโœ“ verifiedโœ“ audited
scored from the board run of 2026-10-08. sushi. Run a live analysis
๐Ÿท๏ธ Cash-flow app, judged on fees, revenue, TVL, and value accrual.
55.6/100
C (watchlist)
coverage 73%, high confidence, 100% tier-stable, rank #9/67
Share:Post on X
Compare with other tokens
โš  real yield 0.9% below 4.5% treasury hurdle
Price
$0.258
Market cap
$74.00M
FDV
$75.23M
24h volume
$5.05M
24h change
+3.3%
From ATH
-99%
Circulating
286.75M
Total supply
291.51M

Price

Loading...

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.

fundamental
40.4
tokenomics
54.3
onchain
89.6
social
84.0
dev
23.8

Cross-chain & resources

Present on 0 chain(s).

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.

price, market cap, supply, volume, community up-votes, watchlists, repo links
fees, revenue, holders revenue, TVL, audit record (protocol, or chain for an L1)
daily active addresses (90-day trend, 30-day means) and dev-activity level (events/day over 90 days)
githuboksushiswap
most recent push across the project's accounts (dead-token gate)
top-10 holder shares (Ethereum ERC-20s only)
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

DeFi protocol. Each feature is computed from the raw figures shown, then ranked as a percentile (0 to 100) against the defi 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 30%, 4/4 features, domain score 40.4
  • P/F
    lower is better, defillama
    pct 56 vs 25
    7.5% weight, +4.2
    Market cap: $74.00M
    Fees (total1y): $14.62M
    $74.00M รท $14.62M = 5.06x
  • P/S
    lower is better, defillama
    pct 64 vs 23
    7.5% weight, +4.8
    Market cap: $74.00M
    Revenue (total1y): $9.30M
    $74.00M รท $9.30M = 7.96x
  • MC / TVL
    lower is better, defillama
    pct 24 vs 26
    7.5% weight, +1.8
    Market cap: $74.00M
    TVL: $105.79M
    $74.00M รท $105.79M = 0.70x
  • Real yield
    higher is better, defillama
    pct 18 vs 18
    7.5% weight, +1.3
    Holders revenue (total1y): $685.04K
    Market cap: $74.00M
    $685.04K รท $74.00M = 0.9%
TokenomicsSupply structure: dilution, unlocks, float, and value accrual to holders.
weight 25%, 3/5 features, domain score 54.3
  • FDV / MCAP
    lower is better, coingecko
    pct 74 vs 26
    8.3% weight, +6.2
    Total supply: 291.51M
    Circulating supply: 286.75M
    291.51M รท 286.75M = 1.02x
  • Unlock overhang
    lower is better, cryptorank
    not scored
    vesting data needs a CryptoRank Pro plan
  • Unlock / volume
    lower is better, cryptorank
    not scored
    next-unlock value needs CryptoRank Pro or DefiLlama Pro
  • Float
    higher is better, coingecko
    pct 74 vs 26
    8.3% weight, +6.2
    Circulating supply: 286.75M
    Total supply: 291.51M
    286.75M รท 291.51M = 98.4%
  • Token sink
    higher is better, defillama
    pct 15 vs 21
    8.3% weight, +1.2
    Holders revenue (total1y): $685.04K
    Revenue (total1y): $9.30M
    $685.04K รท $9.30M = 7.4%
On-chainUsage and distribution: active-address growth and holder concentration.
weight 20%, 2/2 features, domain score 89.6
  • Top-10 holders
    lower is better, ethplorer
    pct 94 vs 19
    10.0% weight, +9.4
    Top-10 holder shares: (10.0% + 7.3% + 6.1% + 4.0% + 3.6% + 3.4% + 2.2% + 2.1% + 2.1% + 2.1%)
    ฮฃ (10.0% + 7.3% + 6.1% + 4.0% + 3.6% + 3.4% + 2.2% + 2.1% + 2.1% + 2.1%) = 43.0%
  • Active-address growth
    higher is better, santiment
    pct 85 vs 24
    10.0% weight, +8.5
    Daily active addresses, first 30-day mean: 212.8
    Daily active addresses, last 30-day mean: 383.4
    window: 90
    (383.4 โˆ’ 212.8) รท 212.8 = 80.1%
SocialAttention: is social interest rising ahead of price?
weight 10%, 1/3 features, domain score 84.0
  • Social trend
    higher is better, santiment
    not scored
    Santiment social volume needs DYOR_SANTIMENT_API_KEY
  • Sentiment
    higher is better, coingecko
    not scored
    coingecko responded but the ratio is undefined (zero denominator or no shared window)
  • Watchlists
    higher is better, coingecko
    pct 84 vs 26
    10.0% weight, +8.4
    CoinGecko watchlists: 128.95K
    128.95K = 128.95K
DevelopersBuilder activity: is the team still shipping, especially in a downturn?
weight 15%, 1/1 features, domain score 23.8
  • Dev activity
    higher is better, santiment
    pct 24 vs 22
    15.0% weight, +3.6
    Dev-activity events in window: 150
    days with data: 90
    150 รท 90 = 1.7/day
Composite
DomainWeightRenormalizedDomain scorePoints
Fundamentals(required)30%30.0%40.4+12.1
Tokenomics25%25.0%54.3+13.6
On-chain20%20.0%89.6+17.9
Social10%10.0%84.0+8.4
Developers15%15.0%23.8+3.6
Raw score = ฮฃ points55.6
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): yes, 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): yes, trips when False
    If tripped: caps the score at 50
  • extreme_fdv_mcappass
    FDV / MCAP: 1.02x, trips above 10x
    If tripped: caps the score at 40
  • dead_tokenpass
    Days since last GitHub push (sushiswap): 0, trips at 180 days or more
    Santiment dev events in window: 150, > 0 overrules a stale GitHub org
    24h volume: $5.05M, trips below $1,000
    If tripped: zeroes the score
No rule tripped, so the final score is the raw score: 55.6
Tier
A (high conviction) 80+B (qualified) 60+C (watchlist) 40+D (avoid) 0+
55.6 maps to C (watchlist). 100% of plus or minus 20% weight perturbations keep this tier. Coverage 11/15 of this class's features (73%). high confidence.

Peer comparison

63.6
62.4
60.2
59.9
59.2
58.0
57.2
56.7
โญ sushi
55.6
55.2
55.0
53.8

In one paragraph

Sushi (SUSHI), DeFi protocol: score 55.6/100, tier C (watchlist), rank #9 of 67 same-class peers. Domains, 0 to 100, with each one's weight in this class's composite: fundamentals 40.4/100 (weight 30%), tokenomics 54.3/100 (weight 25%), on-chain 89.6/100 (weight 20%), social 84.0/100 (weight 10%), developers 23.8/100 (weight 15%). Data coverage 11/15 features (73%), confidence high, 100% tier-stable. Gate flags: none. Advisories: real yield 0.9% below 4.5% treasury hurdle. All figures are already on a 0 to 100 scale; do not rescale.

About this page

This is Sushi's permanent DYOR page, scored from the board run of 2026-10-08 against 66 other DeFi protocol 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 DeFi protocol tokens on the board: pancakeswap-token (63.6/100), benqi (62.4/100), uniswap (60.2/100), stargate-finance (59.9/100), gmx (59.2/100), curve-dao-token (58/100), aave (57.2/100), sky (56.7/100). All scored tokens