Gram (prev. Toncoin)

GRAML1 / platform✓ verified

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

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

44.4/100

C (watchlist)

coverage 71%, high confidence, 100% tier-stable, rank #10/15

Share:Post on X

Compare with other tokens

Price

$1.52

Market cap

$4.30B

FDV

$8.02B

24h volume

$22.73M

24h change

+2.3%

From ATH

-82%

Circulating

2.82B

Total supply

5.26B

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.

fundamental

68.5

tokenomics

7.1

onchain

99.6

social

18.1

dev

14.3

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

defillamaok

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

santimentok

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

githubokton-blockchain

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

ethplorerok

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

sourcifyok

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%, 3/4 features, domain score 68.5

MC / TVL
lower is better, defillama
pct 25 vs 13
6.0% weight, +1.5
Market cap: $4.30B
TVL: $53.99M
$4.30B ÷ $53.99M = 79.58x
P/F
lower is better, defillama
pct 85 vs 14
6.0% weight, +5.1
Market cap: $4.30B
Fees (total1y): $404.30M
$4.30B ÷ $404.30M = 10.63x
P/S
lower is better, defillama
pct 96 vs 13
6.0% weight, +5.8
Market cap: $4.30B
Revenue (total1y): $89.82M
$4.30B ÷ $89.82M = 47.83x
Real yield
higher is better, defillama
not scored
defillama responded but the ratio is undefined (zero denominator or no shared window)

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
MC / TVL lower is better, defillama	Market cap: $4.30B TVL: $53.99M	$4.30B ÷ $53.99M = 79.58x	25 vs 13 peers	6.0%	+1.5
P/F lower is better, defillama	Market cap: $4.30B Fees (total1y): $404.30M	$4.30B ÷ $404.30M = 10.63x	85 vs 14 peers	6.0%	+5.1
P/S lower is better, defillama	Market cap: $4.30B Revenue (total1y): $89.82M	$4.30B ÷ $89.82M = 47.83x	96 vs 13 peers	6.0%	+5.8
Real yield higher is better, defillama	n/a	defillama responded but the ratio is undefined (zero denominator or no shared window)	n/a	n/a	n/a

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

weight 20%, 2/4 features, domain score 7.1

FDV / MCAP
lower is better, coingecko
pct 7 vs 15
10.0% weight, +0.7
Total supply: 5.26B
Circulating supply: 2.82B
5.26B ÷ 2.82B = 1.87x
Unlock overhang
lower is better, cryptorank
not scored
vesting data needs a CryptoRank Pro plan
Float
higher is better, coingecko
pct 7 vs 15
10.0% weight, +0.7
Circulating supply: 2.82B
Total supply: 5.26B
2.82B ÷ 5.26B = 53.6%
Token sink
higher is better, defillama
not scored
defillama responded but the ratio is undefined (zero denominator or no shared window)

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
FDV / MCAP lower is better, coingecko	Total supply: 5.26B Circulating supply: 2.82B	5.26B ÷ 2.82B = 1.87x	7 vs 15 peers	10.0%	+0.7
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: 2.82B Total supply: 5.26B	2.82B ÷ 5.26B = 53.6%	7 vs 15 peers	10.0%	+0.7
Token sink higher is better, defillama	n/a	defillama responded but the ratio is undefined (zero denominator or no shared window)	n/a	n/a	n/a

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

weight 25%, 2/2 features, domain score 99.6

Top-10 holders
lower is better, ethplorer
pct 100 vs 3
12.5% weight, +12.4
Top-10 holder shares: (4.4% + 4.1% + 3.8% + 3.5% + 3.4% + 2.7% + 2.3% + 2.0% + 2.0% + 1.9%)
Σ (4.4% + 4.1% + 3.8% + 3.5% + 3.4% + 2.7% + 2.3% + 2.0% + 2.0% + 1.9%) = 30.1%
Active-address growth
higher is better, santiment
pct 100 vs 5
12.5% weight, +12.5
Daily active addresses, first 30-day mean: 99.5
Daily active addresses, last 30-day mean: 165.1
window: 90
(165.1 − 99.5) ÷ 99.5 = 66.0%

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
Top-10 holders lower is better, ethplorer	Top-10 holder shares: (4.4% + 4.1% + 3.8% + 3.5% + 3.4% + 2.7% + 2.3% + 2.0% + 2.0% + 1.9%)	Σ (4.4% + 4.1% + 3.8% + 3.5% + 3.4% + 2.7% + 2.3% + 2.0% + 2.0% + 1.9%) = 30.1%	100 vs 3 peers	12.5%	+12.4
Active-address growth higher is better, santiment	Daily active addresses, first 30-day mean: 99.5 Daily active addresses, last 30-day mean: 165.1 window: 90	(165.1 − 99.5) ÷ 99.5 = 66.0%	100 vs 5 peers	12.5%	+12.5

SocialAttention: is social interest rising ahead of price?

weight 12%, 2/3 features, domain score 18.1

Social trend
higher is better, santiment
not scored
Santiment social volume needs DYOR_SANTIMENT_API_KEY
Sentiment
higher is better, coingecko
pct 8 vs 15
6.0% weight, +0.5
Community up-votes: 42.9%
42.9% ÷ 100 = 42.9%
Watchlists
higher is better, coingecko
pct 29 vs 15
6.0% weight, +1.7
CoinGecko watchlists: 280.25K
280.25K = 280.25K

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: 42.9%	42.9% ÷ 100 = 42.9%	8 vs 15 peers	6.0%	+0.5
Watchlists higher is better, coingecko	CoinGecko watchlists: 280.25K	280.25K = 280.25K	29 vs 15 peers	6.0%	+1.7

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

weight 25%, 1/1 features, domain score 14.3

Dev activity
higher is better, santiment
pct 14 vs 15
25.0% weight, +3.6
Dev-activity events in window: 3.94K
days with data: 90
3.94K ÷ 90 = 43.8/day

Feature	Raw figures	Calculation	Percentile	Weight	Points
Dev activity higher is better, santiment	Dev-activity events in window: 3.94K days with data: 90	3.94K ÷ 90 = 43.8/day	14 vs 15 peers	25.0%	+3.6

Composite

Domain	Weight	Renormalized	Domain score	Points
Fundamentals	18%	18.0%	68.5	+12.3
Tokenomics	20%	20.0%	7.1	+1.4
On-chain	25%	25.0%	99.6	+24.9
Social	12%	12.0%	18.1	+2.2
Developers	25%	25.0%	14.3	+3.6
Raw score = Σ points				44.4

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): n/a, trips when False
If tripped: caps the score at 50
extreme_fdv_mcappass
FDV / MCAP: 1.87x, trips above 10x
If tripped: caps the score at 40
dead_tokenpass
Days since last GitHub push (ton-blockchain): 0, trips at 180 days or more
Santiment dev events in window: 3.94K, > 0 overrules a stale GitHub org
24h volume: $22.73M, trips below $1,000
If tripped: zeroes the score

No rule tripped, so the final score is the raw score: 44.4

Rule	Evidence	If tripped	Result
unverified_contract	Contract verified (Sourcify): yes, 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: 1.87x, trips above 10x	caps the score at 40	pass
dead_token	Days since last GitHub push (ton-blockchain): 0, trips at 180 days or more Santiment dev events in window: 3.94K, > 0 overrules a stale GitHub org 24h volume: $22.73M, trips below $1,000	zeroes the score	pass
No rule tripped, so the final score is the raw score			44.4

Tier

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

44.4 maps to C (watchlist). 100% of plus or minus 20% weight perturbations keep this tier. Coverage 10/14 of this class's features (71%). high 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

Gram (prev. Toncoin) (GRAM), L1 / platform: score 44.4/100, tier C (watchlist), rank #10 of 15 same-class peers. Domains, 0 to 100, with each one's weight in this class's composite: fundamentals 68.5/100 (weight 18%), tokenomics 7.1/100 (weight 20%), on-chain 99.6/100 (weight 25%), social 18.1/100 (weight 12%), developers 14.3/100 (weight 25%). Data coverage 10/14 features (71%), confidence high, 100% tier-stable. Gate flags: none. All figures are already on a 0 to 100 scale; do not rescale.

About this page

This is Gram (prev. Toncoin)'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: polkadot (82.7/100), 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). All scored tokens