The crypto assets market is highly differentiated, and high-quality tokens are scarce.

Recently, the overall trend of the Crypto Assets market has been downward, with many Token prices dropping by 80%-90% from their historical highs. A data analysis company has utilized artificial intelligence algorithms to conduct a comprehensive assessment of over 2 million Tokens in the market based on 16 indicators, establishing a system for measuring project credibility and market health.

Recent data analysis shows that the Token reputation scores exhibit a clear pyramid structure. The vast majority of Tokens are concentrated in the "average" and "poor" ranges, while high-scoring Tokens are extremely rare. This phenomenon not only reflects the high degree of market differentiation but also reveals significant differences in Token quality across different blockchain platforms. This article will delve into the influencing factors behind reputation scores and their implications for future market trends.

Token Reputation Index: High-quality tokens are hard to come by

From the overall data, Ethereum remains the primary Token issuance platform. Statistics show that the number of Token addresses issued on Ethereum accounts for 54.56% of the total, far exceeding the second-ranked Polygon (21.88%) and the third-ranked Base (16.32%). The proportions for Avalanche and Linea are relatively small.

The token reputation score data presents a clear pyramid structure. The vast majority of tokens are concentrated in the "average" and "poor" rating segments. Taking Ethereum as an example, about 116,347 tokens are at average level, while 573,739 tokens are at poor level. In contrast, the number of tokens with excellent and good ratings is extremely limited across blockchain platforms. Ethereum has only 7 tokens that achieve excellent ratings and 310 tokens that achieve good ratings.

The total number of tokens for Polygon and Base ranks second and third respectively. Taking Polygon as an example, among its 450,000 tokens, only 5 are rated as "excellent", while the proportion of tokens in the "poor" and "terrible" ranges is as high as 96.7%. In the 336,000 tokens on the Base chain, the proportion in the "poor" range is 75.6%, and there are only 67 tokens in the "average" range.

It is worth noting that while the total amount of Avalanche tokens is only 10.7% of Ethereum, its "average" range token proportion reaches 4.03%, significantly higher than Ethereum's 0.34%.

The Ethereum ecosystem has attracted a large number of projects, but at the same time, a serious "long tail effect" has emerged - a few high-quality projects coexist with a massive number of low-quality Tokens. In contrast, emerging chains like Polygon and Avalanche perform relatively better in the "average" range.

Factors Affecting Reputation Scores: Common Issues with Low-Scoring Tokens

The Token reputation index is composed of multiple dimensions, including issuance time, liquidity pool size, holder distribution, and 16 other influencing factors. By comparing the characteristics of tokens in high and low scoring ranges, it can be observed that low-scoring tokens generally face the following issues:

1. Insufficient liquidity and low market participation

The liquidity pool size and number of participants for low-scoring Tokens are generally low. For example, the median liquidity pool size for "poor" range Tokens on the Ethereum chain is only 1/5 of that of high-scoring Tokens, with fewer participants. The lack of liquidity directly leads to severe price fluctuations of Tokens, further undermining market confidence.

2. The concentration of coin holders is too high.

The distribution of coin holders is a core indicator of the decentralization level of a Token. Data shows that the average holding proportion of the top 10 coin holders of Ethereum "poor" interval Tokens is significantly higher than that of "excellent" rated Tokens. A highly concentrated holding structure is prone to market manipulation risks, which is one of the main reasons why low-rated Tokens are avoided by investors.

3. Insufficient trading activity and profitability

In terms of trading dimensions, low-scoring tokens lag significantly in trading volume ratings and profitable trader ratings. High-scoring tokens attract more long-term investors through stable trading volumes and positive profit expectations.

Market Share and Ecological Strategy

The correlation between the number of Tokens and reputation scores reveals the ecological strategy differences among various blockchain platforms. As one of the most mature blockchains, Ethereum has both ecological advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, Ethereum has become the preferred platform for Token issuance due to its complete development tools, large user base, and rich DeFi infrastructure; on the other hand, its high Gas fees and network congestion issues force many projects to shift to lower-cost chains, which still need to strengthen their liquidity depth and user stickiness.

In contrast, the Polygon and Base ecosystems are also rapidly expanding. The total supply of tokens on the Base chain is nearly three times that of Avalanche, but many projects in the ecosystem are still in early stages. Meanwhile, Avalanche and Linea are also attracting specific projects through technological differentiation, but are still limited by their user base.

Conclusion

Since the last bull market, the number of Tokens has shown exponential growth. Currently, the Token market exhibits a clear polarization. In the future, with stricter regulations and the professionalization of investors, the Token reputation index may become a core tool for selecting quality assets. Only those projects that develop in a balanced manner across dimensions such as liquidity, holder distribution, and trading sustainability can gain an advantage in the next phase of market reshuffling.