A score, worked through
Everything else in this section explains the machinery. This page runs one real alert through it.
Nothing below is illustrative. It is a record pulled from the production database on 17 August 2026, and every number is copied from that record.
No repository, no docs, no paper, no audit. Product evidence scored 7 out of 30 — the token's own description is a meme reference. Nothing here is a criticism; it is simply that there was nothing to find.
Round-trip cost measured at 3.98%, so the sell simulation earned full credit. Ownership renouncement and source verification both came back unknown on this chain, and unknown earns nothing.
Near-maximum. Accounts with real reach were posting, from a healthy number of distinct authors.
A recognisable meme with no product claim. Coherent, entirely unoriginal — novelty scored 0.1.
Wallet 32 days old, funded from an established address, two prior launches, zero rugs. No prior winner, which is the two points it did not get.
Top ten non-contract wallets held 22.0% of supply, largest single holder 3.1%. Scaled continuously, that is three points of five.
Why it landed at SILVER and not higher
Codebase scored zero, and that alone puts GOLD out of reach. With 25 points unavailable, the ceiling for the whole token is 75 — reachable only by scoring near-perfectly on all five remaining channels. This is the single most common reason a token that looks strong tops out in the fifties: most launches have no repository at all.
Security scored 16 of 25 despite a completely clean safety verdict. The sell simulation gave full credit — a round-trip of 3.98% is normal trading friction. It lost points on things that came back unknown rather than bad: ownership renouncement and source verification were both unavailable on this chain. Unknown earns nothing, which is exactly the rule that keeps a missing measurement from reading as a passed one.
Social carried it. 19 of 20. Without that channel the token would have scored 32 and arrived as MONITOR, if at all.
The deployer was the quiet good news. A 32-day-old wallet, funded from an established address, with two prior launches and zero rugs. It is not a track record of winners — that is the two points it did not get — but it is not an anonymous wallet created an hour ago either.
Why the trade label says DEGEN and not HOT
The momentum picture is genuinely strong. Hourly volume ran six times the pool's liquidity, and buying outweighed selling 1.73 to 1.
Run it against the HOT criteria: volume-to-liquidity clears easily, the buy-sell ratio clears, the largest holder at 3.1% clears comfortably, and there are no rug markers. Four of five.
It fails on the fifth. Seven other tokens share the ticker $DATBOI, which is a tier-2 collision, and a tier-2 collision blocks both HOT and MOONSHOT.
That is not a judgement about the token. It is a judgement about your risk of buying the wrong one, which is why the card also prints the contract address and tells you to check it.
What this example does not tell you
Nothing about what happened next. This is the state at 01:44 UTC on the day it fired. We chose the most recent SILVER alert on the chain, not one selected for its outcome — precisely because a worked example picked for how it turned out teaches you nothing about the scoring.
Nothing about whether SILVER is good. For that you need the distribution: SILVER is roughly the top 5% of everything we score. See what the numbers actually look like.
Nothing about safety after the fact. Ownership and verification were unknown here. A CLEAN verdict describes the checks that ran, not the ones that could not.
➡️ See also: Conviction score · Trade labels · Reading an alert
Anything on this page unclear, or wrong?
Tell us →