How the index is built.
The catalog, market data, and issuer assessments answer different questions. This is how to read each one.
What a catalog count means
An underlying asset is the company, currency, commodity, or crypto asset a product references. A token representation is a distinct indexed product. An issuer family groups the legal names mapped to the same catalog identity.
A product on several networks counts once in a token total and once on each listed network in a network table. Network totals overlap. A missing contract or network means that field is unrecorded; it does not establish that no deployment exists.
The stock directory includes the securities and fund products grouped into its stock catalog. Commodity-linked funds grouped under commodities are outside a stock-only report. Coverage is limited to the indexed sources, and catalog share is not market share by money invested.
How claims are supported
Issuer documents and venue rules support product rights, fees, and availability. Registry records can extend catalog coverage; a registry entry is not an independent verification of backing. The source label on each record identifies the evidence used.
Comparisons keep catalog facts separate from an actionable buying route. A network listing alone does not establish that a wallet can trade the token or that an investor is eligible to buy or redeem it.
Prices and missing market data
Market metrics use Codex data for the indexed contracts and networks. Results are cached for 15 minutes. Values are snapshots and may not refresh at the same moment across pages.
The reference price identifies the token and network used; it is not necessarily the exchange price of the underlying share or metal. Known onchain market value aggregates the deployments for which data is available. A ≥ mark indicates partial coverage. Missing values remain unavailable rather than becoming zero.
The live progress page compares known token value with broad reference benchmarks. The dated data reports preserve their own fixed coverage and calculations.
How the issuer risk index works
Each assessment starts with 100 possible points across five categories. Documented concerns or evidence gaps withhold points. The displayed total adds the remaining points: a higher score means stronger observable safeguards in this model.
| Factor | Maximum points | What it considers |
|---|---|---|
| Regulatory & legal | 25 | Strength of licensing, legal structure, jurisdictional clarity, and regulatory standing. |
| Backing & redemption | 25 | Strength of asset quality, segregation, custody, and practical redemption arrangements. |
| Transparency & assurance | 20 | Frequency, independence, and depth of reserve, audit, and product disclosures. |
| Operating resilience | 15 | Operating history, counterparty quality, concentration controls, and evidence of stress resilience. |
| Technical & network | 15 | Controls around smart contracts, bridges, admin keys, oracles, and network operations. |
The bands are 80–100: low risk; 60–79: moderate; 40–59: elevated; 20–39: high; and 0–19: very high. These are editorial categories, not probabilities of default or loss. Confidence describes the evidence available, separately from the numerical score.
The model excludes trading liquidity, price risk, tax, wallet security, and personal suitability. A score does not certify an issuer or replace reading its product terms. Open an issuer’s score to inspect the factor deductions and linked evidence.
Model Beta 1.0 · existing assessment review date 2026-08-27. Individual evidence can be newer than this model-wide date.
Authorship and updates
Bylines link to Tokenized Research. Review dates belong to the evidence checked for an article, not to the time the page was opened. Dated reports keep their original snapshot; changes to the current index do not change those historical counts.