Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@wizbubba1
Last active May 8, 2025 13:00
Show Gist options
  • Save wizbubba1/de836627e3393329bd7835fe8fd7aa45 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save wizbubba1/de836627e3393329bd7835fe8fd7aa45 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

Updated EMV Repository including EIGEN: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1843mEciZzFqXpNtzq6by7Hkt52phbtSdDeeUDCKGQBg/edit?usp=sharing

Table of Updated EMV Repository including EIGEN:

Project Winner/Loser Environment Score Myth Score Vapor Score Calibration Data/Notes Combined Final Score
ARB Loser 3 2 1 Already-finished product; constant grant sell-pressure; flat narrative 28.75
FTM Winner -> Loser 3 4 2 Sonic hype then post-event dump; clear tech keeps Vapor moderate 52.5
GRASS Winner 4 4 3 AI + DePIN mania; low-float TGE; future unlock wave adds Vapor 68.75
KAITO Winner 2 4 3 Late-cycle dilution; InfoFi squeeze; utility abstract but linked 48.75
MOVE Winner -> Loser 3 4 5 Elite backers + political headlines; no working chain (pure vapor) 71.25
SUI Winner 4 3 2 Early-bull scarcity; “shiny new L1” dream; tech talk modest 53.75
JTO Winner 4 3 2 Early-cycle Solana liquid staking leader; TVL & price in sync; credible backers; tangible utility keeps Vapor low. 53.75
TIA Winner 4 4 3 Staking for airdrop flywheel; modular narrative; scarce float; Tier 1 backers. 68.75
ZRO Winner 4 4 2 Elite VC backing, top bridge volumes; prestige narrative; tangible cross chain messaging tech. 62.5
STRK Loser 4 1 4 Launch timing perfect but narrative vacuum; VC prestige turned to exit‑liquidity fear; usage near‑zero 48.75
ZK Loser 3 1 4 Saturated L2 launch; no narrative retention; governance‑only token creates high Vapor 38.7
EIGEN Loser 3 1 4 Elite TVL & VC backing, but no post‑airdrop narrative; governance‑only token keeps Vapor high 38.75

Methodology (unchanged) Three pillars on a 1‑to‑5 scale

Environment (E) – launch climate, liquidity depth, calibre of listings/backers.

Myth (M) – strength and durability of the forward‑expectations narrative.

Vapor (V) – useful ambiguity vs. actual value‑accrual; higher when the token is governance‑only or delivery is uncertain.

Constant weights—40 % E, 35 % M, 25 % V—derived from our initial six‑coin calibration and kept fixed for continuity.

Linear 0‑100 rescale

base=0.40E+0.35M+0.25V→EMV_Final=base−14×100\text{base}=0.40E + 0.35M + 0.25V \quad\rightarrow\quad \text{EMV_Final}= \frac{\text{base}-1}{4}\times100base=0.40E+0.35M+0.25V→EMV_Final=4base−1​×100 Because every pillar shares the same 1‑to‑5 domain, no further normalisation is required; the transform just gives a percentile‑style composite that lets you rank coins at a glance.

Calibration commentary EIGEN fit cleanly into the existing framework: Environment 3 – huge funding and liquidity, but a crowded late‑2024 DeFi backdrop.

Myth 1 – narrative vacuum post‑airdrop; no “hopes‑and‑dreams” arc.

Vapor 4 – governance‑only token with no value‑accrual sink despite protocol success.

Weighted base = 2.55 → EMV _Final = 38.75, matching other high‑vapor, low‑myth governance tokens (e.g., ZK). No adjustment to the 40 / 35 / 25 weighting was necessary; the methodology continues to discriminate effectively across new additions.

📄 Private Verification Document – Verification Section Step 1 – Updated Data Points from Aggregator

Project Environment Myth Vapor EMV_Final
EIGEN 3 1 4 38.75

Key Update: Myth set at 1 reflecting the post-airdrop collapse and absence of a sustaining narrative.

Vapor rated 4 due to governance-only token design without value accrual despite protocol success. ✔ EMV_Final score 38.75 for EIGEN matches the master repository and applies the unchanged 40/35/25 weighting system. ✔ No alterations to the weighting formula were required—ensuring continuity across all prior entries. ✔ Integration strengthens the aggregator’s detection of DeFi tokens with high technical delivery but severe Myth attrition, matching the framework’s predictive goals.

All updates are fully traceable. The private document and the on-chain submission are aligned for future third-party audit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment