Improving Your Score
For Project Teams
Your score reflects the structural risk of your project, not its popularity or price. It is not designed to be optimised through shortcuts.
The only reliable way to improve your score is to reduce real risk for users.
Before anything else, to be clear:
- ✕We do not accept payment from projects.
- ✕We do not negotiate or adjust scores on request.
- ✕We have never contacted a project requesting payment of any kind.
- ✕Projects cannot pay for a better score, a "verified" badge, or any kind of preferential treatment. We do offer optional premium features to our users, but those features never affect how a project is rated.
How scoring works in practice
Our system evaluates projects across multiple dimensions. Each one reflects a different type of risk. Improving your score means addressing those risks directly.
- Contract safety
- Liquidity quality
- Holder distribution
- Team and project transparency
- Independent security validation
- Market and community signals
Where the structural risk lives, and how to reduce it
1. Eliminate contract-level risks
Smart contract design is one of the strongest signals in our system. Contracts that allow for abuse (blocking sells, minting supply arbitrarily, hidden fees) will score poorly by design.
How to improve:
- Remove or renounce privileged functions where possible.
- Avoid hidden fees, taxes, or transfer restrictions.
- Ensure users can freely buy and sell your token.
- Make contract behaviour predictable and transparent.
2. Build real liquidity
Liquidity should be deep, stable and accessible. Artificial volume, wash trading and temporary liquidity injections are detected and may reduce your score.
How to improve:
- Maintain enough liquidity to support normal trading.
- Reduce slippage for typical transaction sizes.
- Lock liquidity where appropriate to reduce rug-pull risk.
3. Reduce concentration risk
Highly concentrated ownership increases the risk of market manipulation. If a small number of wallets can significantly move price, your score will reflect that.
How to improve:
- Distribute supply across a broader set of holders.
- Limit large, unlocked team allocations.
- Use vesting schedules for long-term alignment.
4. Increase transparency and accountability
Projects that are easier to evaluate are generally safer. Anonymous projects are not automatically penalised, but a lack of transparency reduces confidence and may impact your score.
How to improve:
- Provide clear, accessible documentation.
- Maintain an active and verifiable development presence.
- Share your roadmap and update it regularly.
5. Validate security independently
Independent verification helps identify risks early. Audits do not guarantee safety, but the absence of review is a negative signal.
How to improve:
- Obtain third-party smart contract audits.
- Address identified issues before deployment.
- Disclose known risks openly.
6. Build genuine engagement
We evaluate the quality of activity, not just the quantity. Manipulated or low-quality signals may negatively affect your score.
How to improve:
- Foster real user participation.
- Communicate clearly and consistently.
- Avoid artificial engagement (bots, purchased followers).
What will not improve your score
The following do not lead to sustainable improvements and may result in penalties:
- Paid promotion or undisclosed sponsorship.
- Artificial volume or liquidity.
- Bot-driven social growth.
- Cosmetic changes without underlying improvements.
Our system is designed to detect and discount these behaviours.
You cannot improve your score by appearing safer.
You improve your score by being safer.
Important
A higher score indicates lower structural risk, not guaranteed success. It does not predict price performance, market demand, or future events.
All scores should be used as a starting point for further research, not a final decision.
Contact us
If you believe a specific data point in your rating is factually incorrect, please email corrections+v1 [at] isthiscoinascam [dot] com with the following:
- The specific data point you believe is wrong.
- What the correct value is.
- A link to publicly verifiable evidence.
Submissions without a verifiable evidence link are not reviewed.
We review corrections on a regular cycle and update verified inaccuracies. We do not respond individually to each submission, but corrections that are verified will be reflected in the next score update.