Token profile
BORG (BORG)
Included as a case study with explicit conflict-of-interest labeling. Founder incentives, referral promotion, and forecast-versus-completed ambiguity are central to the research treatment.
Conflict-of-interest handling active
Overview
SwissBorg · Ethereum · Other custom sectors. Websites and governance links are included for direct source review.
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Conflict-of-interest status | Founder-linked promotion presentnegative | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: high The source presentation promoted SwissBorg and included a referral incentive. |
| Current price | Do not infer from presentationcaution | Research methodology Open sourcenot-collected Confidence: low Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Market capitalization | $350,000,000neutral | Illustrative seed Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Data freshness | Requires direct verificationcaution | Research workflow Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
Overall score
38.2
/ 100
Research incomplete
Confidence
88%
Missing-data penalty
-0.0
Data-age penalty
-4.0
Penalties
1
Conflict-of-interest flag present. Treat founder or promotional claims as claims requiring verification.
Revenue and revenue growth
Rewards durable fee generation, growth, and quality while discounting incentive-dependent revenue.
6.1 / 15
Token-holder value capture
Measures whether protocol success translates into token demand, buybacks, burns, or revenue sharing.
5.3 / 15
Net buyback yield
Separates gross buyback narratives from net sellable supply after emissions, unlocks, and incentives.
9.1 / 15
User and volume growth
Rewards adoption, transaction activity, and share gains rather than isolated token marketing.
0.8 / 10
Utility
Measures whether the token is genuinely required for access, collateral, governance, or economic participation.
5.8 / 10
Supply quality
Rewards healthier float and lockups while penalizing aggressive unlocks and concentration.
6.5 / 10
Relative valuation
Compares valuation against peers on revenue, fees, TVL, and user monetization.
5.9 / 10
Liquidity and exitability
A high score requires enough volume and depth to enter or exit size without severe slippage.
5.3 / 10
Competitive moat
Captures network effects, switching costs, distribution, and structural advantages.
2.4 / 5
Applied penalties
- Conflict-of-interest warning: -5 points. Promotional or founder-linked claims require stricter verification.
Four-quadrant tokenomics
Utility, locking, buybacks, and burns all require evidence, not just charts.
Utility: 5.8 / 10
There is visible ecosystem utility, but token demand is not fully separated from promotion.
Usage benefits should be verified independently of founder messaging.
Locking and loyalty: 7.2 / 10
Locking is a potentially meaningful strength if the claimed percentage is correct.
A high locked-supply percentage can support loyalty and reduce float.
Buybacks: 5.4 / 10
Attractive only if completed amounts track the forecast and are not offset elsewhere.
Forecast buybacks are not completed buybacks.
Burns and scarcity: 3.3 / 10
Scarcity claims are secondary and not yet central to the thesis.
The stronger story is lockups rather than burning.
Net token flow
Gross demand and sellable supply remain separated across low, base, and high cases.
| Scenario | Gross buying pressure | New sellable supply | Net token flow | Net buyback yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| low | $18,000,000.00 | $16,800,000.00 | $1,200,000.00 | 0.34% |
| base | $22,500,000.00 | $14,000,000.00 | $8,500,000.00 | 2.43% |
| high | $27,000,000.00 | $11,200,000.00 | $15,800,000.00 | 4.51% |
Protocol fundamentals
Measures whether the underlying protocol is succeeding.
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Assets under management | Claim exists; verification panel requiredcaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| User count | Claim exists; verification panel requiredcaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Licenses | Requires jurisdiction-specific verificationcaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Revenue | Forecast and realized amounts must stay separatecaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
Token fundamentals
Measures whether protocol success benefits the token itself.
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Utility | Loyalty, yield, and ecosystem accessneutral | Seed research Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Buybacks | Meaningful only if completed, not merely forecastcaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Locking | Reportedly high locked supplypositive | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Promotional claims | Cannot be auto-treated as verifiednegative | Research policy Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
Supply analysis
Float, unlocks, concentration, and future sell pressure matter directly to token quality.
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Locked supply | Reportedly ~40%positive | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Team and company allocation | Requires exact breakdowncaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Emission status | Requires direct issuer verificationcaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Top holder concentration | Requires refreshed chain analysiscaution | Research queue Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
Value capture, liquidity, and valuation
Direct cash-flow alignment is weighed against exitability and price paid.
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Annual buyback forecast | $20,000,000caution | Source presentation Open sourceforecast Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Buyback share of revenue | Reportedly ~50%caution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Completed buybacks | Separate verification requiredcaution | Research workflow Open sourcenot-collected Confidence: low Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| DEX/CEX availability | Mixed and requires venue-by-venue confirmationcaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Slippage at $250,000 | Quoted 5.6% in source scenariocaution | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Slippage at $450,000 | Quoted ~9% in source scenarionegative | Source presentation Open sourcesource-claim Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Exitability rating | 4.6 / 10negative | Internal model Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Metric | Value | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Market-cap-to-revenue | Cannot be trusted until revenue is verifiedcaution | Research workflow Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Net buyback yield | Positive only if completed buybacks exceed new supplycaution | Internal model Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
| Conflict-of-interest adjustment | Applies explicitlynegative | Research policy Open sourceexample-seed Confidence: medium Illustrative seed example. Not live market data; verify against current sources before acting. |
Score history
Historical scores help show whether the thesis is strengthening or weakening.
Revenue versus price
Price and protocol usage should be inspected together.
Buybacks versus emissions
Gross positives can be cancelled by larger supply expansion.
Catalysts
Potential demand or thesis-improvement events.
| Catalyst | Date | Tone | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Verification sweep on founder claims | 2026-08-05 | caution | The most important near-term catalyst is not hype; it is source verification. |
| Liquidity venue review | 2026-08-18 | negative | If reported liquidity does not hold up under test size, the thesis weakens fast. |
Risks
High-conviction research includes explicit invalidation and structural risk handling.
| Risk | Severity | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Founder conflict of interest | critical | The presentation had direct economic incentives for BORG adoption and appreciation. |
| Forecast versus completed data | high | Forecast buybacks should not be mixed with realized completed buybacks. |
Claims and evidence
Claims remain separate from verified data until independently confirmed.
| Category | Claim | Status | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| AUM | SwissBorg reportedly has significant assets under management. | unverified | medium |
| Buybacks | SwissBorg reportedly allocates roughly 50% of revenue to buybacks. | unverified | medium |
| Buyback forecast | SwissBorg reportedly forecasts at least $20 million in annual buybacks. | forecast | medium |
| Locked supply | SwissBorg reportedly has about 40% of supply locked. | partially-verified | medium |
| Liquidity impact | About $250,000 of BORG buying reportedly produced 5.6% quoted price impact in a demonstrated liquidity scenario. | promotional-statement | low |
| Liquidity impact | About $450,000 reportedly produced roughly 9% quoted price impact. | promotional-statement | low |