Three Pillars
Peg Stability (40%)Inverted live depeg risk score. A healthy stablecoin (risk score 0) contributes the full 40 pts. A fully depegged token (risk score 100) contributes 0 pts.
40 × (1 − risk_score / 100)DEWS Stress (30%)Inverted DEWS pre-depeg stress score. CALM conditions (DEWS ~5) contribute ~29 pts; DANGER (DEWS ~90) contributes ~3 pts. If DEWS data is unavailable, this weight is redistributed to the other two pillars.
30 × (1 − dews_score / 100)Structural (30%)Composite of peg mechanism, governance type, token type, holder concentration (HCI), mint cap status, and Webacy contract risk. Captures inherent design safety independent of current price behaviour.
30 × (structural_score / 100)Safety Score = Peg Stability contribution + DEWS contribution + Structural contribution. Capped 0–100. Good structure doesn’t save a token that’s actively depegging — excellent design plus a crashing price still produces a D or F.
Grade Bands
Hard Caps (Active Depeg Overrides)
If a token is actively depegging, the score is capped regardless of how good its structure looks.| Condition | Max Safety Score | Max Grade |
|---|---|---|
status == "dead" (graveyard) | 0 | F — no exceptions |
tier == "critical" OR risk_score ≥ 75 | 9 | D — takes precedence over all pillar scores |
risk_score ≥ 50 (warning range) | 39 | C+ maximum |
risk_score ≥ 25 (watch range) | 69 | B+ maximum |
Structural Pillar Breakdown
How safe is the token’s design, independent of current price? Formula:0.65 × mechanism_score + 0.35 × governance_score + adjustments
Peg Mechanism Score (65% weight within structural)
| Mechanism | Score | Examples | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
fiat_reserve | 100 | USDC, USDT, PYUSD | Cash or T-bills backing — redeemable 1:1 at any time with the issuer. |
rwa | 82 | BUIDL, mTBILL, USDY, OUSG | Real-world assets with regular attestations. Slightly less liquid than pure cash. |
commodity | 72 | PAXG, XAUT | Gold-backed with audited reserves. Price floats vs USD but asset is real. |
crypto_collateral | 55 | DAI, LUSD, crvUSD | Overcollateralised but exposed to collateral price volatility. |
delta_neutral | 40 | USDe | Funding-rate hedged. Works in normal markets; funding flips during stress. |
algo | 15 | UST, FRAX (partial) | Algorithmic / unbacked. Death-spiral risk profile. UST is the defining case. |
Governance Score (35% weight within structural)
| Governance Type | Score | Why |
|---|---|---|
cefi | 80 | Regulated centralised issuer (Circle, Tether). Compliance audits, AML/KYC, legal accountability. |
defi | 70 | On-chain governance — no single point of failure. Smart contract auditability partially offsets key-person risk. |
cefi_dependent | 65 | DeFi protocol with CeFi collateral dependency. Decentralised at the protocol layer but inherits the issuer’s trust assumptions. |
Structural Adjustments (additive)
| Adjustment | Condition | Points |
|---|---|---|
| Token type — algo | token_type == algo | −10 pts |
| Token type — synthetic | token_type == synthetic | −5 pts |
| Token type — yield | token_type == yield | +3 pts |
| Token type — rwa | token_type == rwa | +2 pts |
| HCI — Extreme concentration | top_10 holders ≥ 50% of supply (non-fiat tokens only) | −15 pts |
| HCI — High concentration | top_10 holders 30–50% (non-fiat) | −10 pts |
| HCI — Medium concentration | top_10 holders 10–30% (non-fiat) | −5 pts |
| Mint cap — two_step_uncapped | Off-chain completion pattern with no on-chain cap (USR pattern) | −12 pts |
| Mint cap — uncapped | Authorised minter with no cap detected | −10 pts |
| Webacy contract — high risk | Webacy contract score ≥ 75 | −15 pts |
| Webacy contract — moderate | Webacy contract score 50–74 | −10 pts |
| Webacy contract — low risk | Webacy contract score 25–49 | −5 pts |
HCI (Holder Concentration Index) adjustments are exempt for fiat_reserve tokens. USDC holders simply redeem at $1 with Circle — there is no exit-dump amplification risk. Crypto-collateral, delta-neutral, and algo tokens face real cascade risk from concentrated exits.
Worked Example
A delta-neutral stablecoin under mild stress: