> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.webacy.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
# Risk Rating
> How Webacy maps a stablecoin's 0–100 risk score to an A+ to F letter grade on the standard 11-band scale — lower risk earns a better grade.
A stablecoin's **Risk Rating** is a single letter grade from **A+** (lowest risk) to **F** (highest risk), mapped directly from the token's 0–100 risk score on Webacy's standard 11-band scale — the same scale used across every Webacy grade surface. It is a risk rating: lower risk earns a better grade, while the underlying risk score runs higher = worse.
| Grade | Risk score | Grade | Risk score |
| :------------------------------ | :--------- | :------------------------------ | :--------- |
| A+ | 0–5 | C+ | 47–56 |
| A | 6–12 | C | 57–66 |
| A- | 13–20 | C- | 67–77 |
| B+ | 21–28 | D | 78–88 |
| B | 29–37 | F | 89–100 |
| B- | 38–46 | | |
The band cutoffs encode severity, so a riskier token can never grade better than a safer one — the grade maps straight from the risk score with no separate overrides on top. Bands are tighter at the safe end and widen as risk rises.
# What Drives the Risk Score
A stablecoin's risk score combines three dimensions (weights sum to 100%). Each contributes risk points — higher means riskier.
**Peg Risk (40%)**
Live depeg risk score. A healthy stablecoin (risk score 0) contributes 0 risk pts; a fully depegged token (risk score 100) contributes the full 40 pts.
`40 × (risk_score / 100)`
**Pre-Depeg Stress (30%)**
Peg Canary Score (PCS) pre-depeg stress. CALM conditions contribute \~0 pts; DANGER contributes up to \~30 pts. If PCS data is unavailable, this weight is redistributed to the other two dimensions.
`30 × (pcs_score / 100)`
**Structural Risk (30%)**
Composite of peg mechanism, governance type, token type, holder concentration (HCI), mint cap status, and Webacy contract risk. Captures inherent design risk independent of current price behaviour.
`30 × (structural_risk / 100)`
Risk Score = Peg Risk + Pre-Depeg Stress + Structural Risk contributions. Capped 0–100, higher = more risk. Good structure doesn't save a token that's actively depegging — strong design plus a crashing price still produces a D or F, because peg risk dominates the score.
For the full real-time depeg risk methodology — the 16 signals behind the live risk score — see [Scoring Methodology](/scoring-methodology). For structural risk on stablecoins and RWA tokens, see [RWA Risk (v3)](/api-reference/rwa-v3).
# Structural Risk Breakdown
How risky is the token's design, independent of current price? Formula: \
`0.65 × mechanism_risk + 0.35 × governance_risk + adjustments` — 0 = lowest structural risk, 100 = highest.
### Peg Mechanism Risk (65% weight within structural)
| **Mechanism** | **Risk** | **Examples** | **Why** |
| :------------------ | :------- | :------------------------ | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `fiat_reserve` | **0** | USDC, USDT, PYUSD | Cash or T-bills backing — redeemable 1:1 at any time with the issuer. |
| `rwa` | **18** | BUIDL, mTBILL, USDY, OUSG | Real-world assets with regular attestations. Slightly less liquid than pure cash. |
| `commodity` | **28** | PAXG, XAUT | Gold-backed with audited reserves. Price floats vs USD but asset is real. |
| `crypto_collateral` | **45** | DAI, LUSD, crvUSD | Overcollateralised but exposed to collateral price volatility. |
| `delta_neutral` | **60** | USDe | Funding-rate hedged. Works in normal markets; funding flips during stress. |
| `algo` | **85** | UST, FRAX (partial) | Algorithmic / unbacked. Death-spiral risk profile. UST is the defining case. |
### Governance Risk (35% weight within structural)
| **Governance Type** | **Risk** | **Why** |
| :------------------ | :------- | :------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| `cefi` | **20** | Regulated centralised issuer (Circle, Tether). Compliance audits, AML/KYC, legal accountability. |
| `defi` | **30** | On-chain governance — no single point of failure. Smart contract auditability partially offsets key-person risk. |
| `cefi_dependent` | **35** | DeFi protocol with CeFi collateral dependency. Decentralised at the protocol layer but inherits the issuer's trust assumptions. |
### Structural Adjustments (additive risk)
| **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 the issuer — there is no exit-dump amplification risk. Crypto-collateral, delta-neutral, and algo tokens face real cascade risk from concentrated exits.