Quick background: I spent 27 years in banking, got into crypto in 2021, and built a system that scores 1,000 cryptocurrencies from 0–100 using 30 data points, things like on-chain activity, token supply, whale movements, and liquidity. The full methodology is public.

This post is about the part rating sites never show you: whether the scores actually track reality. I’ve been checking every week and publishing the results, good weeks and bad.

Every week, some coins’ scores go UP (their data is improving) and some go DOWN (their data is getting worse). I only count meaningful moves: a coin has to gain 5+ points to count as improving, or drop 5+ points to count as worsening. Then I ask one simple question, did the improving coins actually do better than the worsening ones?

Eight weeks of answers:

Week Bitcoin that week Improving (+5 pts or more): % beat Bitcoin Improving coins: typical return Worsening (−5 pts or more): % beat Bitcoin Jul 20 +4.8% 67% +8.1% 9% Jul 26 +0.2% 67% +3.3% 25% Aug 3 −3.1% 71% +0.7% 20% Aug 9 +3.2% 68% +6.7% 18% Aug 12 −3.2% 78% +3.6% 26% Aug 22 +21.9% 37% +17.5% 6% Aug 29 +1.0% 61% +3.2% 12% Sep 5 +2.6% 84% +9.4% 17%

The improving group has beaten the worsening group all 8 weeks, in up markets, down markets, and sideways markets. The typical improving coin made money every single week, even the weeks Bitcoin fell.

My favorite row is the +22% week. Everyone assumes everything pumps when Bitcoin rips. It didn’t: the 70 coins my system flagged as worsening that week lost money in the middle of the biggest rally of the summer.

Now the honest part, because this is where rating sites usually go quiet:

The system tracks coins getting worse as it happens — it does NOT predict tops or crashes in advance. One of my own top-scored coins fell 82% in a week; the score dropped during the fall, not before it. Anyone selling crash prediction is selling a story. Two of the early measurement windows partially overlapped before I standardized the schedule, and one week a batch of new data points came online, which made more scores move than usual. Eight weeks is evidence, not proof. So here’s a commitment: on October 1, the first batch of scores turns 90 days old — the timeframe the system was actually designed for — and I’ll publish those results no matter what they say.

Happy to answer anything about how it works, what it gets wrong, or the math.

Site: clevercrypto.com — free tier exists. Research tool, not financial advice.

submitted by /u/NMoney007 [link] [comments]r/CryptoCurrencyRead More

You might also be interested in reading SOL, AVAX Lead Crypto-Market Recovery, Bitcoin Tops 50-Day Average Before Fed Meeting.