Metrics analysis and relevant questions about Iotex

I have been following the IoTex project since 2019. One of the reasons that made me like and follow the project was that it is one of the few serious projects working in the IoT world.
After studying it, I wrote this article answering 20 essential questions for any crypto project: IoTex (IOTX) review: fundamental analysis for the long term

  1. What is the main concept of the project?
  2. What is the utility of the token (why not use BTC/ETH/USDC…?)
  3. What is the technical basis of the project?
  4. Who is the core team?
  5. How active is the Github repository?
  6. How engaged is the Community?
  7. Are there relevant partnerships?
  8. What are the competitors and how does this project stand out?
  9. What are the network’s current fees and how does it intend to scale?
  10. Is the project really decentralized?
  11. How is the Rich list/concentration of tokens?
  12. How fair is the tokenomics?
  13. What is the incentive for validators?
  14. What is the long-term sustainability?
  15. What is the current adoption of the project?
  16. Is interoperability with other projects facilitated?
  17. Is there a roadmap?
  18. Is there transparent communication?
  19. What is the regulatory risk?
  20. What extra rewards can I get (staking)?

In these answers you can see many strengths of IoTex, and also some aspects where there can be improvements. I hope it is useful for beginners, and if there are any misconceptions, please let me know so I can correct them. Cheers!

4 Likes

Great blog post with great info. I would add however in regards to Ethereum being a competitor possibly, IOTEX already has a ERC-20 token on the Ethereum blockchain. From what I read in the docs this was supposed to be obsolete a couple years ago and phased out. However Coinbase and one other exchange still list the ERC-20 token. Back in November there was a huge price difference from Ticker IOTX listed on CDC and Ticker IOTX listed on Coinbase. The two completely different iterations were listed on separate exchanges with the same ticker name. Many people losing quite a bit of money because they were trying to seize the arbitrage opportunity from one exchange to the other. Coinbase has since put disclaimers to better shield their mistake and even went as far as changing the ticker to read IOTEX-E. However they still list the token using the same trade volume, token supply, and at times show the percentage gain from Native to the bastard coin they now list on their exchange instead of the percentage change of the ERC-20 token that they list. You should check out the reviews on Coinbase. Most investors think the token is pumping so the invest but in reality the big percentage is only because Coinbase shows the price difference as if it were the jump between Native and what they have the ERC-20 listed for. The price difference sits usually close to .01 but has been much more than that. Holders of the ERC-20 token are reading info from Coinbase stating that IOTEX-E helps power the IOTEX network although the token resides on the Ethereum blockchain. One of the main reasons people lost so much money. So I’d probably look into the transparency portion of your post and consider that Larry mentioned in his 2021 wrap up that there would supposedly be a solution for all these investors that lost money by doing something anyone could have done considering the same ticker issue. This was supposedly supposed to happen in Q2. Well we are pushing Q4. Only responses I’ve seen or gotten is to be patient and that it’s now on Coinbase. However this wasn’t what Larry said. This solution wasn’t supposed to be contingent on Coinbase falling in line. If this is the case then nothing has changed because Coinbase has the private keys for all these orphaned Native tokens. They could have just returned to sender if it’s just been riding on Coinbase. I love the idea of this project. I work with manufacturing automation design and control cabinets for work. I see the possibilities however to not have a clear roadmap or at least documentation of past issues and how they are being addressed I’m not sure how serious investors that know about the ERC-20 and Native coin relationship would ever risk investing. Definitely aren’t winning any returning investors that got burned by incompetence. There seems to be 2 communities. One that lives on Coinbase and has no idea there are two separate currencies that are not compatible. That think they are driving the network but I’m reality what they hold is useless as far as powering the network because it doesn’t even reside on the IOTEX network. Then you have the Native holders that were pushed by other community members or other powers at be that hold the Native coin that has utility and that does allow you to stake and participate in governance. However the ERC-20 token has a high marketcap but shares the same trade volume, and token supply analytics. Investors are either blind to the fact that they have to choose between two separate currencies, with different market caps, prices, aren’t compatible but somehow power the same network for a common goal. To me this just so blatant and infuriating that one there is still a ERC-20 token at all, two that there is no transparency or explanation about what the difference is or pushing Coinbase to either list the Native token or at least explain to Coinbase investors what the ERC-20 version actually does, what it’s actual trade volume is, and only show correct increase percentages. Investors would love for the team to take some time out of their schedule promoting MachineFi and give some direct insight into what’s happening with all the lost coins that were transferred, update the documents and/or roadmap with pertinent info regarding actual tokenomics and the ecosystem, and what is the plan about dealing with Coinbase? Their listing explanation of the token is a stretch by any means and is almost a downright misrepresentation of what the ERC-20 token actually does.