Crypto compare to a new study of the crypto-landscape. The on 16. October published the paper considered various options for grouping of over 200 various crypto-Assets.
Crypto compare bills itself as the “gateway to the world of crypto-currencies”. In their recently published crypto asset Taxonomy Report under the London company attempts a classification of the different types of crypto-Assets. The authors of the study examine the Token on the basis of four possible groupings:
By these categories toa sufficiently precise taxonomy of the studied assets. The most important results at a Glance.
The major focus of the inquiry on the Status quo of decentralization. The surprising result: Only 16 percent of the investigated crypto-Assets can be referred to as a completely decentralised. The authors rate of 30 percent as a “semi-decentralized”, and with rich, 55 percent more than half of the Assets are classified as centralized.
Furthermore, the authors examine the basic calculations of the investors, which can be incorporated in the purchasing decisions. Or in the words of the authors: “What is the hold salient reason, a crypto-Asset?” Since the list of the calculi can not be finally estimated are limited to the authors on the six ways of classification, with the following results:
Distribution of the various DLT
Furthermore, the study shows the distribution of the various Distributed Ledger technologies (DLT). The vast majority of it is classical Blockchain-technology, à la Bitcoin (48 percent of the Assets). Together with the ERC-20-Token, a share of 92 percent. The next largest proportion with three per cent, the Directed-Acyclic-Graph technology (DAG) which is also used in IOTA application.
The distribution of wealth
The distribution of wealth the authors examine an example on the basis of eight prominent crypto-currencies:
The result: The established crypto currencies such as BTC, BCH and ETH have a lower concentration within the Top 100 Wallets than lesser-used tokens such as EOS or NEM.
Crypto compare its reputation as a reliable source for data about the crypto-Ecosystem. The records appear thoroughly researched and are processed with over 40 illustrations, mostly in a descriptive way.
Here and there a few inaccuracies creep in. So some of the definitions are not consistent over the entire length of the Paper or only inadequately explained. The division into the various basic ideas for the purchase of the Token-effect, moreover, is arbitrary and could just as well be otherwise. It’s worth it, as always, to look carefully.
The full crypto asset Taxonomy Report you’ll find.