ONCHAINBENCHMARKThe measurement standard for tokenized capital
IndexesResearchCoverageLog inOpen Terminal ↗

OCB — Methodology

The measurement standard.

RWA Qualityv1.0locked 2026-06-06
Stablecoin Healthv1.1-stablecoinlocked 2026-06-09
Equities Transparencyv1.0-equitieslocked 2026-06-08

Cite as

OnChain Benchmark. "Methodology v1.0." OnChain Benchmark, 2026. https://onchainbenchmark.com/methodology. Permanent anchor: #methodology-v1.0.

This document is the authority behind every Trust Rating, dimension score, and Index level published on OnChain Benchmark. Each procedure resolves to a specific data path, scoring band, and source — making any number independently reproducible. This document is not investment advice and does not rate issuer creditworthiness; it measures the transparency of onchain disclosure.

—Overview
01The Rubric
02The Pipeline
03Change Log
04Reproduce
05Coverage
06Citations
OCB — §1 · The Rubric

How each product score is computed.

Three scoring frameworks share a four-dimension architecture (Disclosure Quality, Redemption Liquidity, Structural Trust, Holder Concentration), each scored 0–25 for a composite of 0–100. Per-product details differ: asset-class weights, sub-signal definitions, and band thresholds vary. §1.1 is always open. §1.2 and §1.3 are collapsed by default.

OCB — §1.1 · RWA Quality

RWA Quality Methodology v1.0

locked 2026-06-06

This rating measures whether an RWA instrument's published value or yield claim is independently verifiable, whether holders can exit under realistic conditions, and whether the issuer has made structural commitments that support long-term trust. It does not assess creditworthiness, predict price performance, or verify the accuracy of off-chain reserve holdings.

01

Disclosure Quality

0–25 pts

Principle

Disclosure Quality measures whether an issuer's published value or yield claim can be independently verified against an external benchmark, and whether the issuer maintains ongoing disclosure discipline over time.

Sub-signal A — Claim Verifiability (weight varies by asset class)

Input conditionScore
Oracle delta ≤ 10 bps25
Oracle delta ≤ 25 bps23
Oracle delta ≤ 50 bps20
Oracle delta ≤ 100 bps16
Oracle delta ≤ 200 bps11
Oracle delta ≤ 400 bps6
Oracle delta > 400 bps2
Peg-NAV: regulated daily filing23
Peg-NAV: voluntary daily attestation19
Peg-NAV: regulated monthly filing19
Peg-NAV: voluntary monthly attestation16
Peg-NAV: regulated quarterly filing14
Peg-NAV: voluntary quarterly attestation11
Peg-NAV: aggregate attestation naming instrument9
Peg-NAV: self-published rate, no cadence7
No published rate3

Sub-signal B — Attestation Freshness

Age of most recent attestationScore
≤ 7 days25
≤ 30 days22
≤ 45 days19
≤ 90 days15
≤ 180 days10
≤ 365 days5
> 365 days or absent0

Sub-signal C — Disclosure Consistency

Attestation count (trailing 180 days)Score
≥ 90 (daily)25
≥ 12 (weekly-ish)22
≥ 6 (monthly)18
4–514
2–310
15
00

Per-class weights (A / B / C)

Asset classVerifiabilityFreshnessConsistency
Treasury40%30%30%
Commodity35%40%25%
Private credit30%30%40%
Equities40%30%30%

Cap rules (applied in order)

Aggregate-attestation cap: when sub-signal A is at the aggregate tier (raw score = 9), sub-signals B and C are each capped at 13 before the weighted sum.

Voluntary-attestation cap: when the attestation is voluntary (third-party, not a regulated filing), the composite Disclosure Quality is capped at 19 after the weighted sum.

Data input: norm_disclosure_quality.claim_verifiability_score, .attestation_freshness_age_days, .disclosure_consistency_count_180d

02

Redemption Liquidity

0–25 pts

Principle

Redemption Liquidity measures whether a holder can actually exit the instrument under realistic conditions. Both the direct (issuer redemption) and onchain (DEX swap) paths are real. The dimension rewards genuine depth on either path with a joint-path bonus.

Direct-redemption path (declared per instrument)

ProfileScore
Retail-accessible, low minimum, T+0/T+1 documented22
Retail-accessible, moderate minimum, T+1 to T+319
Institutional-only (high minimum, AP-only documented)17
Available but terms opaque / delays12
No direct redemption path documented0

Onchain secondary path (DEX depth as % of supply)

liquidity_pctScore
≥ 20%24
≥ 10%21
≥ 5%17
≥ 2%13
≥ 0.5%9
> 0%4
0%0

Joint-path bonus: if both direct AND onchain paths exist, composite = max(direct, onchain) + 3, capped at 25.

Data input: norm_redemption_liquidity.direct_redemption_profile, .liquidity_pct, .joint_path_bonus_applied

03

Structural Trust

0–25 pts

Principle

Structural Trust measures the structural and procedural commitments an issuer has made — regulatory framework, governance controls, and custody verification — independent of any specific data point.

Sub-signal A — Regulatory Standing

TierScore
US SEC-registered fund + PCAOB-registered auditor + audit within 12mo25
US SEC-registered fund + named non-PCAOB auditor + audit within 12mo21
US NYDFS trust company or equivalent + named auditor + audit within 12mo21
Major foreign regulator (FCA, MAS, BMA DABA, etc.) + named auditor + audit within 12mo18
Claims regulation but weak documentation / audit > 12mo12
Claims regulation but no auditor or no audit recency8
No regulatory framework documented0

Sub-signal B — Governance Quality (base + upgrade + timelock bonus, capped 25)

ComponentScore
Base: multisig 4-of-7+ (genuinely distributed)16
Base: multisig 3-of-5 (standard institutional)13
Base: multisig 2-of-3 (minimal)9
Base: DAO with active delegation + structured proposals13
Base: timelock-only (no multisig)7
Base: single EOA / unknown signers / unknown threshold0
+8 if contract is immutable+8
+6 if transparent proxy with timelock-protected upgrade+6
+3 if UUPS proxy with admin-controlled upgrade+3
+0 if unrestricted upgrade authority+0
+2 timelock bonus if admin operations are timelock-gated+2

Sub-signal C — Custody Verification

SurfaceScore
Commodity: independent vault auditor reports with serial numbers25
Treasury: SEC-filed schedule of investments (N-MFP3, N-PORT, N-CSR)25
Private credit: published loan tape with borrower-level detail25
Partial signal (auditor named but reports not public; schedule filed but aggregated)16
Custody described in marketing only — no independent verification8
No custody verification surface documented0

Per-class weights (A / B / C)

Asset classRegulatoryGovernanceCustody
Treasury40%20%40%
Commodity30%20%50%
Private credit30%20%50%
Equities50%30%20%

Data input: norm_structural_trust.regulatory_standing_score, .governance_quality_score, .custody_verification_score

04

Holder Concentration

0–25 pts

Principle

Holder Concentration measures the distribution of token ownership across holders, post-exclusion. Two tracks: retail-facing (Track 1) and institutional-direct (Track 2), because concentrated holdings in an AP-only instrument are the design, not a transparency failure.

Track 1 — Retail-facing (top10_pct post-exclusion)

≤ 20%25
≤ 35%22
≤ 50%20
≤ 65%14
≤ 80%9
> 80%4
null (no data)8

Track 2 — Institutional-direct (top10_pct post-exclusion)

≤ 50%25
≤ 70%22
≤ 85%18
≤ 95%13
> 95%8
null (no data)8

Exclusions applied before scoring: protocol contracts, treasury proxies, labeled exchange custody — each verified to ≥90% confidence and individually documented.

Data input: norm_concentration.top10_holder_pct, .concentration_track

Band thresholds — RWA Quality v1.0

≥ 85VerifiedCapital counts toward Verified Capital
65–84RatedStrong disclosure; some gaps
45–64LimitedPartial disclosure; material gaps
< 45UnverifiableInsufficient evidence to assess

Note: the Verified Capital threshold (85) and the Verified band threshold (85) are documented as separate parameters that happen to share a value at v1.0. They may evolve independently through change control (Q9 principle).

Click to expand the full Stablecoin Health Methodology v1.0-stablecoin rubric — dimensions, sub-signals, weights, and thresholds.

Click to expand the full Equities Transparency Methodology v1.0-equities rubric — dimensions, sub-signals, weights, and thresholds.

OCB — §1.4 · Index computation

How per-instrument scores aggregate to market-level indexes.

Supply-weighted index

raw_index = Σ(score_total × supply_usd) / Σ(supply_usd)

Verified Capital (RWA threshold = 85)

verified_capital_usd = Σ(supply_usd) WHERE score_total ≥ 85

Healthy Capital (Stablecoin threshold = 80)

healthy_capital_usd = Σ(supply_usd) WHERE score_total ≥ 80

The index does not publish if any constituent has data older than 36 hours. Better to skip a day than to publish a silently-narrowed composite.

During the calibration period, scores are tagged is_calibration = true and are not used as the chart starting point. The inception snapshot is set when calibration ends and the index is declared authoritative.

The Verified Capital threshold (85) and the Verified band threshold (85) are documented as separate parameters coincidentally sharing a value at v1.0. They may evolve independently through change control.

OCB — §2 · The Pipeline

Where the scoring framework's inputs come from.

Pipeline credibility is upstream of methodology credibility. If inputs are unreliable, the rubric produces unreliable scores. This section documents every data source, normalization rule, and failure mode that affects a published score.

§2.1 — Chain coverage

ChainFamilyRPC providerWhat we collectFreshness SLA
EthereumEVMAlchemy (primary), QuickNode (backup)Supply, holders, pool depth, oracle reads36h
PolygonEVMAlchemySupply, holders, pool depth36h
BaseEVMAlchemySupply (BENJI)36h
ArbitrumEVMAlchemySupply (Dinari dShares, 36 instruments)36h
AvalancheEVMAlchemySupply (BENJI)36h
Solananon-EVMHelius JSON-RPCSupply, holders (SPL tokens)36h
Stellarnon-EVMPublic Horizon APISupply, holders, home_domain anchor36h
Tronnon-EVMTronGridSupply (USDT, USDC native)36h

§2.2 — Raw data layer

raw_contract_reads

On-chain totalSupply, decimals, NAV/price oracle reads per deployment per block.

raw_holder_snapshots

Top-N holders per chain per instrument per observation, before exclusions.

raw_external_rates

FRED DGS3MO, LBMA PM fix, equity benchmarks — used as independent comparison points.

raw_transfer_events was append-only (no DELETE/UPDATE) while collected. Transfer collection is not active at launch (Alchemy free-tier MVP, 2026-07-04) — the append-only commitment applies to the tables actively collected above, and resumes for this table if transfer collection is restored.

§2.3 — Off-chain ingestion

Attestation events: issuer reserve attestations, audit reports, SEC filings. Ingested at issuer-published cadence.

Published rates: issuer-published APY / NAV. Used in Claim Verifiability oracle-delta computation.

External benchmarks: FRED 3-month T-bill (DGS3MO), LBMA gold PM fix. Never sourced from the issuer — independently collected.

§2.4 — Normalization rules

  1. 1. Multi-chain supply: each instrument_deployments row is per-chain; scored instrument supply is the sum across all active chains.
  2. 2. Decimal handling: EVM 18 decimals, Solana 6, Stellar 7, Tron 6 — normalization is per-chain-family.
  3. 3. Pricing source: peg_one for distributing yield instruments; oracle delta for accumulating_price; LBMA spot × token balance for commodities.
  4. 4. Yield computation: yield_delta_bps is derived independently from two consecutive oracle reads at known timestamps — not ingested from the issuer's published yield figure.

§2.5 — Freshness SLAs and failure behavior

Norm tableSLAFailure behavior
norm_redemption_liquidity36hInstrument skipped from index entirely
norm_disclosure_quality36hSub-signal scores 0; published as data gap
norm_structural_trust36hSub-signal scores 0
norm_concentration36hNull fallback (8 pts, penalty)
raw_external_rates (LBMA)5 trading daysBenchmark comparison skipped; flagged in pipeline health
raw_external_rates (FRED)7 calendar daysBenchmark comparison uses stale rate; known gap (see §2.6)

§2.6 — Known pipeline limitations (publicly disclosed)

1

Alchemy stale-data silent failure

Below the 36h threshold, stale data can propagate with HTTP 200. The wall-clock vs block_timestamp check is not yet implemented. Effect: a score may be computed from data up to 36 hours old without a visible indicator.

2

FRED publication lag in FOMC weeks

In FOMC weeks, the 7-day lookback window may use a rate 300–500 bps stale relative to the current market. Effect: treasury instruments may score 1–2 bands better than their true market-relative position in the week of a rate move.

3

Off-chain reserve accuracy

We score the existence and freshness of an attestation, not the accuracy of its content. A fraudulent attestation scores identically to an accurate one. This is explicit in every product's §1.x rubric.

OCB — §3 · Change Log

Every methodology change, on the record.

Default: no recomputation. Historical scores stay tagged at the version when published.

Chart markers: every post-v1.0 change shows a vertical marker on the index chart at the effective date.

Exclusion additions are not methodology changes (Q8 lock). They apply the unchanged methodology to newly-observed data.

v1.0-equitiesEquities TransparencyEffective 2026-06-08

Graduated 36 Dinari dShare instruments on Arbitrum. Claim Verifiability oracle deferred to v2.1 — all instruments score 0 on sub-signal A until oracle ships. Expected composite: 45–67 (Limited / Rated).

Recompute: No (calibration)

v1.1-stablecoinStablecoin HealthEffective 2026-06-09

Index aggregation widened from primary-deployment-only to all NATIVE deployments across seven chains. USDC adds Base / Arbitrum / Polygon / Solana / Avalanche native mints; USDT adds Tron / Solana / Avalanche; PYUSD adds Solana. Bridged variants (USDC.e, USDbC, etc.) intentionally excluded to avoid double-counting Ethereum-locked supply. Per-instrument scoring methodology unchanged — trust_scores rows remain tagged v1.0-stablecoin. Result: coverage $156B → $269B, Healthy Capital $52B → $70B.

Recompute: No (forward-looking)

v1.0-stablecoinStablecoin HealthEffective 2026-06-06

Locked rubric: Reserve Quality (single tier table), Redemption Depth (direct + onchain + joint-path bonus), Holder Concentration (Track 1), Transparency (freshness / consistency / regulatory standing at 35/30/35). Healthy ≥ 80.

Recompute: No (calibration)

v1.0RWA QualityEffective 2026-06-06

Locked rubric: 4 dimensions (Disclosure Quality, Redemption Liquidity, Structural Trust, Holder Concentration), each 0–25. Verified ≥ 85, Rated 65–84, Limited 45–64, Unverifiable < 45. Cap rules, per-asset-class weights, custody verification sub-signal. Pre-launch exception: one-time historical recompute.

Recompute: Yes (pre-launch)

Full changelog with references and recomputation notes: /methodology/changelog. Section anchors use the pattern #changelog-vX.Y[-product] and are never renumbered.

OCB — §4 · Reproduce a Score

Worked example: BUIDL on Ethereum.

BUIDL (BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund) is the primary worked example because it is publicly known (journalist can verify BlackRock's identity independently), has the richest input surface (SEC N-MFP3 monthly filings, multiple chain deployments, DEX liquidity), and reliably sits in the Verified band. Every step names the exact DB column — readers with future API access can reproduce the query; readers without API access can verify the inputs from public sources (EDGAR, Etherscan, Uniswap).

Static snapshot as of2026-06-08· Last verified 2026-06-08

Step 1 — Chain reads (raw data)

InputSource tableSource columnValue on 2026-06-08
totalSupply (Ethereum primary)raw_contract_readstotal_supply_raw$178,606,543
Other chain deploymentsinstrument_deploymentschain_id, contract_addressSee §4.2 (BENJI multi-chain callout)

Supply feeds the index level and Verified Capital calculation, not the Trust Rating directly.

Steps 2–4 — Disclosure Quality

Sub-signalInputSource columnValueScore
A Claim VerifiabilitySEC N-MFP3 (regulated monthly filing)claim_verifiability_scorepeg-NAV: regulated monthly19
B Attestation FreshnessDays since last SEC filingattestation_freshness_age_daysNo machine-fetchable attestation surface (age = unknown)0
C Disclosure ConsistencyFiling count / 180 daysdisclosure_consistency_count_180d0 attestations in trailing 180 days0

Cap checks: voluntary_attestation_cap = false (regulated filing, not voluntary)

Cap checks: aggregate_attestation_cap = false (per-instrument N-MFP3)

DQ = 8

Source: norm_disclosure_quality WHERE instrument_id = 'buidl_eth' AND observed_at = '2026-06-08'::date

Step 5 — Redemption Liquidity

Direct pathdirect_redemption_profile = institutional_only17
Onchain path (DEX depth)onchain_path_score from norm_redemption_liquidity
Joint-path bonusjoint_path_bonus_appliedN/A
Composite RLscore_redemption_liquidity17

Step 6 — Structural Trust + Holder Concentration

Structural Trust sub-signals (treasury weights 40/20/40)

A Regulatory StandingSEC-registered + PCAOB auditor (BlackRock)25
B Governance Qualitygovernance_quality_score from norm_structural_trust19
C Custody VerificationSEC N-MFP3 schedule of investments = full_independent_surface25
Composite STscore_structural_trust20

Holder Concentration (Track 2 — institutional-direct, $5M minimum)

top10_pct (post-exclusion)norm_concentration.top10_holder_pct76.67
Concentration scorescore_holder_concentration18
Trust Score · BUIDL (buidl_eth) · 2026-06-08
Disclosure Quality8 / 25
Redemption Liquidity17 / 25
Structural Trust20 / 25
Holder Concentration18 / 25
Total63 / 100
BandLimited

Values from trust_scores for buidl_eth as of 2026-06-08. BUIDL's secondary Ethereum deployment (0x7712...) is the only one with scored history; the new BUIDL-I primary (0x6a9Da..., added 2026-06-08) will populate on the next scoring tick.

§4.2 — Multi-chain reconciliation: BENJI

Franklin BENJI is deployed on Stellar (primary, ~$571M), Solana, Ethereum, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum, and Avalanche. Each deployment is a separate row in instrument_deployments; supply is summed across all active chains. If only Ethereum were counted, the published supply would materially undercount total exposure. The reconciliation logic: join on instrument_id, sum supply_usd across all deployments.

Per-chain supply breakdown updates daily from raw_contract_reads; the live values surface on the BENJI instrument page.

§4.3 — Index level reproduction

From per-instrument scores, the index level and Verified Capital are computed as:

-- Verified Capital
SELECT SUM(supply_usd) AS verified_capital_usd
FROM trust_scores
WHERE scored_at::date = '[date]'
  AND score_total >= 85;

-- Raw Index
SELECT SUM(score_total * supply_usd) / SUM(supply_usd) AS raw_index
FROM trust_scores
WHERE scored_at::date = '[date]';

The live index_levels row is the authoritative published number; re-running these queries against a given as_of date will reproduce it.

§4.4 — Stablecoin Health worked example

Stablecoin Health follows the same six-step walk, with Reserve Quality as the primary dimension input in place of Claim Verifiability. A full USDC walkthrough is published alongside the RWA worked example.

OCB — §5 · Coverage and Perimeter

What is in scope, and why.

Journalists citing OCB should qualify the universe: “among OCB-tracked tokenized RWA instruments.” Coverage today is tokenized treasuries and commodities; private credit, real estate, and tokenized equities expand the scope as each category meets the data threshold.

In scope at v1.0

  • ·Tokenized US Treasuries and money market funds
  • ·Tokenized commodities (gold, silver)
  • ·Tokenized public equities and ETFs
  • ·Fiat-backed and crypto-backed stablecoins (USD-pegged v1.0)

Methodology-supported, no instruments yet

  • ·Private credit (methodology exists; no live instruments in scored population)
  • ·Non-USD stablecoins, e.g., EURC (deferred to v1.1)

Out of scope at v1.0 and why

  • —Tokenized real estate — no independent, chain-verifiable valuation benchmark
  • —Carbon credits — no tradable standardized benchmark
  • —DAI (MakerDAO) — Maker CDP collateral mapping required; deferred to v1.1
  • —Crypto synthetics marketed as RWA (e.g., Ethena USDtb) — category mismatch
  • —Sub-$5M instruments — insufficient institutional scale

Full instrument coverage list

The complete table of active instruments (with chains, status, and current score band) is on the coverage sub-page. Every excluded category is listed with rationale.

View coverage list →
OCB — §6 · Citations and Contact

How to cite this document.

Harvard
OnChain Benchmark (2026) 'RWA Quality Index — Methodology v1.0',
OnChain Benchmark, retrieved [date],
<https://onchainbenchmark.com/methodology#methodology-v1.0>.
APA
OnChain Benchmark. (2026). RWA Quality Index — Methodology v1.0.
Retrieved [date], from https://onchainbenchmark.com/methodology#methodology-v1.0
BibTeX
@misc{ocb2026methodology,
  author  = {{OnChain Benchmark}},
  title   = {{RWA Quality Index --- Methodology v1.0}},
  year    = {2026},
  url     = {https://onchainbenchmark.com/methodology#methodology-v1.0},
  note    = {Retrieved [date]}
}
Plain
OnChain Benchmark, "RWA Quality Index — Methodology v1.0" (2026),
https://onchainbenchmark.com/methodology#methodology-v1.0.

§6.2 — Permalink discipline

Section anchors in this document are stable across edits. If a section moves, the anchor moves with it — inbound links remain resolvable.

#methodology-v1.0Resolves to §3 changelog entry for v1.0
#sec-rubric-rwaResolves to §1.1 RWA rubric
#sec-reproduceResolves to §4 worked example
#reproduce-buidlResolves to §4.1 BUIDL example
#changelog-v1.0Resolves to v1.0 changelog entry

§6.3 — Methodology change requests

A change request qualifies when it identifies a specific scoring framework rule, threshold, or classifier that produces a materially incorrect output given its stated purpose. General disagreement with the methodology does not qualify.

Submit via GitHub issues on the public repository or email the ops address below. The change-control process is published at the methodology changelog.

§6.4 — Contact

Methodology questions: ops@onchainbenchmark.com. No sales CTAs on this page.

OnChain Benchmark
HomeIndexCoverageChangelogPrivacy
Independent · Not investment advice