CROPS Inspector

Assess your project on Telegram

Gap Type Distribution

?Privacy is missing from nearly every use case, which dominates the overall picture. Excluding it lets you see how Censorship Resistance, Open Source, and Security compare on their own.
Build from scratch Fix CROPS weakness Scale existing No gap

Coverage by Property

Gaps by Category

Each category has 8 subcategories, each assessed on 4 properties (C, O, P, S). The bar shows how many of those assessments are healthy (green) vs. missing (red/orange/amber). Categories with the most problems are at the top. Click a category to jump to its detail.

Covered Underserved Gap Void
?Privacy is missing from nearly every use case, which dominates the overall picture. Excluding it lets you see how Censorship Resistance, Open Source, and Security compare on their own.

Top 10 CROPS Gaps by Use Case

The 10 use cases with the most CROPS failures, ranked worst first. Each card shows all four property scores and what needs to be built or fixed.

Covered Underserved Gap Void
?Privacy is missing from nearly every use case, which dominates the overall picture. Excluding it lets you see how Censorship Resistance, Open Source, and Security compare on their own.

Coverage Heatmap

Each cell shows whether the Ethereum ecosystem has a viable option satisfying that CROPS property for the given use case.

?Privacy is missing from nearly every use case, which dominates the overall picture. Excluding it lets you see how Censorship Resistance, Open Source, and Security compare on their own.
Covered Underserved Gap Void
Methodology

CROPS Properties

  • Censorship Resistance (CR): Can the protocol function without any single entity being able to freeze, block, or exclude users? Admin keys, geographic blocking, monopolistic control over critical infrastructure, and dependency on censorable services all degrade this property.
  • Open Source (O): Is the project released under an OSI-approved license? Business Source License (BSL) is an automatic failure. Proprietary frontends with open contracts score Weak.
  • Privacy (P): Does the protocol provide privacy at the protocol level by default? Optional privacy features or application-layer wrappers are insufficient. On a transparent chain like Ethereum, most activity is fully public.
  • Security (S): Can the protocol survive the disappearance of its founding team? Governance overrides, unaudited code, and admin-upgradable proxies all weaken security. Multiple audits are necessary but not sufficient if governance can override them. Excessive reliance on external services expands the attack surface.

Coverage Levels

Each property (CR, O, P, S) is scored independently per subcategory. "Covered" for Censorship Resistance means at least one project passes CR at scale. "Covered" for Open Source means at least one project passes O at scale. These may be different projects. A subcategory can show green across all four columns even if no single project passes all four properties at once. The heatmap answers "does the ecosystem have any option for this property?" rather than "is there one project that does everything?"

  • Covered: At least one project passes this property with Medium or Dominant adoption.
  • Underserved: A passing project exists but only at Niche or Minimal adoption.
  • Gap: No project passes; the best available is Weak.
  • Void: All assessed projects fail this property outright.

Gap Type Derivation

  • Build from scratch: At least one CROPS property is Void. Nothing even attempts to satisfy it.
  • Fix CROPS weakness: No Voids, but at least one property is Gap (only Weak options exist).
  • Scale existing: All properties are Underserved or better. Solutions exist but need wider adoption.
  • No gap: All four properties are Covered.

Numerical Scores (0 to 10)

Each use case gets a numerical score per CROPS property. The score combines two inputs: the best project grade for that property (Pass, Weak, or Fail) and that project's adoption level (Dominant, Medium, Niche, or Minimal). The highest-scoring project wins.

Grade Adoption Score
PassDominant10.0
PassMedium8.0
PassNiche5.0
PassMinimal3.5
WeakDominant3.0
WeakMedium2.0
WeakNiche1.5
WeakMinimal1.0
FailAny0.0

The aggregate score shown on each use case card is the average of all four property scores. When privacy is excluded, the aggregate averages only CR, O, and S.

Scope

This analysis covers 56 subcategories across 7 categories of Ethereum ecosystem activity. Each subcategory was assessed by examining the leading projects and their CROPS properties. Individual project scores are not shown here; this page presents only the aggregate coverage picture.

Based on the Ethereum Foundation Mandate v2.0.