FINIX COIN

Finix Coin (FNX) creates a solar module referral system that allows members to refer it to other investors and earn income from the commission of investments.

About FINIX COIN

Finixcoin (FNX) is a digital currency used to store value and be exchanged. It’s backed up in the Finix blockchain, which uses the scrypt algorithm (same as Litecoin). All the transactions can be seen without knowing the ownership of the addresses. They offer different services related to banking industry: lending, staking, trading and mining.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

1.4
Product
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

3.0
N/A
3 - Has growth potential.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

1.0
N/A
1 - Many / much better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.

Product

Unrelated or conflicting concepts are mixed together. The first item described is a new blockchain with mining system, building a decentralized ecosystem, but it is followed by the idea of creating a centralized system with loans, staking, trading and mining. They even propose a Ponzi scheme to make money. They are competing with the main blockchains and potentially planning a scam scheme.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

2.2
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

3.0
N/A
3 - Automation; making something easier to do.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but not much.
Need for Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

3.0
N/A
3 - Issuing a custom token is justifiable.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some plans to decentralize.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.

Use of Blockchain

The company is planning to launch a new cryptocurrency and blockchain (similar to bitcoin or litecoin), to move money and store value, but doesn’t innovate in terms of efficiency of the protocols or network. Also, they are building on top of it a Ponzi scheme that can harm participators in the long run. This project is susceptible to a lot of regulatory issues once launched and offers no added value.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

1.6
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient coverage.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

2.0
N/A
2 - Difficult, tech / marketing babble.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

2.0
N/A
2 - Ambiguous non-disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.

Whitepaper

It’s a deck composed of 19 slides (including cover page and thank you). The information doesn’t go very deep and they miss important information such as the team or technical explanations. It’s not easy to get a clear picture of how it is going to be implemented from this documentation. It seems they have used the definition of blockchain to describe how it works and made some modifications. There are some technical terms that don’t fit neatly in the overall explanation.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

1.4
Roadmap
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

1.0
N/A
1 - No concrete plans or milestones.
Feasiblity

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

1.0
N/A
1 - A pipe dream.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

2.0
N/A
2 - Not fully available or trustworthy.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.

Roadmap

There is no information in the whitepaper about the roadmap, and on their website appears a huge project developed only in 3 months (crazy!!). The huge project consists in creating a new blockchain with a new governance system. There doesn’t seem to be a plan for creating something interesting.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

1.4
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

1.0
N/A
1 - None; ignored.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.

Compliance

It could be initially considered a token utility in the sense that it can be used for payments between the agents of the ecosystem but, as it offers revenue to the holders, it is clearly a security token.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

1.0
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

1.0
N/A
1 - No registered company yet.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

1.0
N/A
1 - Unverifiable (e.g., no online profiles).
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

1.0
N/A
1 - Haphazard or uncommitted.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

1.0
N/A
1 - Unrelated or irrelevant, if any.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely skewed.

Company and Team

No company/team information available.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.4
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some presence, lukewarm reception.

Token Sale

The company is selling a project with not too much sense, with a 16 million USD hard cap and no soft cap. The fund allocation is similar to a lot of other ICOs: tech, marketing, and business development. Information is missing about the total supply (in order to understand what portion is for the ICO), bounty programs, advisors, etc. A good point is that they have made a lot of efforts to appear in media.

Product

Unrelated or conflicting concepts are mixed together. The first item described is a new blockchain with mining system, building a decentralized ecosystem, but it is followed by the idea of creating a centralized system with loans, staking, trading and mining. They even propose a Ponzi scheme to make money. They are competing with the main blockchains and potentially planning a scam scheme.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

3.0
N/A
3 - Has growth potential.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

1.0
N/A
1 - Many / much better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Product Score:
1.4

Use of Blockchain

The company is planning to launch a new cryptocurrency and blockchain (similar to bitcoin or litecoin), to move money and store value, but doesn’t innovate in terms of efficiency of the protocols or network. Also, they are building on top of it a Ponzi scheme that can harm participators in the long run. This project is susceptible to a lot of regulatory issues once launched and offers no added value.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

3.0
N/A
3 - Automation; making something easier to do.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but not much.
Need for Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

3.0
N/A
3 - Issuing a custom token is justifiable.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some plans to decentralize.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.
Use of Blockchain Score:
2.2

Whitepaper

It’s a deck composed of 19 slides (including cover page and thank you). The information doesn’t go very deep and they miss important information such as the team or technical explanations. It’s not easy to get a clear picture of how it is going to be implemented from this documentation. It seems they have used the definition of blockchain to describe how it works and made some modifications. There are some technical terms that don’t fit neatly in the overall explanation.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient coverage.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

2.0
N/A
2 - Difficult, tech / marketing babble.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

2.0
N/A
2 - Ambiguous non-disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Whitepaper Score:
1.6

Roadmap

There is no information in the whitepaper about the roadmap, and on their website appears a huge project developed only in 3 months (crazy!!). The huge project consists in creating a new blockchain with a new governance system. There doesn’t seem to be a plan for creating something interesting.

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

1.0
N/A
1 - No concrete plans or milestones.
Feasiblity

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

1.0
N/A
1 - A pipe dream.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

2.0
N/A
2 - Not fully available or trustworthy.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.
Roadmap Score:
1.4

Compliance

It could be initially considered a token utility in the sense that it can be used for payments between the agents of the ecosystem but, as it offers revenue to the holders, it is clearly a security token.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

1.0
N/A
1 - None; ignored.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.
Compliance Score:
1.4

Company and Team

No company/team information available.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

1.0
N/A
1 - No registered company yet.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

1.0
N/A
1 - Unverifiable (e.g., no online profiles).
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

1.0
N/A
1 - Haphazard or uncommitted.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

1.0
N/A
1 - Unrelated or irrelevant, if any.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely skewed.
Company and Team Score:
1.0

Token Sale

The company is selling a project with not too much sense, with a 16 million USD hard cap and no soft cap. The fund allocation is similar to a lot of other ICOs: tech, marketing, and business development. Information is missing about the total supply (in order to understand what portion is for the ICO), bounty programs, advisors, etc. A good point is that they have made a lot of efforts to appear in media.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some presence, lukewarm reception.
Token Sale Score:
2.4

Use this code to share the ratings on your website