ICO PASS

In a matter of minutes ICO Pass verifies authenticity of person's ID documents, does a face-matching, checks Sanction lists and the country of origin & residency.

About ICO PASS

ICO Pass aims to simplify the KYC process while reducing costs for organizations wishing to follow KYC guidelines. Users will be able to be verified once through the ICO Pass platform and then easily participate in events that require KYC without going through further registration. Organizations will also spend less time and fewer resources on the KYC process as a result.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

3.0
Product
Readiness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Appeal

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Few competitors / a leading solution.
Innovation

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Partial, a novel approach or aspect.

Product

The ICP Pass platform consists of three main components: 1) the application used to perform the KYC check, pay for the service, and link an Ethereum wallet, 2) identity verification based on documents, email, etc., and 3) automated risk profiling, which is to be implemented at a later stage. The premise of the platform is that users will only need to be verified once, and then will be able to easily participate in other ICOs that incorporate KYC. Organizations will reduce the manpower that would be required to perform KYC protocols using traditional methods. The target user base is quite small, but the level of competition that ICO Pass faces is favorable.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

2.8
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

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

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
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.)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Hybrid; decentralized as far as circumstances allow.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.

Use of Blockchain

ICOP is an ERC20 compliant token. ICO Pass claims that “there are no KYC management systems that can interact with blockchain-based data”. ICO Pass aims to implement smart contracts capable of rejecting applicants automatically, thus saving time and money, so the platform possesses an inherent blockchain advantage compared to traditional KYC methods.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.6
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage, well written.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Informative disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is fairly short at 24 pages. However, technological aspects of the platform’s operation are discussed in fairly high detail and go beyond a layman level explanation. A separate document, the prospectus of the ICOP token sale, gives sufficient detail with regard to the company’s business plan, including proposed service costs.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.6
Roadmap
Concreteness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

3.0
N/A
3 - A trend with potential.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.

Roadmap

The roadmap is somewhat vague and spans from February 2018 to December 2018. Milestones contain very brief descriptions as to what each entails, and the goals are primarily focused on integrating with established institutions (IRS and banks) and increasing the verification functionality of the platform (video identification, qualified investor checks).

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.4
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

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

1.0
N/A
1 - None in the near (or any) future.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Solely; a passive investment vehicle.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Professional, audited.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Semi-professional (e.g. Howey Test)

Compliance

It is stated that the crowdsale contract has been audited, and a link to the audit report is provided in the whitepaper. However, it is also stated that certain changes have yet to be audited, and that this is planned to be completed before the crowdsale. On the website, it is stated that ICOP token are not to be considered securities, but the company also makes the claim that “a total of 500K tokens will be guaranteed 7% of the yearly revenue from ICO Pass.” Of course, KYC guidelines will be used for the token sale.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

2.8
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
Team Skill Set Relevance

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.

Company and Team

The 6 team members are listed on the ICO Pass website, along with profile pictures, brief descriptions and links to social media profiles. The team’s skill set is fairly balanced between business and technology: the three co-founders possess primarily business-related professional experience, while the rest of the team is more suited to the platform’s technological development. However, considering the nature of the solution, ICO Pass should consider a full-time team member with expertise in law/regulations. Links to social media accounts were not provided for one of the developers but can be found through a manual search on LinkedIn.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

1.8
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Very greedy (e.g. uncapped).
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well defined and reasonable.
Token Allocation

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Obfuscated, or giving company control of market value.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.

Token Sale

The details of the token sale are not presented in an organized manner; some are given in a separate document. At the time of writing this review, critical information such as the total supply and soft/hard cap is absent from both the ICO Pass website and whitepaper. The total number of ICOP tokens is 60 million (the token allocation is obfuscated, however it is known that 33.3% of the tokens are for sale). The allocation of funds is described in high detail (within the business document). The token sale takes place on February 21, 2018.

Product

The ICP Pass platform consists of three main components: 1) the application used to perform the KYC check, pay for the service, and link an Ethereum wallet, 2) identity verification based on documents, email, etc., and 3) automated risk profiling, which is to be implemented at a later stage. The premise of the platform is that users will only need to be verified once, and then will be able to easily participate in other ICOs that incorporate KYC. Organizations will reduce the manpower that would be required to perform KYC protocols using traditional methods. The target user base is quite small, but the level of competition that ICO Pass faces is favorable.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Appeal

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Few competitors / a leading solution.
Innovation

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Partial, a novel approach or aspect.
Product Score:
3.0

Use of Blockchain

ICOP is an ERC20 compliant token. ICO Pass claims that “there are no KYC management systems that can interact with blockchain-based data”. ICO Pass aims to implement smart contracts capable of rejecting applicants automatically, thus saving time and money, so the platform possesses an inherent blockchain advantage compared to traditional KYC methods.

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

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

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
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.)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Hybrid; decentralized as far as circumstances allow.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
Use of Blockchain Score:
2.8

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is fairly short at 24 pages. However, technological aspects of the platform’s operation are discussed in fairly high detail and go beyond a layman level explanation. A separate document, the prospectus of the ICOP token sale, gives sufficient detail with regard to the company’s business plan, including proposed service costs.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage, well written.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Informative disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Whitepaper Score:
3.6

Roadmap

The roadmap is somewhat vague and spans from February 2018 to December 2018. Milestones contain very brief descriptions as to what each entails, and the goals are primarily focused on integrating with established institutions (IRS and banks) and increasing the verification functionality of the platform (video identification, qualified investor checks).

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

3.0
N/A
3 - A trend with potential.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.
Roadmap Score:
2.6

Compliance

It is stated that the crowdsale contract has been audited, and a link to the audit report is provided in the whitepaper. However, it is also stated that certain changes have yet to be audited, and that this is planned to be completed before the crowdsale. On the website, it is stated that ICOP token are not to be considered securities, but the company also makes the claim that “a total of 500K tokens will be guaranteed 7% of the yearly revenue from ICO Pass.” Of course, KYC guidelines will be used for the token sale.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

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

1.0
N/A
1 - None in the near (or any) future.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Solely; a passive investment vehicle.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Professional, audited.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Semi-professional (e.g. Howey Test)
Compliance Score:
2.4

Company and Team

The 6 team members are listed on the ICO Pass website, along with profile pictures, brief descriptions and links to social media profiles. The team’s skill set is fairly balanced between business and technology: the three co-founders possess primarily business-related professional experience, while the rest of the team is more suited to the platform’s technological development. However, considering the nature of the solution, ICO Pass should consider a full-time team member with expertise in law/regulations. Links to social media accounts were not provided for one of the developers but can be found through a manual search on LinkedIn.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
Team Skill Set Relevance

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Company and Team Score:
2.8

Token Sale

The details of the token sale are not presented in an organized manner; some are given in a separate document. At the time of writing this review, critical information such as the total supply and soft/hard cap is absent from both the ICO Pass website and whitepaper. The total number of ICOP tokens is 60 million (the token allocation is obfuscated, however it is known that 33.3% of the tokens are for sale). The allocation of funds is described in high detail (within the business document). The token sale takes place on February 21, 2018.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Very greedy (e.g. uncapped).
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well defined and reasonable.
Token Allocation

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Obfuscated, or giving company control of market value.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.
Token Sale Score:
1.8

Use this code to share the ratings on your website