ICO Rating

Filecoin

The Filecoin network achieves staggering economies of scale by allowing anyone worldwide to participate as storage providers.

About Filecoin

Filecoin ICO Review

Protocol Labs’ Filecoin is a decentralized storage network built on a blockchain with a native token. It utilizes the Interplanetary File System (IPFS) – a peer-to-peer hypermedia protocol, also by Protocol Labs – to address and move content, while providing the surrounding auditing, verification, and incentivization structure. Clients spend tokens on storing and retrieving data, while miners earn tokens by storing and/or servicing the retrieval of data, as well as mining new blocks and processing transactions.

Storage and retrieval requests are handled as orders in two respective decentralized verifiable markets, allowing clients to tune their storage strategy to a custom balance between redundancy, speed, and cost, and incentivizing vendors to offer flexible options at competitive prices. Miners receive their payments only if the network can audit that their service was correctly provided. Filecoin employs Proof-of-Replication (whereby providers prove that data has been replicated to its own uniquely dedicated physical storage) and Proof-of-Spacetime (proof that data has been stored throughout a specified amount of time) as Proofs-of-Storage.

Filecon ICO Review

Storage is what counts as power toward the Filecoin consensus: storage rewards are proportional to the amount of storage miners contribute to the service. However, miners collect strong rewards not only for distributing content to clients, but also for doing so quickly; therefore, the strongest rewards will go to miners who are well-located within the network (i.e., close to many clients). Also, using Erasure Coding and Information Dispersal Algorithms, the Filecoin network is capable of detecting missing nodes and re-allocating their pieces to other miners who can reconstruct them.

Filecoin ICO Review

Filecoin’s ICO is open to accredited investors only, making it compliant with SEC regulations, and is being conducted via CoinList, a joint project between Protocol Labs and startup investment platform AngelList. Given that the platform itself hasn’t been launched yet, investors aren’t actually buying tokens right now, but rather signing a Simple Agreement for Future Tokens (SAFT) – the default agreement for investments on CoinList.

Nearly halfway into its ICO, Filecoin has already raised nearly $200 million, of which $186 million were raised within the first hour of the sale. This brings Filecoin’s fundraising total to a record-setting $252 million, when combined with the $52 million raised prior to the sale from VC investment firms including Andreessen Horowitz, Union Square Ventures, the Digital Currency Group, and Sequoia Capital.

Filecoin is employing a pricing model for its ICO whereby the token price is equal to max($1, amountRaised/$40,000,000), causing it to rise with every investment made (over $40 million), while presale investors received a discounted price (maximum $0.75 per token) in exchange for providing strategic advice and committing to a minimum vesting period of 1 year.

Filecoin ICO Review

The measures taken by Filecoin with regard to its token sale reflect the company’s intentions not only to remain within regulatory bounds, but also to attract investors who are committed long-term to seeing this vision realized. Some might say, however, that excluding the actual network participants from the sale could damage the platform’s network effect and lead them to prefer other decentralized storage solutions such as Sia, Maidsafe, Storj, or others down the line.

Crowdsale Details

Token Sale Dates10-August to 7-September
Total SupplySale Cap: 200,000,000 Filecoin
Raise LimitsN/A
Pricing Structuremax($1, amountRaised/$40,000,000)

Project Highlights

Technical White Paper      See all documents here: https://coinlist.co/currencies/filecoin/docs

These include: Filecoin Primer, Sale Economics, How to Invest in Filecoin, Filecoin Whitepaper, Proof of Replication, Research Roadmap 2017, SAFT, and Private Placement Memorandum.

Team Protocol Labs is headed by founder and CEO Juan Benet along with a professional, experienced core team and many contributors.
LocationSan Francisco, California, USA
BlockchainFilecoin, based on Ethereum (?)
Project CodeN/A, but there is a repository for IPFS (and also for libp2p, which is used by IPFS).
PrototypeN/A
Token RightsTrading in the storage and retrieval of data on the network.

*Disclosure – At the time of writing, cryptorate staff owned no Filecoin tokens.

Interested in deeper analysis – Filecoin?

4.0
Product

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Wow.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

5.0
N/A
5 - General audience / mass market.
Competition

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Highly specialized, proprietary.
4.2
Use of Blockchain

Use of Blockchain

Blockchain Development

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

1.0
N/A
1 - None; simple Ethereum based coin.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Fundamentally disruptive.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Real, tangible, utility-based value.
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.)?

5.0
N/A
5 - Fully decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Wow.
4.4
Whitepaper

Whitepaper

Comprehensiveness

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

5.0
N/A
5 - All issues addressed coherently.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

5.0
N/A
5 - Crystal clear. Enjoyable.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Thorough, viable, convincing, promising.
3.0
Roadmap

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

5.0
N/A
5 - Paving the way for the future.
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
4.0
Compliance

Compliance

Token Utility (value through usage)

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Foundational or varied use cases.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

N.0
N/A
N/A
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?

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

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Professional and top-tier.
4.2
Company and Team

Company and Team

Company Stage and Foundation

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Established with some fundraising history.
Background of Lead Team Members

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Accomplished, recognized.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Fully assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited 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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Good, sufficient for each aspect.
2.8
Token Sale

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Only loosely related to plans.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

2.0
N/A
2 - Use of funds only loosely defined.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Exceptional presence and interest, having credibility.

Product

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Wow.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

5.0
N/A
5 - General audience / mass market.
Competition

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Highly specialized, proprietary.
Product Score:
4.0

Use of Blockchain

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

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

1.0
N/A
1 - None; simple Ethereum based coin.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Fundamentally disruptive.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Real, tangible, utility-based value.
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.)?

5.0
N/A
5 - Fully decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Wow.
Use of Blockchain Score:
4.2

Whitepaper

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

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

5.0
N/A
5 - All issues addressed coherently.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

5.0
N/A
5 - Crystal clear. Enjoyable.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Thorough, viable, convincing, promising.
Whitepaper Score:
4.4

Roadmap

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

5.0
N/A
5 - Paving the way for the future.
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
Roadmap Score:
3.0

Compliance

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Foundational or varied use cases.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

N.0
N/A
N/A
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?

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

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Professional and top-tier.
Compliance Score:
4.0

Company and Team

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Established with some fundraising history.
Background of Lead Team Members

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Accomplished, recognized.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Fully assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited 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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Good, sufficient for each aspect.
Company and Team Score:
4.2

Token Sale

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Only loosely related to plans.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

2.0
N/A
2 - Use of funds only loosely defined.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Exceptional presence and interest, having credibility.
Token Sale Score:
2.8