Plumb
B

Crypto research and analytics

Messari

Independent (Messari, Inc.); venture-backed, no parent owner

Editorial reviews Free to read Visit Messari ↗

Sharp analyst-written crypto research, but note that the protocols it covers can pay Messari to commission their own coverage, a relationship Messari discloses on the reports.

What it's really for A crypto research firm; some 'Hub' reports are commissioned by the projects covered, under disclosure.

What our grade covers The grade on this page is about its analyst research and diligence reports on crypto, not everything the site does.

High Scoring Confidence Checked against primary sources. We are confident in the facts and the grade here.

Follow the money

Paid subscribers and the crypto projects that buy Protocol Services/Hub coverage pay it most; by Messari's own disclosure, paying funds coverage and distribution but is said not to dictate the editorial conclusions or buy a ranking slot.

Source →
Operating since
2018 (8 years) · source
What it costs you
Free to read The reviews are free to read.
How they make money
Makes money mainly from Pro/Enterprise subscriptions and data APIs, plus Protocol Services/Hub fees where crypto projects pay Messari to fund research and distribution about themselves.
What they do
Provides crypto market data, asset profiles, and analyst-written research and diligence reports on tokens and protocols for retail and institutional investors.
What to watch for
Much of its protocol coverage is commissioned and paid for by the projects being covered, so it is not the same as unsolicited, fully independent analysis even though Messari labels it as such.
Composite score
3.30 / 5.00 → grade B

How the grade was reached

Independence · 30% weight 2 / 5

Does the site take money from the very entities it ranks? Pay-for-placement, vendor-funded data, and affiliate commissions all pull this down. The less the ranking can be bought, the higher the score.

Evidence basis · 30% weight 4 / 5

What is the ranking actually built on? Hands-on testing scores highest, then verified first-hand reviews, then opinion or popularity surveys and self-reported figures, then pay-to-rank, which scores lowest.

Method transparency · 20% weight 4 / 5

Is the methodology published, specific, and reproducible? Can a reader see how a given rank was reached, or is it a black box?

Conflict disclosure · 10% weight 4 / 5

Are commercial relationships, sponsorships, and affiliate arrangements disclosed clearly and near the rankings themselves, rather than buried?

Manipulation resistance · 10% weight 3 / 5

How hard is it to game? Controls against fake reviews, solicited reviews, and vendor gaming raise this; an open box anyone can stuff lowers it.

Evidence

Compare with others

Others reviewing crypto (compare all →)

← Back to the Report Card