Friday, December 9, 2022

Looking at Darpal Rating’s Latest GitHub Code Audit of Top Crypto Plays

Looking at Darpal Rating’s Latest GitHub Code Audit of Top Crypto Plays

Darpal Rating — a crypto asset rating organization that wants to become the space’s Moody’s — has released their monthly code audit for March 2018. In first place for the top 200 projects? EOS, followed by Lisk and Particl and then with Cardano, Bitcoin, and Ethereum rounding out the top six.

Also see: Saudi Arabian Telecom Giant STC Set for Blockchain Deal with ConsenSys

Join the Bitsonline Telegram channel to get the latest Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and tech news updates:

Competition Rising

Darpal Rating’s code audit list, wherein projects are rated according to metrics like release frequencies and number of contributors, is topped off with three underdogs in the new March 2018 edition.

Underdogs, at least in the sense that many cryptoverse denizens would just automatically assume the dominance of Bitcoin and Ethereum would’ve locked down the top two spots. Not so, though, as they’re placed fifth and sixth respectively behind more upstart competitors.

The top 10 projects per GitHub activity for March, per Darpal Rating.

EOS, Lisk, and Cardano are all billed in one way or another as Ethereum competitors, so the competition for smart contract supremacy is certainly starting to rev up in the space.

For many, the over-achiever here will be Particl, a privacy platform play that is seemingly rarely mentioned in the same breath as bigger cryptocurrency privacy projects like Monero, ZCash, and Verge. Confidence and awareness should grow if the Particl community can keep tackling code at a high level.

Since Darpal Rating’s February 2018 code audit, Bitcoin has gained two positions while Ethereum has slid down one. Regardless, the top projects all seemingly have promising and flourishing GitHub activity.

Darpal Rating’s February 2018 top 10.

The Metrics of the List

Per Darpal Rating, their team looks at four key factors in crypto GitHub environments for scoring purposes:

  • Library popularity
  • Amount of contributors
  • Release frequency
  • Commit types

The rating organization qualifies their process in saying that “we only audit core libraries. The definition of core library varies for each project.” As such, a high ranking on the Darpal Rating lists indicates transparency and industriousness among a project’s core development community.

Not bad things to get recognized for in the still maturing cryptoverse, to say the least.

What’s your take? What did Darpal Rating get right? Do you disagree with any of their rankings? Sound off in the comments below. 

Images via Darpal Rating, copperstateracing

Bitsonline Email Newsletter