Allocation Playbook
Before You Participate
Most allocation decisions are made on hype, social proof, and FOMO. The Repute allocation playbook replaces those inputs with structural evaluation — four steps that use Repute intelligence to assess whether a project has genuine structural readiness before participating in its allocation event.
This playbook is informational only. It does not constitute financial advice or an allocation recommendation. All participation decisions are your own.
Step 1: Evaluate Structural Integrity
Check the SIS score of the project’s primary Telegram community.
| SIS Value | Action |
|---|---|
| > 70 | Proceed to Step 2 |
| 30–70 | Proceed with caution. Note specific weaknesses (low D, low C, or high A). |
| < 30 | High structural risk. The community is likely artificially constructed. |
What to look at:
- Is organic growth ratio (O) high? Growth should be asymmetric, not spike-driven.
- Is engagement depth (D) meaningful? Replies and threads, not emoji walls.
- Is creator overlap (C) present? At least 3–5 independent creators referencing the project.
- Is anomaly score (A) low? No symmetrical join spikes in the recent history.
Step 2: Check Pre-TGE Velocity
Check the AVI trend over the 30-day window preceding the TGE.
| AVI Pattern | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| Accelerating + high SustainabilityFactor | Genuine momentum building. Positive signal. |
| Spiking + low SustainabilityFactor | Manufactured attention. Single-event surge. Negative signal. |
| Flat or declining | Narrative fatigue pre-TGE. Weak structural setup. |
Key question: Is attention accelerating because the narrative is compounding, or because a coordinated campaign is generating synthetic spikes?
Step 3: Analyze Creator Overlap
Check the NSM creator density for the project’s narrative.
| Creator Density | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| 8+ independent creators | Narrative has compounding structural support. Strong. |
| 4–7 creators | Moderate. Some organic spread but not self-sustaining yet. |
| 1–3 creators | Narrative is project-controlled. Stops when promotion stops. |
| 0 (only project channel) | No independent narrative propagation. Highest fragility risk. |
A project where only its own team and paid promoters carry the narrative has zero structural narrative support. When the promotional budget is spent, the story ends.
Step 4: Review Historical Retention
Check the launchpad database for post-TGE retention data on the launchpad hosting this project.
| Launchpad 30-day Retention | Action |
|---|---|
| > 70% historical average | Launchpad has structural track record. Lower risk environment. |
| 40–70% | Average. Review individual project history, not just aggregate. |
| < 40% | Launchpad historically attracts allocation hunters. High post-TGE decay risk. |
What Repute Reduces
Applying this playbook systematically reduces exposure to:
| Risk Type | Reduced By |
|---|---|
| Artificial hype participation | SIS evaluation (Step 1) |
| Synthetic growth exposure | AVI sustainability check (Step 2) |
| Mispriced allocation demand | Creator density analysis (Step 3) |
| Platform-level fragility | Historical retention review (Step 4) |
The playbook does not eliminate risk. It filters for structural quality, which historically correlates with reduced post-TGE collapse probability.