Note: the findings are directly from the TTFs themselves and do not reflect any material updates since the filing dates.

For most of crypto's history there has been no shared way to disclose material information about a token. Holders, exchanges, and funds have had to assemble it from scattered, incomplete sources. Blockworks Token Transparency Filing (TTF) is the best attempt yet to fix this. It gives the industry a much needed standardized and scored disclosure format, and getting 53 teams to file is a real achievement.

The product is still early, which means there is likely a lot more to come. We looked at the filings as a whole and some consistent patterns emerged. What is missing is the next thing crypto needs.

Summary By the Numbers 

  • 53 filings (19 are B-1 and 34 are B-2.). 17 scored complete, 36 partially complete. 
  • 43 of 53 describe how the project earns, the fee and revenue mechanics. 
  • 2 of 53 include an income statement, 4 more link to external reports, 47 include none.
  • Just one project (Loyal) provides a balance sheet, through a linked report. None include a balance sheet in the filing itself.
  • Around 9 filings redact their market maker or exchange terms in full or part.
  • 40 out of 53 disclose a token holder DAO. The most common governance mechanism is Snapshot. 
  • Filings are drafted by the project teams themselves, in several cases by a marketing or BD lead, and Blockworks returns a score for how much is disclosed.

A key takeaway for us is that the filings tell you clearly what a project is and how it works. They tell you less about what it earns and holds. 

What a Complete Filing Does and Does Not Include

The TTF score measures how much a project discloses. A high score reflects the amount of information on the record and says nothing about whether the business is financially healthy. The B-1 filing is a one-time disclosure for pre-launch or post-launch teams, so ongoing financials are not central to it. The B-2 is a continuously updated filing for mature post-ICO teams, and it's likely that ongoing financials become a larger part of it over time.

What we see now is that only 2 of 53 filings, MetaDAO and WalletConnect, include a profit and loss statement. To MetaDAO's credit, theirs shows a net loss, which is the kind of transparency the category needs more of. For the other 51, the historical fundraising is visible, while what the organization earns and holds today is mostly absent.

Transparency ≠ Financial Legibility

There are different levels of financial disclosure across the 53 filings. How a project earns is well covered, in roughly 43 of 53 filings. How much it earns shows up in only a handful. The financial position, an income statement and balance sheet, is almost absent. 

The TTF does not yet standardize the financial statements themselves, so the ones that exist are hard to compare. MetaDAO covers the DAO. WalletConnect combines its foundation and operating company (WalletConnect Limited). A standard statement format, with a defined scope and schedule, could come next, and it should live in the B-2 filing.

Where projects do redact something, it is most often their market maker or exchange terms, citing confidentiality. Around 9 filings withhold these, a few entirely and the rest in part.

Token + Equity

Ownership and value accrual is an important point the market needs help understanding. Most projects have more than one entity, typically a foundation and an operating company, and the filings disclose each one separately. What is harder to see at a glance is where the value actually accrues. The information is all there, but it's split between entities and across several sections rather than shared in a single answer, which makes it hard to understand. We will share more about a potential solution in a separate article. 

Governance

40 out of 53 filings have a token holder DAO. The other 13 are run by a foundation or a team multisig, or have no governance at all, though a few have a DAO planned. Among the governance mechanisms, Snapshot voting is the most common single choice. Onchain governance is the larger group when you add it up. It spans decision markets (MetaDAO ecosystem), Realms, token weighted models such as vote escrow, native app chain or Cosmos governance, and custom council processes are used. Several disclose no governance mechanism at all.

Final Thoughts

Blockworks built the framework for standardized disclosures. What is needed next is financial legibility, so an outsider can actually understand the economics of a token project. That is the work we are focused on at 01Resolved, and it complements the standard the TTF has already established. Crypto needs both disclosure and financial legibility.