When hunting for promising tokens, a solid screening framework can make all the difference. The key is balancing two approaches: hunting for entry opportunities on undervalued assets, or tracking projects with proven track records. A few things worth considering—does the project have a real use case backing it up? What's the team's history like? Have similar projects shown resilience through market cycles? Starting small with a diversified approach makes sense, especially if you're testing multiple positions. The goal isn't picking winners on day one, but building a portfolio where even a couple solid performers can deliver meaningful returns over time. What criteria are you using to filter candidates? Community sentiment, on-chain metrics, or fundamentals? Sharing observations on what works could help others refine their own strategies.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
16 Likes
Reward
16
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
rugdoc.eth
· 5h ago
Hey buddy, it sounds good in theory, but when it comes to actual implementation, it still depends on luck... I just want to ask, how can I quickly verify the team background? Can on-chain data be deceived?
View OriginalReply0
MysteriousZhang
· 5h ago
To be honest, no matter how good the screening framework is, it depends on execution ability. I got stuck on the "long position testing" part.
View OriginalReply0
WhaleSurfer
· 5h ago
Honestly, choosing coins is just gambling on luck. No matter how solid the framework is, it can't withstand black swan events.
View OriginalReply0
TestnetFreeloader
· 5h ago
Honestly, it still comes down to fundamentals. All the flashy community sentiment is just superficial. I only trust on-chain data and the team's background.
View OriginalReply0
BtcDailyResearcher
· 5h ago
To be honest, the filtering framework sounds fancy, but 90% of people still buy coins based on luck and FOMO.
View OriginalReply0
BrokenDAO
· 5h ago
Sounds good, but in reality, it's just relying on probability theory to mask the blindness of choice. The screening criteria such as team history and project use cases inherently involve information asymmetry. How could retail investors possibly have insider information? In the end, it's still the moment when the game equilibrium is broken.
When hunting for promising tokens, a solid screening framework can make all the difference. The key is balancing two approaches: hunting for entry opportunities on undervalued assets, or tracking projects with proven track records. A few things worth considering—does the project have a real use case backing it up? What's the team's history like? Have similar projects shown resilience through market cycles? Starting small with a diversified approach makes sense, especially if you're testing multiple positions. The goal isn't picking winners on day one, but building a portfolio where even a couple solid performers can deliver meaningful returns over time. What criteria are you using to filter candidates? Community sentiment, on-chain metrics, or fundamentals? Sharing observations on what works could help others refine their own strategies.