pledge8 factors. Weighted. Public.
Every Pledge safety score is the weighted sum of a fixed, published factor set — eight factors for lenders, stablecoins, custody, and ETFs alike. This page documents the eight-factor model in full: what each factor measures, what a perfect 10/10 looks like, and which evidence sources feed each score.
Each scored 0–10
Adds up to 100%
Published June 21, 2026
Scores are factor-driven. Editor picks add editorial judgment; reasoning published.
Reviewed on a recurring cadence; each row carries its own dated snapshot.
How a Pledge score gets built.
Lenders, custodians, dollar products, and ETFs are each scored on eight factors. Weights are fixed and published. Editors don't override individual scores to elevate or demote a product.
Each vertical's factor set is purpose-built — ETFs, custody, and stablecoins weight the variables that actually matter for that structure — but the weighting principle (fixed, published, no editor overrides) stays identical.
Collateral cannot be re-lent, re-pledged, sold, transferred, or otherwise used by the lender or funding partners, and that restriction is explicit in borrower-facing terms.
Borrower collateral uses a control model where the lender cannot unilaterally move BTC outside documented liquidation or recovery procedures.
The product is offered through a clearly licensed or regulated structure, with visible jurisdiction rules, KYC requirements, and no buried access constraints.
Collateral or solvency evidence is current, independently reviewed, easy to find, and specific enough for borrowers to understand what is actually protected.
The lender has a long operating history through multiple Bitcoin drawdowns, meaningful funded volume, and no unresolved borrower-protection red flags.
Margin-call, cure, partial-liquidation, and final-liquidation rules are conservative, specific, borrower-visible, and not dependent on vague discretionary language.
The product adds meaningful borrower downside protection beyond basic margin-call mechanics without hiding material costs or eligibility restrictions.
Borrowers can verify terms, ownership, source evidence, governance, public profiles, and correction paths without relying on sales copy or a private quote flow.
A 10/10 Bitcoin loan would be nearly boring.
The borrower keeps meaningful control of collateral, collateral cannot be reused, reserves or collateral handling are independently verifiable, legal status is clear, liquidation rules are conservative and explicit, and the lender has survived multiple market cycles with clean public evidence.
Most real products should not reach 10/10 because every borrowing path adds a tradeoff: custodial exposure, smart-contract risk, jurisdiction limits, quote-dependent pricing, liquidation mechanics, or thinner public proof. That does not make a 7 or 8 weak; it means the product is strong relative to a deliberately strict ideal.
Same spine. Different factors per product type.
Lenders, stablecoins, and custody providers are scored on eight factors; ETFson their own eight-factor set built for a regulated trust structure (expense ratio, liquidity, tracking error, price/NAV tracking, AUM, issuer credibility, fee transparency, custodian quality). Click any product type below for its exact factor list and weights. Because each category weighs different factors, read a score against its peers in the same vertical — a Digital Credit 7.7 and an ETF 8.4 aren't a one-to-one safety comparison.
Custodian quality, issuer credibility, liquidity, tracking error, expense ratio.
Read methodology →Key control model, insurance backing, recovery model, proof of segregation.
Read methodology →Backing source, peg design, claim ladder, exit liquidity, counterparty risk.
Read methodology →Open source review, hardware audit, seed-recovery model, threat model.
Read methodology →Hashrate share, geographic diversification, energy mix, financial disclosure.
Read methodology →BTC per share, treasury policy, equity dilution risk, financial reporting.
Read methodology →Public BTC holdings, custody disclosures, treasury policy documents.
Read methodology →Methodology determines rank — full stop.
Pledge currently has no affiliate, referral, or sponsorship relationships with any provider on this site. There is nothing to influence the ranking. The methodology output IS the rank.
About → How Pledge works ↗No editor adjusts a score after the methodology computes it. Period.
Weights, criteria, and evidence sources all documented above.
Methodology changes are versioned and dated. Old versions stay archived.
Every score links to the underlying evidence on the entity's profile page.