Work Team Analysis for DATA

Work Team Analysis by @Metfanmike , @jdcook , and myself

@Kiba and @Thomas_Hepner have proposed DATA (IIP-55: Data Economy Index (DATA)), a digital asset index capturing the growth of on-chain data economies.

The DATA Index has improved in score from 1.45 (pre-DG1) to 1.98 (pre-DG2). For reference, BTC2x-FLI has ranked the most highly (2.84) and BED has ranked lowest (.34). DATA’s score is most similar to MVI (scored at 1.92).

Link to full analysis: Revised Product Scoring Chart - Google Sheets

Reference for scoring methodology: Revised Product Prioritization Framework


Market Opportunity: 4

Market opportunity earned one baseline point, and one point each for a large market, differentiation, and a nice-to-have user need. From a “large market” and AUM standpoint, we benchmarked this against MVI, which also earned a point for a large market. The product earned differentiation points as there are no large/obvious competitors, and a nice-to-have user need from protecting against the need to research/risk all of the tokens in the DATA portfolio.

Revenue Potential: 3

Since DATA plans to roll out with a 95bps streaming fee (the same as DPI), it earned 3 points. The Work Team noted that there is upside to this score in the future, as the methodologists have talked about adding mint/redeem fees after launch. In the absence of an agreed upon plan for those fees, we did not factor them into the current score.

Methodologist Impact: 3

The team earned one baseline point, and one point each for product competency and methodology. Though we appreciate their reputations and willingness to provide marketing support, points in these categories are typically allocated for larger organizations with broad community reach.


It’s worth noting that costs are factored into the rubric such that a lower score results in the product being ranked more highly.

Financial: 3

DATA earned one baseline point here, plus two points for requiring Index Coop to seed a liquidity pool.

Operational: 2

The product earned a baseline of 1 point, plus a point for requiring regular liquidity management operations, and we noted that regular liquidity management of direct treasury liquidity positions is predicted to have higher operational overhead.

Technical: 1

DATA uses the existing simple index product model that should not require considerable new feature builds by engineering.

Note on Work Team Analysis:

  • This is intended to help members who haven’t closely followed DATA product discussions learn about the strengths and opportunities of this product. It’s also designed to help methodologists uncover strengths and opportunities in their proposals. We’re really enthused that Thomas and Kiba integrated feedback from the previous score into their final proposal.
  • Work Team analysis can never accurately predict the future, or how successful a product will be in the months/years after launch. What it does communicate is how much risk the Coop is taking on by launching a product, and a perspective on the strengths/opportunities as stated above.
  • Work Team analysis is completed by each of the three members individually scoring the product, discussing their scores, and aggregating results. The final score is an average of the three individual scores.

Future improvements to the Prioritization rubric:

Like everything at the Coop, this is a perpetual work in progress! As our organization and ecosystem evolve, there are new considerations for launching products and refining our process. During our group discussion, a few areas emerged as candidates for refinement in the future. “Operational Costs” has shifted with Uniswap V3 and discussions about future liquidity strategy, which presents the need for more active management and sophisticated strategies. We’d love to hear your thoughts.


Thank you @catjam , @Metfanmike , and @jdcook for your thoughtful analysis and write-up. :pray:

We’re thrilled to see that DATA received such a high score (1.98) from the Work Team and are excited to launch through Index Coop (assuming a successful DG2 vote)!

It was a pleasure working with the three of you during the process. Your input and feedback certainly helped @Kiba and myself better understand the product prioritization and onboarding process and improve the proposal between the initial Request for Discussion and the Final IIP ahead of a DG2 vote.