Work Team Analysis for iROBOT

Work Team: @metfanmike, @jdcook and myself


@Monportefeuille has proposed iROBOT (IIP-71 : Launching the Robot Index (iRobot) - **Fee Structure & Liquidity Strategy Update**), the 1st decentralized Robo-Advisor launched by Index Coop, responding to the surging demand from digitally natives for a product that can unlock the potential of crypto diversification and quantitative trading - in a single token.

iROBOT scored a 1.72 in Work Team Analysis. This is a few points below MVI (1.94) and a few points above a few products which were scored but did not launch (SYI - 1.74, SMI - 1.18).

Link to full analysis: iROBOT_Product Scoring Chart - Google Sheets

Reference for scoring methodology: Revised Product Prioritization Framework


Market Opportunity: 3

Market opportunity earned one baseline point, and one point each for differentiation, and a nice-to-have user need. The product’s strength lies in differentiation as it would be the first of it’s kind to use this methodology. @metfanmike made the analogy to the early self-driving cars: this product may not be one that everyone is comfortable with, but could be attractive to early adopters! It is also a nice-to-have user need that protects against the need to research/risk many smaller or lesser-known tokens.

Revenue Potential: 4

The revenue structure is a 1.5% streaming fee with a 70/30 split. It is similar to the FLI products (the benchmark for a 5 score) without the mint & redeem fees. The 70% goes directly towards the Index Coop, and the 30% is directed towards the iROBOT Working Group budget. We felt this Working Group funding was a great structure to set the product up for success

Methodologist Impact: 3

The team earned one baseline point, and one point each for product competency and methodology. Though we appreciate the methodologist’s reputation 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

iROBOT earned one baseline point here, plus two points for requiring Index Coop to seed a liquidity pool. We did not add points for requiring incentives as the product will rely on Onsen rewards instead.

Operational: 2

The product earned a baseline of 1 point, plus a point for requiring regular liquidity management operations.

Technical: 1

iROBOT 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 iROBOT 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.
  • 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. We’ve noted that “Revenue Potential” is poorly named – we will rename it to “Revenue Structure” for future scoring. It does not capture the full revenue potential of the product (which is largely encapsulated in Market Opportunity).