Too much, not too little
Several hundred launches appear each week, largely indistinguishable on first inspection. Volume is not a shortlist, and aggregation is not research.
Private beta · 2026
A faster way to discover
and evaluate web3 ventures.
Every venture we publish is researched individually: the team's verifiable history, the launches they have shipped before, and whether their audience is genuine. Each is scored against a single rubric built entirely from evidence you can confirm yourself. Curated coverage, not a feed.
The premise
Most of what matters is public.
Almost none of it has been checked.
Claims without evidence
Track records circulate far more widely than the evidence behind them. An unverified history is a claim, not a credential.
The good ones stay quiet
The most credible teams are often the hardest to identify early, precisely because their effort goes into building rather than promotion.
Method
Researched, scored, published.
Every venture is gone through by hand.
Coverage is not a filter applied to a feed. Every venture admitted has been researched in depth: the individuals behind it traced through their previous work, and the on-chain record examined directly rather than the pitch.
- Team traced through their previous ventures
- Prior launches identified, including those that failed
- On-chain history examined directly, not accepted on trust
One rubric, and every input is public.
Identical criteria are applied to every venture, so that any two can be compared directly. Each input traces to a source you can examine yourself, which is what makes a score open to challenge.
- Consistent criteria across all coverage
- Each input traceable to a public source
- Insufficient evidence lowers a score rather than being omitted
A written report, not a rating.
The score is a summary, not the analysis. Each report sets out the reasoning, the supporting evidence and the points that did not reconcile, and is revised as the facts change. Ventures we cover receive the same material directly, with guidance.
- Full reasoning published, not a verdict alone
- Revised as the underlying facts change
- Direct guidance for the ventures we cover
Panels are illustrative.
What we score
The questions worth answering properly.
Team track record
Who the team are, what they built previously, and how those ventures concluded.
Identity
Publicly identified, pseudonymous with a traceable history, or fully anonymous. Recorded plainly, never implied.
Launch history
How many they have shipped, how many remain active, and what became of the rest.
On-chain metrics
Holders, liquidity, treasury and flows, read from the chain rather than from a dashboard.
Genuine engagement
Whether the audience is genuine. Purchased followers and automated replies are both measurable.
Public sources
Every figure carries its source, so a score can be verified rather than trusted.
The most ambitious teams rarely have the loudest launch. Finding them is the work. Standing it up with real research is the point.
Dalmanutha exists to bring credible ventures to a wider audience, with the research to substantiate them, and to support their growth from there.
Waitlist
Early access opens in cohorts.
One address, whether you intend to read the reports or would like your own venture assessed. We will confirm which when we reply. No newsletter, no forwarding, and a single message when your place opens.