2.6 Asset Credibility

The asset's credibility score is shaped by the event mirroring process and the reputation of the involved IAC partners.

This score encompasses three independent assessments: authenticity, compliance, and insurance rating.

Each of these ratings undergoes a detailed comparison that includes:

• Theoretical Maximum: Measuring against the highest possible score achievable within the IAC system (with an exception to insurance rating)

• Global and Category Averages: Benchmarking against the average IAC rating of all assets registered on the OAE within the specific category.

• Ranking: Identifying the asset's specific standing within a global ranking of the IAC rating system.

IAC ratings are displayed on the asset's GOR profile page. Due to the distinct nature of each category, the ratings are presented separately and not combined into a singular final score. This distinction acknowledges that an asset might exhibit high ratings in one category, while falling short in others.

Example 1: Let’s consider a real estate asset being onboarded to the OAE. An authenticator may visit the property, granting it a high authenticity score based on its physical presence. However, if it's discovered during compliance checks that the asset, including ownership rights, is being onboarded by a tenant without the owner's consent, the compliance score would be zero. This discrepancy highlights why averaging these scores would be misleading and potentially hazardous to OAE users, as it could obscure critical compliance issues. Example 2: Imagine a vintage car being introduced to the Onchain Asset Environment. During the compliance validation process, it's found that all necessary legal and regulatory requirements are meticulously met. The car's paperwork is in perfect order, including its registration, insurance, and historical authenticity certificates. This thorough documentation leads to a high compliance validity score. However, when an authenticator inspects the car for its authenticity, they discover discrepancies. Despite the car's paperwork indicating it as an original vintage model, detailed examination reveals several modern replacements and modifications not consistent with the vehicle's claimed era. These findings significantly undermine the car's authenticity score, as the physical evidence contradicts the historical claims made in the documentation.