The InsideRWA Rating Standard
A transparent, independent methodology for scoring tokenized real-world assets. Version 1.0.
Why an Independent Standard
Tokenized assets are growing faster than the tools to evaluate them. The InsideRWA Score is an independent, published methodology that grades every product on the dimensions financial professionals actually diligence — so an advisor can compare a tokenized treasury fund, a private-credit pool, and a commodity token on one consistent scale.
The Six Pillars
Weights flex by asset class — a tokenized T-bill fund and a real-estate pool are not judged identically. Category weight tables are published with each rating.
| Pillar | Weight | What it answers |
|---|---|---|
| Asset & Yield Quality | 20% | Is the underlying sound, and is the net yield real and sustainable? |
| Liquidity | 15% | Can holders get in and out — at what speed, and has it held up under stress? |
| Transparency & Verification | 20% | Can the backing be independently verified? Audits, attestations, reporting cadence. |
| Counterparty & Custody | 20% | Who holds the asset, how is it structured, and what happens if a party fails? |
| Regulatory & Compliance | 15% | Is the legal wrapper established, clear, and appropriate for the investor base? |
| Technology & Smart-Contract | 10% | Audits, contract maturity, admin-key and oracle risk. |
Grades
Every rating ships with its pillar breakdown. If the data is not verifiable, the product is marked Not Rated — we never guess.
| Score | Grade | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| 90–100 | AAA | Institutional-grade, minimal structural concern |
| 80–89 | AA | Very strong, minor gaps |
| 70–79 | A | Strong, some considerations |
| 60–69 | BBB | Adequate, notable trade-offs |
| 50–59 | BB | Caution, material weaknesses |
| Below 50 | B / NR | High risk — or insufficient transparency to rate |
Independence
Ratings cannot be bought. No issuer payment, listing fee, or partnership influences any InsideRWA Score. Any sponsored placement on this site is labeled and visually distinct from ratings. Conflicts, if any, are disclosed on the rating itself.
DOL Prudence-Standard Mapping
Each InsideRWA pillar maps to a specific DOL prudence factor under ERISA § 404(a)(1)(B) and the 2020 Investment Duties regulation. The table below shows how each pillar addresses the DOL's five-factor prudence analysis for plan fiduciaries evaluating alternative investments.
| InsideRWA Pillar | DOL Prudence Factor |
|---|---|
| Asset & Yield Quality | Risk/return profile; diversification characteristics |
| Liquidity | Liquidity needs of the plan; redemption terms |
| Transparency & Verification | Availability of information; independent verification |
| Counterparty & Custody | Custodial arrangements; counterparty risk |
| Regulatory & Compliance | Legal structure; regulatory status; investor eligibility |
| Technology & Smart-Contract | Operational risk; infrastructure maturity |
This mapping is informational only. InsideRWA is not a law firm and does not provide legal or fiduciary advice. Plan fiduciaries should consult qualified ERISA counsel before making investment decisions.
Versioning
This is Methodology v1.0 (July 2026). Changes are published in a public changelog. Ratings are refreshed monthly and event-driven — a halted redemption, a lapsed audit, or a regulatory action triggers an immediate review.