All of you know at this point, I'm all in on Internet Computer Protocol. But many of you have asked: well, what would your second and third place coins be? If ICP didn't exist, what would you like best? Now, I've made this website called cryptotechcap.com, and based on the methodology I used, it came up surprisingly bullish on Polkadot and Kusama — based purely on the technical realities of what they can do.
How Crypto Tech Cap Scores 100 Blockchains
First off, I made this website by asking 100 zero-or-one — so yes-or-no — questions about 100 of the top coins. And by coins I mean layer-one blockchains and layer zeros, where you have an actual blockchain infrastructure, not just a coin that has a business system off chain. So I asked 100 different questions, I made this website at cryptotechcap.com, and the capability scores came out with everything 100% transparent, so you can see exactly, perfectly how the scores were determined. And Polkadot and Kusama came out with some surprisingly high scores.
Now here's the thing: compared to ICP, these don't even matter. Like, so what that Polkadot and Kusama are incrementally better than Cardano or NEAR Protocol or Sui or Solana? It seems kind of pointless. And yes, some of the Polkadot and Kusama people will probably like that I think there is a tech-adjusted upside. In other words, if the coin were properly evaluated based on the technology and not just marketing hype and speculation, I think Polkadot and Kusama could potentially be undervalued — along with Tezos and even Algorand. However, when you compare that to ICP having what to me is a 1,000x tech-adjusted upside based on the raw capabilities of the chain, yeah, they don't look so good. But if you delete Internet Computer Protocol, this is how I would evaluate the rest of crypto.
What's really nice is that this information doesn't change on a day-to-day basis. The tech cap multiple may change, because it's based on the market cap. But the capabilities are stable, and I would invite you to bookmark cryptotechcap.com and stop looking at CoinGecko. Stop looking at CoinMarketCap. This is what you should be doing. And I guess this isn't financial advice — this is telling you: you should be researching and thinking for yourself. These are the things you should be looking at when you decide how valuable something is.
ICP Answers Yes to 97 of 100 — Including the Honest No's
All of these are evaluated based on the exact same questions, and the answers are yes or no. There are no maybes. There's no "we'd like it to" or "it's on the roadmap." Either it can do this right now, or it can't. A hundred questions, and ICP answers yes to 97 of them, with notable no's: can the founding foundation or core company not unilaterally upgrade the protocol? Now, DFINITY is not doing that, but it does look like they can. Can the chain realistically continue operating if the founding foundation disappeared at this point? Probably not — so ICP gets a no there. And does it have multiple independent client implementations — implementation diversity? Well, no, because it's all on the same thing. You can debate any of those, but every single other question is a yes.
You'll notice the vast majority of other coins get a no on all of these, because they just can't do all this stuff. You can't have a DEX with its own user interface, back end, state, and execution all hosted on chain outside ICP. You can't do that. So this to me is the most important research you can do in crypto, and there's full transparency on how I did it.
The Methodology: a 10,000-Answer Grid
I have ChatGPT Pro, the $200-a-month version. First off, I had it go find the top 100 actual blockchain layers — not coins like Chainlink that have an off-chain business system, but the top 100 real blockchains. And then for every single blockchain, answer these 100 questions zero or one. So that's a 10,000-cell grid spreadsheet — 100 by 100, 10,000 zero-or-one answers. And ChatGPT cranked this out. It took a little while, but it answered this for every chain. I told it what questions it should ask and the methodology, and I went back and forth for hours about how this should work, and then it pulled the research. Depending on whether you all find this valuable or not, I plan to go through and do deeper research on each coin so each answer is as accurate as possible. But the bottom line is: no matter what methodology you try to use, Internet Computer Protocol is going to come out so far ahead of everything else that it almost doesn't matter whether you threw this together in a few hours with ChatGPT Pro. And this is hosted directly on the ICP blockchain — also a very important thing to note.
The Kusama Outlier — and Everything Kusama Can't Do
Now, yes, this does make Kusama look pretty good, because Kusama right now is a $65 million fully diluted valuation. But this also does not take into account anything outside the technical functionality. So yes, this suggests that Kusama — according to the methodology I did this at — you have Beam and Kusama showing up high here. But this is a little bit of an outlier. I could work on the methodology — it's at a two on the capability score, so maybe we could adjust that. What is so exciting about this is that it's showing you the kind of thinking you need to do in crypto.
Just look, for example, at Kusama — look at all the things it can't do. Can the application pay for compute and storage so users don't need native gas? No. Can smart contracts schedule recurring work without external keepers or bots? No. Can a complete app run without mandatory AWS, Google, IPFS, or an external back end? No, it can't run without them. Can a social app have its UI and back end all hosted on chain? No. Can a token launchpad or decentralization sale run all on chain? No. Can smart contracts handle external HTTPS APIs directly from chain code? No. Can the network economically store files or media as part of the protocol? No. Can application state function like a persistent on-chain database? No. Can a production front end be served directly from chain contracts? No.
You see — according to this research, here's some of the most advanced technology in crypto behind ICP, and look how far behind it is. Now, it does do pretty well in the DAO governance and launch structure. But it scores literally zero in identity verification and cybercrime. Can it provide native passwordless identity? No. Can it verify credentials without a central login? No. Does it have tamper-evident web app delivery that reduces front-end substitution? No. Can it be hosted for KYC attestation without a centralized backend? No. This is what you should know about these blockchains.
NEAR, Ethereum, and Sui Against the Facts
And here's another thing: even though Kusama scores pretty high up here on the answers to this, they have no realistic hope of getting to where ICP is. And none of these other ones do either. Algorand has no realistic hope of getting up here. And you have things like NEAR Protocol trying to act like they have the capabilities that ICP has. You have people on NEAR trying to show tiny little websites they've served by plugging Cloudflare in somewhere. But here's the technical facts — F-A-C-K, F-A-C, FAQ, FAQ, FAQing, freak me — here's the technical facts: NEAR can't hardly do anything compared to ICP. You can't have a wallet backend custody service signing itself fully on chain. You can't put a DEX fully on chain on NEAR. You can't have API endpoints serving ordinary internet clients. You can't call HTTPS. You can't use a dapp in a browser on NEAR. You can't economically store files on NEAR.
I hope this will help change the face of crypto, because this is all you need to research in crypto: look at what your chain can actually do. I mean, look at Ethereum — look at how poorly Ethereum scores on here. To me, Ethereum should have a market cap that's hundreds of billions of dollars smaller based on what it can do. Look at all the no's — all the things NEAR can't do, or Ethereum can't do. And yes, Polkadot and Kusama come out pretty well in here, but if I went in and scrutinized every one of these answers, would they still be up here? And would it even matter? You come down to Solana at 16, Aptos at 18 — none of these are going to get up to Internet Computer's level, ever. And Internet Computer is already here.
While some of these try to act like it — like the founder of Sui, who I talked about in a previous video, is trying to pretend that Sui does anything similar to ICP. When you go in and look this stuff up yourself, all Sui can do is provide verifiable randomness to smart contracts, but you can't do any of this other stuff. Can an AI agent backend run autonomously on chain? No. Can smart contracts use LLM inference provided by the network itself? No. Can a dapp call AI inference without using a centralized AI key? No. Can an AI agent own and control cryptographic keys on the chain? No. Can AI-generated actions be auditable? No. Can a self-sovereign AI chat app run entirely on chain? No. This is stuff you can do all on ICP. I share more videos on all of this in my ICP Crypto playlist.
Talk It Through with Me
So I hope this is a really helpful resource for you. Let me know if you'd like to talk more about this — the best thing to do is pop in and have a one-on-one call with me. We can review your portfolio and analyze any of the coins you've got, especially against these metrics. I can also help you with finding lost crypto. I helped a guy find $70,000 once, where he just couldn't figure out how to get back into it — he showed me and explained everything, and I showed him how to get back in. Now, nothing's guaranteed. I once helped a widow try to find her husband's Bitcoin, but it turns out she had already found it — he thought he had more than she actually had, but she was double-counting the Bitcoin he already did have. If you want to debate me on an altcoin, come schedule a call and we can go back and forth. Do you need help with a wallet setup, or getting a website on chain, or something with ICP? I'm here for all of that.
So here are my second-best picks. But you know, I'm a believer in relationships too. I want one wife — I don't want two crappy side pieces. Two crappy side pieces don't equal one great wife.