When evaluating proposals, focus on the following dimensions:
- Engagement model clarity — Is the structure (loan + call option or retainer + working capital) clearly defined with explicit terms?
- Fee structure — Are onboarding fees, monthly retainers, and profit-sharing percentages competitive and transparent?
- Token allocation size — Does the requested allocation align with your circulating supply and float? Be wary of disproportionately large loan requests.
- Strike pricing (for loan + call option) — Are strikes set at realistic premiums above expected TGE pricing, or are they aspirational multiples that create misaligned incentives?
- KPI commitments — Are spread targets, depth obligations, and uptime thresholds explicitly defined?
- Exchange coverage — Which venues will the market maker support, and does this align with your listing strategy?
- Reporting cadence — How frequently will they report, and what data will they share?
Forgd's RFQ tool translates complex proposals into plain-text comparisons, enabling you to evaluate quotes on an apples-to-apples basis across 20+ market makers.
| Evaluation Dimension | What to Look For | Red Flag |
|---|---|---|
| Engagement model | Clearly defined structure with explicit terms | Vague or hybrid structures |
| Fee structure | Transparent onboarding, retainer, and profit-sharing terms | Hidden fees or opaque pricing |
| Token allocation | Proportional to float and circulating supply | Disproportionately large loan requests |
| Strike pricing (L+CO) | Realistic premiums above TGE pricing | Aspirational multiples implying unrealistic FDVs |
| KPI commitments | Explicit spread, depth, and uptime targets | No measurable performance obligations |
| Exchange coverage | Aligned with your listing strategy | Unsupported or misaligned venues |
| Reporting cadence | Regular data sharing with defined metrics | Infrequent or unstructured reporting |
Need help evaluating proposals or structuring your engagement? Book a consultation with the Forgd team for personalized guidance.