Original CryptoSignalsReview dataset research
How the 3,200-Record Transparency Report Was Built
The method is designed to make absence, source concentration, and classification limits visible. It deliberately avoids market-size claims, provider rankings, and invented scores.
Read the reproducible methodNo signup, payment, wallet connection, or credentials are required.
3,200 unique slugs in the snapshot.
Committed manifest, isolated from concurrent worktree changes.
All records carry the same inventory update date.
Direct answer
The report deterministically aggregates the committed Provider Atlas manifest at source commit 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f. The denominator is 3,200 unique provider slugs. Missing fields remain missing, multi-platform term counts may overlap, quarantine is a relevance classification rather than a misconduct finding, and no metric is converted into a rating or recommendation.
Step 1: freeze the source
The generator can read a named Git reference through git show. This run used commit 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f, so the report is insulated from concurrent uncommitted Provider Atlas regeneration. The manifest’s own generated date is 2026-07-05. Re-running against a later commit should create a new measurement, not silently rewrite the old one.
Step 2: define the unit
One record equals one unique CSR slug. The snapshot contains 3,200 unique slugs and 3,133 unique display names. Display names can repeat, so name uniqueness is not used as the denominator. A record can describe a channel, group, provider candidate, project community, marketplace listing, or quarantined non-provider candidate.
The inventory is not a random sample. It combines public category directories, public group ratings, a supported-groups marketplace, manual provider seeds, and small Discord and WhatsApp source families. Results describe this inventory only.
Step 3: preserve missingness
A blank route, subscriber count, alias list, search-intent field, or editorial dossier remains blank. The calculation does not treat a missing website as proof that no website exists, or a missing subscriber count as zero subscribers. Coverage tables answer how much data is present, not what is true outside the dataset.
Step 4: calculate counts and shares
| Measure type | Formula | Overlap rule | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Status share | records in exact status / 3,200 | Mutually exclusive in current snapshot | Inventory workflow state. |
| Platform mention | platform label contains term / 3,200 | Terms can overlap | Label concentration, not market share. |
| Field coverage | non-empty field / 3,200 | Fields can coexist | Completeness of stored metadata. |
| Source family | records with exact sourceKind / 3,200 | Mutually exclusive sourceKind | Discovery-source composition. |
| Quarantine type | quarantined records in profileType / 3,200 | Exact current profile type | Why a record is excluded from recommendation framing. |
| Collision group | normalized value appears on at least two provider slugs | One record can occur in one group per field | Entity-resolution queue, not duplicate proof. |
| Exact source concentration | records on exact trimmed sourceUrl / 3,200 | Every row contributes to one stored URL | Collection-path concentration, not market share or independent corroboration. |
| Source-registry reconciliation | provider sourceUrl exactly matches a declared sources entry | Every row is matched or unmatched | Internal source-metadata agreement, not provider or source validation. |
| Field coverage by source | populated field / records with exact sourceKind | Each field uses its source-family denominator | Importer and source availability, not provider quality. |
| Country-language source cross-tab | exact stored country and language labels grouped by sourceKind | Every row enters one exact pair and one source family | Collection taxonomy, not operator location, jurisdiction, audience geography, or current language. |
| Subscriber observation | finite nonnegative integer value / 3,200 | Missing remains missing; no imputation | Metadata coverage, not active audience or customer count. |
| Subscriber quantile | nearest-rank value among observed rows | Observed rows only | Distribution of stored values, not a market estimate. |
| Metadata bundle | four-bit route/alias/subscriber/key presence mask | Every record enters exactly one of 16 possible patterns | Field co-occurrence and importer signature, not evidence score. |
| Platform-route cross-tab | platform label term crossed with matching route field | Labels can overlap; each route field is tested separately | Stored classification agreement, not activity or ownership. |
| Source-family quarantine share | quarantined rows / rows with exact sourceKind | One mutually exclusive sourceKind per record | CSR classification within a collection path, not source or fraud rating. |
| Cornix reviewer denominator | stored reviewer count on 85 exact-sourceKind rows | Missing star values stay missing; reviewer counts are not deduplicated | Marketplace sample size, not verified-customer or unique-person count. |
| Cornix activity dependence | weekly value compared with monthly value * 3 / 13 | One residual test per Cornix row | Field lineage, not independent activity or outcome proof. |
Step 5: normalize conservatively for comparison
Name and alias comparison version nfkd-mark-lower-separator-v2 uses Unicode NFKD decomposition, removes combining marks, lowercases without a national locale, and folds non-letter and non-number runs into separators while retaining letters and numbers from every script. It is not full Unicode case-folding, homoglyph or confusable detection, transliteration, phonetic matching, or semantic similarity. Route version platform-route-v2 applies only declared Telegram and Discord endpoint rules; generic URL query strings, fragments, paths, and www hosts remain intact. Explicit dedupe keys use opaque trim-and-lower comparison version trim-lower-v1, not name normalization.
Original values remain the evidence; comparison values only create review queues. A collision group contains at least two provider slugs with the same non-empty key. 2 names produce an empty key and remain ungrouped. Counts labeled “excess” retain one record per group only as a mathematical baseline; they are not deletion or merge recommendations.
Step 6: separate classification from verification
Review status, result-sheet status, verification level, and quality quarantine are read from explicit manifest fields. The report does not infer a positive status from subscriber count, source family, country label, language label, platform, aliases, Cornix presence, or page position. It also does not infer fraud from quarantine, a repeated name, route reuse, a repeated dedupe key, or missing proof.
Data dictionary
| Field | Meaning in this report | Not equivalent to |
|---|---|---|
| sourceKind | Discovery-source family assigned by CSR | Official ownership or independent corroboration |
| sourceUrl | Exact stored route through which the candidate entered the inventory | An official provider route, independent source, or citation-quality score |
| platform | Normalized platform label | Current activity or market share |
| reviewStatus | CSR workflow conclusion displayed on the record | Regulatory status or user rating |
| verificationLevel | Current evidence gate | Provider quality score |
| resultSheetStatus | Whether CSR completed a result-sheet review | A provider’s own screenshot or testimonial |
| qualityStatus | Quarantine or correction workflow marker | Fraud allegation |
| subscribers | Stored public catalog count where available | Active users, customers, or profitable followers |
| aliases | Alternative names used for resolution | Endorsements or affiliated entities |
| dedupeKey | Source-derived comparison key where populated | Verified entity identity or automatic merge instruction |
| normalized name | Versioned NFKD, mark, lower, and separator comparison key | Canonical provider name, full case-folding, or confusable detection |
| canonical route | Platform-specific endpoint comparison key | Current ownership, authorization, or service continuity |
| source URL concentration | Record shares across exact trimmed sourceUrl values | Provider-market share, web traffic, or source independence |
| source registry match | Exact provider sourceUrl also appears in the manifest sources registry | Provider validation, source authority, or independent corroboration |
| country label | Exact stored geographic taxonomy on one provider row | Operator location, legal jurisdiction, audience geography, or market availability |
| language label | Exact stored language taxonomy on one provider row | Current message language, support language, contract language, or translation quality |
| subscriber quantile | Nearest-rank position among finite nonnegative integer observations | Typical market audience, active users, or customers |
| metadata bundle mask | Presence order: direct route, alias, subscriber observation, explicit key | Evidence quality, identity resolution, or verification status |
| label-without-route | Platform term appears in the stored label while its matching direct URL field is blank | Proof that the provider lacks the platform outside this snapshot |
| Cornix reviewer count | Frozen marketplace denominator attached to a record’s star metadata | Unique people, verified customers, independent reviews, or CSR rating |
| Cornix weekly activity | Stored monthly count transformed by 3/13 in this snapshot | Independent observation, successful signals, trades, or follower outcomes |
Reproduction commands
node tools/generate-crypto-signal-provider-transparency-evidence-library.mjs --git-ref 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f --distribution-ref 60368e8bdc778678738af1b1534253bdcbd3bd27 --distribution-json-url https://gist.githubusercontent.com/TheCryptoSimon/943c15bdd232eca0047603e33200dba0/raw/ffb007a02c83a78e8f0d505bfd7e712fca57cc50/summary.json --distribution-csv-url https://gist.githubusercontent.com/TheCryptoSimon/943c15bdd232eca0047603e33200dba0/raw/c3a134b5e031a67537d21ae898de785f1ff50df8/summary.csv --distribution-version 91c6a4d3f781fce63acd8b9689a8511b60269370 --distribution-page-url https://gist.github.com/TheCryptoSimon/943c15bdd232eca0047603e33200dba0 --published-at 2026-07-10 --modified-at 2026-07-10 node tools/check-crypto-signal-provider-transparency-evidence-library.mjs --verify-public-distributions node tools/audit-evidence-library-information-gain.mjs --library crypto-signal-provider-transparency-evidence-library --fail-on-risk
The generated manifest stores the source commit, aggregate metrics, page metadata, word counts, repository commit, public release identity, byte sizes, and checksums. The canonical landing page links to immutable aggregate JSON and CSV files; the live data-table article exposes the same measurements to readers.
Cite and download this release
Use the canonical dataset landing page, snapshot date 2026-07-05, source commit 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f, and the metric’s stated denominator. The aggregate files below are frozen in public release 91c6a4d3f781fce63acd8b9689a8511b60269370; repository commit 60368e8bdc778678738af1b1534253bdcbd3bd27 preserves the matching internal build.
- Download aggregate JSON
54,745 bytes. SHA-256
0d133d3a394c4c3e4d2f405e8dc6632209e216ea6a73a89360e101335f9375b3. - Download aggregate CSV
7,057 bytes. SHA-256
e64f109cd3379bf514946bb6b038031d97a3fb5257cda2d4dfc405a990db6230.
CryptoSignalsReview Evidence Desk. CryptoSignalsReview Provider Transparency Snapshot 2026-07-05. Published 2026-07-10. https://cryptosignalsreview.com/crypto-signal-provider-transparency-evidence-library/
Aggregate reuse terms: CSR permits quotation and reuse of the aggregate JSON and CSV with attribution to CryptoSignalsReview, the canonical landing page, snapshot date, and frozen source commit. This permission covers CSR’s aggregate analysis only; it does not grant rights in third-party names, marks, routes, or source-catalog content. Reuse must preserve the non-representative, non-verification, and non-performance boundaries.
Dataset boundary
This is a census of records in the CryptoSignalsReview candidate inventory at snapshot 2026-07-05, not a representative survey of every crypto signal provider or every messaging channel. Directory inclusion is discovery evidence only. Missing fields stay missing, platform labels can overlap, and no count proves provider quality, legality, profitability, or safety.
Frozen source: 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f. Unit: one unique CSR provider slug. Position: coverage is not endorsement.
Official context sources
These sources explain why identity, disclosure, complete performance evidence, and resistance to urgency matter. They do not validate any record in the CSR dataset.
- FCA: cryptoasset firms marketing to UK consumers
Current social-media promotion, risk-warning, and fair-clear-not-misleading context.
- ESMA: finfluencer factsheet
Transparency, accuracy, paid-promotion disclosure, and recommendation boundaries.
- Investor.gov: social media and investment fraud
Identity verification, impersonation, testimonials, urgency, and social-media limitations.
- CFTC: commodity trading systems sold on the internet
Hypothetical results, fees, slippage, loss capacity, and performance-claim limitations.
- CFTC: virtual-currency pump-and-dump advisory
Messaging-app tips, anonymity, urgency, thin liquidity, and market-manipulation risk.
Continue the transparency research
- Crypto Signal Provider Transparency Data Table
The aggregate counts, percentages, source families, platform labels, field coverage, statuses, and quarantine classes behind the 2026 CSR report.
- Crypto Signal Provider Due-Diligence Checklist
A beginner and advanced due-diligence workflow derived from the evidence gaps in 3,200 crypto signal provider candidate records.
- Crypto Signal Provider Transparency Report 2026
Original analysis of 3,200 crypto signal provider candidate records: platform concentration, verification gaps, quarantine rates, sources, and missing evidence.
- Why 98.4% of the Provider Dataset Is Telegram-Labeled
Analyze why 3,150 of 3,200 CryptoSignalsReview candidate records mention Telegram, what that concentration means, and what it cannot prove.
- What 3,200 Provider Records Reveal About Missing Proof
Why the 3,200-record CSR inventory contains zero verified providers and zero reviewed result sheets, and what evidence would change those statuses.