The BackerGuardian Trust Meter scores crowdfunding campaigns 0–100 across 5 weighted dimensions: Creator Credibility (30%), Product Authenticity (25%), Technical Feasibility (20%), Supply Chain Risk (15%), Communication Quality (10%). Kill-switch conditions cap any score at 20/100 when critical fraud indicators are detected. This page renders methodology v3.0 — the exact rule set the scoring engine runs, also published as machine-readable JSON at /methodology.json.
How the Trust Meter Works
We don't hype. We measure trust. Every signal below is applied by the same validator-checked engine — this page cannot drift from the algorithm because it is generated from it.
The five dimensions
Each dimension starts at a baseline and moves with the evidence-backed signals listed below. Positive signals require evidence too — a score is earned in both directions.
Creator Credibility
weight 30% · baseline 50| -50 | Previous campaign failed to deliver (rugpull) |
| -30 | Previous campaign delivered >1 year late with poor communication |
| -25 | Previous failed/canceled campaign not addressed in current campaign |
| -20 | Zero-Zero profile (0 created, 0 backed) |
| -10 | No external social verification (LinkedIn/website/company registration) |
| +10 | Backer history > 5 projects (part of the community) |
| +10 | Verified real identity (established professional/company history) |
| +30 | Successfully delivered 1+ campaigns to satisfied backers |
Product Authenticity
weight 25% · baseline 50| -50 | Resale/rebrand of an existing product (short of verified pre-launch listing, which is a kill switch) |
| -40 | Only 3D renders shown, no photos of a physical unit |
| -20 | Prototype looks materially different from renders |
| -20 | Demo video fully CGI or heavily edited with no raw footage |
| +10 | Independent third-party hands-on review exists |
| +10 | Factory/tooling photos showing production preparation |
| +30 | Raw, uncut video demo of prototype functioning as claimed |
Technical Feasibility
weight 20% · baseline 70| -30 | Too-good-to-be-true specs vs comparable products |
| -20 | Funding goal under ~50% of estimated BOM/tooling cost |
| -10 | Aggressive timeline (<3 months from campaign end to hardware delivery) |
| +10 | Standard/off-the-shelf components lower execution risk |
| +20 | Clean explanation of specific technical challenges and solutions |
Supply Chain Risk
weight 15% · baseline 60| -20 | No manufacturing partner named |
| -20 | Shipping rates undefined or charged later with no estimates |
| -15 | Flexible funding with no production roadmap |
| -10 | Complex customization options create SKU-count risk |
| +20 | Named logistics/fulfillment partner |
| +20 | Photos of molds/tooling creation |
Communication Quality
weight 10% · baseline 70| -30 | Creator silent in comments (0 replies to backer questions) |
| -20 | Word-salad updates: vague philosophy, no concrete progress |
| -10 | Deleting negative comments |
| +10 | Detailed FAQ covering refunds and warranty |
| +10 | Active creator participation with technical depth |
Kill switches
Some findings end the conversation. Any one of these caps the total score at 20/100 regardless of every other dimension:
- Reselling/Arbitrage: product listed on AliExpress/Alibaba/Temu dated prior to campaign launch
- Identity fraud: creator photo is stock or AI-generated
- Creator linked to banned account or known scam ring
- Claims violate basic physics
Interpreting the score
| Score Range | Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 80–100 | Low Risk | Low risk profile - proceed with standard diligence |
| 60–79 | Medium-Low | Moderate risk - due diligence recommended |
| 40–59 | Medium | Elevated risk - exercise caution |
| 21–39 | Medium-High | High risk - significant concerns |
| 0–20 | High Risk | Critical risk - avoid |
The monetization firewall
Scores are provably independent of money, by construction: monetization eligibility is computed from the score (threshold 60/100), never the reverse. Campaigns below the threshold have all affiliate links stripped automatically, and a validator blocks any record that claims eligibility its score doesn't earn. We disclose in both directions: some of our highest-scoring campaigns carry no affiliate relationship at all, and coverage is selected by discovery criteria — never by commission availability.
Transparency
Analysis combines automated checks (reverse-image search, platform data, marketplace scans) with human judgment; every scored record carries a dated verdict and, on current-standard records, inline source links. The full rule set behind this page is public at /methodology.json — if we change the algorithm, that file changes, visibly.