Report a gap

Coverage is not exhaustive, and a gap is not always an oversight. Before you write, these are the five reasons something is usually absent:

1. The issuer publishes no contract addresses. We record an address only from a source the issuer publishes, so an issuer that names none cannot be recorded however large it is. Still worth telling us — it helps us press them.
2. We have not found or approved a source yet. Smaller issuers especially: automated discovery only surfaces protocols above roughly $10M, so below that we generally do not know an issuer exists. This is the most useful kind of report.
3. It is a wrapper, or a token that only tracks a price. A token that mirrors an asset's price without conveying ownership or a claim on the issuer is not a tokenized asset, and a wrapper of someone else's token belongs to the original issuer rather than the wrapper.
4. It is a derivative. Perpetuals and futures never appear as products — they carry no backing, custody or redemption. Where we already track the underlying asset they are recorded separately, under Derivatives. Where we do not, the market is skipped: a derivative on its own never causes an asset to be added.
5. It has been deliberately excluded. Some instruments have been assessed and ruled out on the record — synthetic pre-IPO tokens, crypto-strategy funds whose token is the strategy, and sanctioned issuers among them.

Worth knowing about points 3 and 4 together: a perpetual on a stock is recorded as a derivative, while a spot token that merely tracks the same stock's price is not recorded at all. The test is not whether exposure is synthetic — it is whether the instrument is openly a derivative or claims to be ownership without being it.

Every submission is reviewed by hand and nothing is added automatically. We do not publish who reported what.