Brief description: an «intelligent distributed system»
Token ticker/type: FET, ERC-20 that will be converted to the native tokens upon the main net launch in 2019.
Tokenomics and distribution metrics:
Here is the current metrics published on Binance:
The total hard cap of the circulating supply is $60mil, including the offering on Binance. The project has attracted around $16,5mil so far. In comparison with the previous metrics, the overall amount of tokens hasn’t changed but the hard cap has: it has undergone a downsize from «no greater than $100mln» to the current figure as you can see in the image below
Overall, the price of a single FET, with the initial $30mil hard cap in mind, can be calculated as follows: 20% of the tokens equal to 230,599,516 FET with comes down to $0.13/FET bringing the valuation of the project, including the total supply, to $150mil. The Binance offering is listed for $0.05267/FET. It seems that the story of BTT repeats itself here.
The token allocation scheme seemed to be done with not much thought in mind:
Token unlock schedule:
50% of the team and advisors’ tokens are unlocked on year 1 with the release of 25% annually in the next 2 years:
The Foundation tokens are locked for 3 years, the private sale gets a 3-month lock with a gradual release within 3 months after the TGE. All the unsold tokens are locked for 12 months and will be put back in the circulation within 24 months after the TGE.
Twitter — 2838 subs and 154 likes. The account was created in 2017 but the first tweet is dated January 24th, 2018. There is a compulsory picture with CZ, of course:-)
Medium — articles have started to appear since December 2018
YouTube — the first video was published on January 30th, 2018 but there are only 406 subscribers despite an abundance of videos featuring team members
Outlier Ventures — young UK-based investment fund that falls closer to a typical VC-fund with an aggressive strategy rather than your typical crypto fund. A rather modest, and somewhat picky, portfolio looks good apart from the fact that technically speaking, they «invested twice» in the team of Fetch (read about it below).
Spark Digital Capital— Asian crypto fund. Seems that only the most successful investments are published on the official website.
Here we can see a textbook separation between the project itself and the Foundation:
FETCH.AI LIMITED Company number 11203766 – registered on February 13th, 2018 in Suffolk, UK with the capital of 100GBP. The board of directors includes Humayun Sheikh, CEO; Toby Simpson, CTO, and Thomas Hain, CSO.
Location: Unit 2 Brickfields Business Park Old Stowmarket Road, Woolpit, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, United Kingdom, IP30 9QS. Right next to it, another company belonging to the CEO of Fetch,ATL Steel LTD, is located. Briefly speaking, it is an industrial neighborhood and ATL Steel does mining, but not the crypto kind as we are used to by now. They mine ores and minerals in quarries. Here is a list of companies with the same CEO. Some of them have a different address but a similar board of directors:
The website gets around 500 visitors a day with a bit over than 2000 views. The figure has increased after the news about Binance in December. There is a nice geographical spread instead of your usual visitors from CIS and Asia generating the traffic. The website currently stands at 2080 visitors a day or 62400 a month.
Whois is hidden and the website is hosted by GoDaddy.
The official GitHubhttps://github.com/fetchaicontains 5 repositories with more than 400000 lines of code written. 4 out of 5 repos have been updated recently which cannot be said of the Ledger repo https://github.com/fetchai/ledger with the latest update being pushed on November 27th, 2018. Generally, all the code is written in C++ with some Python here and there. The volume of the code is not very large but it’s sufficient and relevant. The quality of the code is not bad but is sporadic in certain spots:
In the screenshot above there is an example of such a code: the whole page of initialization in the constructor. It is very inconvenient to read and debug. A better solution would be to group the parameters or use Factory or Builder patterns.
The history of the development is hidden in the private repos and the team seems to push the public updates in batches. It can be seen as a negative sign as there are no public commits and it is impossible to see who actually is responsible for coding as there are no public members on GitHub.
There is no point to fully describe another blockchain with a fairly typical token usage. Here are some bullet points of Fetch:
Main technological features:
Hybrid system with a blockchain and a DAG — for each transaction 2 separate chains are created in order to tacklethesystem throughput. The nodes interact via the DAG with the sharding feature coming in the future;
uPoW (Useful Proof of Work) consensus algorithm — all the computational tasks are broken into the smaller packets and could be executed by the nodes of various computational power, i.e. «weaker» nodes can be in charge of recording the transaction on the blockchain while the «stronger» ones could do the actual heavy lifting. Frankly speaking, the description of the mechanism is quite vague.
Throughput is promised to be around 1 000 000 TPS. There are no technical details though;
Usage of AI for analysis and to predict the load of the network. AI algorithms are also used to validate the work of the agent nodes.
Interface — natural language processing.
To conclude, here we have just another blockchain with an attempt to merge it with AI and machine learning. Some projects, like Dfinity, use pseudo-AI with the clear functions, i.e. self-learning, control over the network, patching on the go and interference in some complex situations. Here AI and ML seem to be capable of doing literally everything. In fact, the blockchain is only needed for payments, miner rewards and, in theory, to use in the supply chain. The network is comprised of so-called «agents» that perform certain actions in exchange for a reward. Thus, we see another «all-in-one» project with no measurable and specific targets in mind and a lot of vagueness in the documentation.
The goals set for the project are very ambitious and require a lot of effort to come to fruition. Considering the quality of the technical documentation and the use of methods that are still being developed and tested, the practical realization of Fetch definitely leaves us in a state of doubt. In addition, the team has never released its Security White Paper that was supposed to be out in Q2 2018.