Back to portfolio
Research & DataSimulated project

Ecosystem Researcher portfolio brief

A simulated research & data exercise for Ecosystem Researcher. Treat it as realistic practice, not real client or protocol work.

Objective

Build a tracker using only official sources

Expected deliverables

Ecosystem mapVerified opportunity trackerProgramme comparisonRisk checklistSource logWeekly ecosystem brief

Recommended workflow

  1. Build a tracker using only official sources
  2. Create evidence and risk labels
  3. Publish a weekly brief that includes what changed, what remains uncertain, and what was removed
  4. Review the result against the rubric, then package it as a case study.

Constraints and safety

  • Use only public sources or clearly simulated data.
  • Never include seed phrases, private keys, or wallet secrets.
  • Redact private user, company, security, legal, or compensation information.
  • State every assumption you make.

Tools in practice

Official docs and forums
Draft, review, and maintain ecosystem map and verified opportunity tracker, with owners, source links, and change history.
X lists
Monitor official teams, programme accounts, researchers, and ecosystem participants without relying on the main timeline for completeness.
Dune
Collect and analyse the evidence used in ecosystem map and verified opportunity tracker, with definitions and reproducible steps.
block explorers
Verify transactions, contract addresses, events, token movements, deployment state, and incident claims against chain data.
spreadsheets
Structure the records behind ecosystem map and verified opportunity tracker and make review status visible.
web archiving tools
Preserve source pages, announcements, edits, and dates so later claims can be checked even when a page changes.

What a strong submission shows

  • A responsible opportunity tracker
  • A source-confidence system
  • An ecosystem map
  • A postmortem of an opportunity that should not have been recommended

Weak submission patterns

  • A list of rumored airdrops
  • Referral links presented as research
  • Cost and eligibility omitted from opportunity write-ups

Review rubric

  • Accuracy of claims and sources
  • Relevance to the target role
  • Decision quality and trade-offs
  • Completeness of the deliverable
  • Clarity of communication
  • Honest limitations and next steps

Present it as a case study

  • Explain the problem, sources, decisions, ownership, constraints, output, review, and what you would change.
  • Show the final artifact before the process notes.
  • State what you owned and what belonged to other people.
  • Label the work as simulated, and keep any real contribution clearly separate.

Interview questions this project helps you answer

  1. When should you decide not to publish an opportunity?

  2. How do you distinguish confirmed rules from community inference?

  3. What information must appear before someone spends money or signs transactions?

Turn this into an application