Back to portfolio
Research & DataSimulated project

Onchain Data Analyst portfolio brief

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

Objective

Rebuild one public metric from raw events

Expected deliverables

SQL query setDashboardWallet or cohort studyProtocol performance reportMetric dictionaryMethodology note

Recommended workflow

  1. Rebuild one public metric from raw events
  2. Write the definition and known failure cases
  3. Create a decision memo that uses the data without overstating it
  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

Dune
Define protocol events and wallet cohorts, write reproducible queries, validate results against explorers, and publish dashboards with metric definitions.
Flipside
Define protocol events and wallet cohorts, write reproducible queries, validate results against explorers, and publish dashboards with metric definitions.
SQL
Define protocol events and wallet cohorts, write reproducible queries, validate results against explorers, and publish dashboards with metric definitions.
Python
Define protocol events and wallet cohorts, write reproducible queries, validate results against explorers, and publish dashboards with metric definitions.
block explorers
Verify transactions, contract addresses, events, token movements, deployment state, and incident claims against chain data.
data warehouses or notebooks
Define protocol events and wallet cohorts, write reproducible queries, validate results against explorers, and publish dashboards with metric definitions.

What a strong submission shows

  • A cohort dashboard
  • A wallet-behavior study
  • A metric dictionary
  • A reproducible protocol report with query links

Weak submission patterns

  • Dashboards with no definitions
  • Wallet counts called users
  • Charts built from copied queries the author cannot explain

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. How do you validate a query when the dashboard result looks plausible?

  2. Why is address count a weak user metric?

  3. How would you investigate a sudden increase in active wallets?

Turn this into an application