Points program scoring patterns: what usually matters (and what to verify)

Most points programs don’t publish a full scoring formula. That doesn’t mean you’re helpless; it means you need to recognize the common patterns and stop treating community “multipliers” as facts.

This guide explains the scoring models you’ll see most often, the parts that usually matter, and the verification checks that keep you from farming a fantasy.

Browse sourced campaigns here: points directory.

Quick take

• Identify the scoring unit (time, balance, volume, quests, or referrals).
• Confirm what counts (net deposits vs gross volume, qualifying markets, and excluded routes).
• Assume eligibility filters exist unless the program says otherwise.
• Treat any “optimal strategy” as unverified unless it’s in official sources.
• Record actions and approvals so you can unwind if rules change.

Vocabulary: points, seasons, and “snapshots”

Programs use different labels, but the concepts repeat:

• Points / XP / credits: an internal accounting unit. It is not a token.
• Season: a time-bounded scoring period.
• Snapshot: a recorded state at a time (wallet balances, positions, activity).
• Boost / multiplier: a modifier applied to an action or balance.

Two rules:

• Points are a tracking system; they are not a promise.
• If a term is only defined by third parties, treat it as unverified.

If you want the safety baseline, read: crypto points farming.

The five scoring models you’ll see most often

1) Time-weighted balances

You earn points based on how long you keep a position open, often scaled by size.

What to verify:

• What counts as “balance” (token amount, USD value, LP shares)
• Whether points stop during withdrawal queues or cooldowns
• Whether boosts require specific assets or markets

Common failure mode: people chase boosts and end up locked in positions with slow exits.

2) Volume-based activity

You earn points based on swaps, trades, borrows, or repayments.

What to verify:

• Is it gross volume or net volume?
• Does the program exclude self-trading or certain routes?
• Are fees and spreads high enough that “points” are a bad trade?

Common failure mode: overtrading to farm points, then realizing fees ate the upside.

3) Liquidity provision (LP) scoring

You earn points for providing liquidity, often based on:

• time in range (for concentrated liquidity)
• USD value of liquidity
• fee generation or volume routed through your position

What to verify:

• Does scoring depend on price range width?
• Does it penalize out-of-range positions?
• Are you exposed to impermanent loss relative to holding?

Sanity-check LP downside here: impermanent loss calculator.

4) Borrow/lend positions

You earn points for supplying, borrowing, or both.

What to verify:

• Borrow costs (variable rates can spike)
• Liquidation mechanics (collateral factors, oracle risk)
• Whether points accrue during queued withdrawals

Common failure mode: borrowing “for points” and getting liquidated in a drawdown.

5) Quest-based actions

You earn points for completing tracked actions (bridge, swap, mint, stake, vote).

What to verify:

• What counts as completion (on-chain event vs off-chain tracking)
• Whether quests can be retroactively changed
• Whether the quest platform is official or a third-party wrapper

Common failure mode: clicking an unofficial quest link and signing approvals on a fake UI.

Use the safer workflow here: how to verify a points program is real.

The verification table (use this when scoring is opaque)

When you can’t find a published formula, at least verify what is knowable.

Labeling uncertainty is part of being accurate. Confident wrong content is how sites lose trust.

Eligibility and sybil filters (assume they exist)

Programs often apply filters after the fact:

• excluding certain contracts (CEX hot wallets, mixers, known sybil clusters)
• requiring a minimum duration or minimum balance
• removing wash volume and suspicious patterns

Don’t try to “outsmart” filters. Build a plan that still makes sense if you earn fewer points than expected.

More context: sybil checks in points programs.

Recordkeeping beats memory

When rules change mid-season, people get stuck because they didn’t record:

• what contracts they approved
• what positions they opened
• what the exit path is

Use a simple template: questing recordkeeping.

FAQ

If scoring isn’t published, should I ignore the program?

Not necessarily. It means you should avoid scaling based on assumptions. If you proceed, do it with a position you can unwind quickly.

Are “boosts” real?

Sometimes. Treat them as real only when they’re in official sources. If they’re only in community posts, label them unverified.

Do points always track USD value?

No. Some programs score token amounts, LP shares, time in position, or activity counts. Always confirm the unit.

What’s the biggest scoring trap?

Mixing up gross activity with net value. Volume can look large while your net outcome is negative due to fees and spreads.

Next step

• Browse sourced campaigns: points directory
• Learn the safety baseline: airdrop farming checklist
• Sanity-check LP downside: impermanent loss calculator

Sources and further reading

• ERC-20 token standard (allowances): https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-20
• Permit (ERC-2612): https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-2612
• Uniswap Permit2 docs: https://docs.uniswap.org/contracts/permit2/overview