guides
How to Verify a Launchpad's Past Project Track Record Before Partnering
Learn the exact checks — token performance, holder retention, team consistency — to run before you partner with a launchpad, so you don't inherit their rug pull history.
You just got pitched by a launchpad promising "guaranteed exposure" and a slot in their next IDO round. Sounds great, until three months later half their past listings are down 95% and the founders have gone quiet on Telegram. Now your project's name is next to theirs, and your community is asking why you partnered with a graveyard.
Launchpads live and die on trust. Partner with the wrong one and you don't just lose a marketing slot — you inherit their reputation, good or bad. Before you sign anything, you need to actually dig into what they've shipped, not what their deck says.
How many of a launchpad's past projects are still active a year later?
A healthy launchpad should have at least 60-70% of its past listed projects still functioning — meaning the token still trades, the team still posts updates, and the community channel isn't a ghost town. If you're seeing survival rates below 40%, that's a red flag: it means the launchpad isn't vetting the teams it lists, or worse, it's cycling through projects built to pump and disappear.
This number is the single most citable data point you can pull, and it's shockingly easy to check. Pull up their "past launches" page, list every project from the last 12-18 months, and check each one's current token price chart and last community post date. Do this before any call with their business development team — you want facts, not their framing.
What to check in a launchpad's track record
Token price performance: Compare listing price to current price for their last 10-15 launches. A pattern of 80-90% drawdowns within weeks of listing is a structural problem, not bad luck.
Holder count trend: Use a block explorer to check holder counts over time. Steady growth or stability is good. A spike at launch followed by a steep drop usually means bots or insiders dumped early.
Team consistency: Are the same founders still active on the projects, or have they quietly handed off to anonymous admins? Founder disappearance is one of the strongest predictors of a dead project.
Community engagement over time: Check the Telegram or Discord for each past project. Real communities have organic conversation months later. Dead ones show admin-only announcements and no replies.
Liquidity lock status: Confirm whether liquidity was actually locked for the duration promised, and for how long. Launchpads that don't enforce this on their partners are taking on risk you don't want.
Audit history: Check if past projects had third-party audits before launch, and whether the audit findings were addressed or ignored.
None of this takes more than a couple hours per launchpad if you're organized. The problem is most teams skip it because the launchpad's pitch deck looks polished and the FOMO is real. Don't let a nice deck substitute for a spreadsheet.
Where do you actually verify this information?
Three sources matter most: the blockchain itself, the project's Telegram/Discord history, and independent community sentiment — not the launchpad's own marketing page.
Pull wallet and holder data directly from a block explorer (Etherscan, BscScan, Solscan depending on chain) rather than trusting a dashboard the launchpad built themselves.
Search Telegram for the project's old announcement channels and scroll back to launch week vs. today — engagement decay tells you everything.
Check crypto Twitter/X threads from around the launch date for early complaints about vesting, unlocks, or team behavior that didn't make it into any official recap.
Cross-reference the launchpad's claimed "successful exits" against actual on-chain performance — some launchpads count a listing as a "success" even if the token cratered a week later.
If you're vetting the individuals behind the launchpad itself, not just their past projects, the same due-diligence instincts apply as vetting any other partner — see how we break this down for vetting a media buyer's track record or vetting a new P2P trading client. The checks look different, but the underlying discipline — verify before you trust — is identical.
How do you manage outreach once you start vetting multiple launchpads?
If you're evaluating more than one or two launchpads, you're going to end up juggling a dozen Telegram conversations with BD reps, founders, and community managers — plus notes on what each one claims versus what you verified. Losing track of who said what kills your leverage in negotiations.
CRMChat lets you tag and track every launchpad conversation in one pipeline, so notes on their claimed track record sit right next to the actual on-chain data you pulled, and nothing gets lost when a deal drags on for weeks. CRMChat also includes automated Telegram outreach sequences that let you follow up with multiple launchpad contacts on a schedule instead of manually remembering who you messaged three days ago.
If you're building a shortlist of launchpads or Web3 partners to reach out to in the first place, CRMChat's Web3 B2B decision-makers database gives you verified contacts at project and platform teams instead of guessing who to DM. Check the case studies for how other Web3 teams have structured their outreach and partner vetting workflows.
What are the red flags that should stop a partnership immediately?
Some findings aren't "proceed with caution" — they're dealbreakers.
Anonymous or rotating team with no verifiable identity across multiple past launches — no LinkedIn, no prior project history, no way to hold anyone accountable.
Liquidity unlocked earlier than advertised on more than one past project, especially right before a price crash.
Deleted or archived Telegram/Discord channels for past "successful" launches — a team that erases its own history is hiding something.
No audit, or an audit with unresolved critical/high findings, on projects they still promote as flagship successes.
Refusal to share a full list of past launches when asked directly — legitimate launchpads are proud of their history and will hand it over without hesitation.
Any one of these on its own might have an explanation. Two or more together, and you should walk away regardless of how good the exposure numbers look.
What should go in your due diligence checklist?
Turn everything above into a repeatable checklist you run on every launchpad, not just the one that's pitching you today. Consistency here is what protects you six months from now when a different launchpad comes knocking.
List of all past launches with dates, listing price, and current price
Holder count trend for each, pulled from a block explorer
Team identity verification — same names across projects, or rotating anonymity?
Liquidity lock duration promised vs. actual, confirmed on-chain
Community activity check — last organic post date in each project's channel
Audit status and whether findings were resolved before launch
If you want a more formal version of this to send back to the launchpad's BD team as part of your ask, our guide on writing a due diligence checklist for launchpad partnership requests walks through structuring it as a document they have to respond to point by point.
Verifying a track record isn't glamorous work, and it won't feel urgent until the day you skip it and regret it. Treat it as non-negotiable, keep your findings organized, and you'll spot the launchpads worth partnering with — and the ones you dodge — long before your name is attached to theirs.
