Public methodology · version v1.0.0

How we score a project

Every audit on this site is produced by the same rubric. The weights, formulas, and thresholds below are fixed in code — we do not adjust them to favour any developer, and we do not accept commissions on sales.

How we score

At-a-glance · five sub-scores · five bands

The composite is a weighted sum of five sub-scores. Each sub-score is itself a weighted blend of public signals. The bar, cards, and ladder below are the whole rubric in one screen.

Composite weight breakdown
Developer 30%
Project 20%
Locality 20%
Financial 15%
Risk 15%
Developer 30%
Project 20%
Locality 20%
Financial 15%
Risk 15%
Sums to 100%.

Developer

30%

Who is building it and what is their MCA + court-case track record?

Inputs
  • MCA company status 60%
  • Court case load 40%

Project

20%

Operational health and how close (or overdue) possession is.

Inputs
  • Operational status 60%
  • Delivery posture (months to possession) 40%

Locality

20%

Market mechanics of the area: price, yield, absorption.

Inputs
  • Price YoY 40%
  • Rental yield 30%
  • Absorption months 30%

Financial

15%

Paid-up capital plus how recently the builder filed with the RoC.

Inputs
  • Paid-up capital 50%
  • RoC filing recency 50%

Risk

15%

Higher value = lower risk: news, pending litigation, oversupply.

Inputs
  • News sentiment (last 365d) 40%
  • Pending litigation 30%
  • Locality oversupply signal 30%
Composite band ladder
Strong Buy 80–100 Every signal aligned — high-confidence buy.
Buy 65–79 Solid project with minor, addressable concerns.
Caution 50–64 Mixed signals — buy only with eyes open.
Watch 35–49 Material weaknesses — wait for them to clear.
Avoid 0–34 Multiple red flags — do not deploy capital.
Methodology version
v1.0.0

Bumping the version is a deliberate, audited act — old audits keep the version that scored them so you can always reproduce a result against the rubric that produced it.

The composite score

A project's composite score is a number from 0 to 100. It is the weighted sum of five sub-scores, each measuring a distinct dimension of the project.

composite = 30% × developer + 20% × project + 20% × locality + 15% × financial + 15% × risk

Weights sum to 100%. Every sub-score is a 0–100 value. The composite is rounded to the nearest integer.

Score bands

Strong Buy 80–100
Buy 65–79
Caution 50–64
Watch 35–49
Avoid 0–34

The five sub-scores

Developer

Weight 30%

The strongest predictor of project trust: who is building it and what has their track record been? Combines MCA company status (active, struck off, under liquidation, etc.) with the count of court cases on file against the builder.

  • 60% — MCA company status. Active → 100, Active in Progress → 80, Amalgamated → 60, Under Liquidation → 10, Strike Off → 0.
  • 40% — Court case load. 0 cases → 100, 1–2 → 80, 3–5 → 60, 6–10 → 40, 11+ → 20.

Project

Weight 20%

The project's own operational health and delivery posture, independent of who is building it.

  • 60% — Operational status. completed → 90, active → 80, launched/under_construction → 70, on_hold → 30, cancelled → 10.
  • 40% — Delivery posture. Delivered within 6 months → 90, delivered earlier → 80, possession within 12 months → 90, 1–3 years → 75, 3–5 years → 60, 5+ years → 40.

Locality

Weight 20%

The market mechanics of the area: price momentum, rental yield, and how long it takes the locality to absorb new supply.

  • 40% — Price YoY. ≥15% → 95, 10–15% → 85, 5–10% → 75, 0–5% → 65, -5–0% → 45, <-5% → 25.
  • 30% — Rental yield. ≥6% → 95, 4–6% → 80, 2–4% → 65, <2% → 45.
  • 30% — Absorption months (lower is better). ≤12 → 90, 12–24 → 70, 24–36 → 50, 36–48 → 35, >48 → 20.

Financial

Weight 15%

Two indicators of builder financial health: how much capital is paid up in the company, and how recent the last RoC (Registrar of Companies) filing is.

  • 50% — Paid-up capital. ≥₹50 cr → 95, ₹10–50 cr → 80, ₹1–10 cr → 65, ₹10 L–1 cr → 50, <₹10 L → 30.
  • 50% — RoC filing recency. Within 365 days → 90, 1–2 years → 65, 2–3 years → 40, older → 20.

Risk

Weight 15%

Higher value = lower risk. Combines negative news sentiment over the last year, pending litigation density, and a locality oversupply flag.

  • 40% — Negative news ratio (last 365 days). 0% negative → 90, ≤25% → 70, ≤50% → 50, ≤75% → 30, >75% → 10.
  • 30% — Pending litigation count. 0 → 90, 1–2 → 75, 3–5 → 55, 6+ → 30.
  • 30% — Locality oversupply flag. low → 90, moderate → 60, high → 25.

Independence + missing data

We do not accept per-sale commissions from any developer. Builders pay us a flat annual fee for audit + marketing services. The audit is published as-is — even if the fee-paying builder fails the rubric. Our fee structure is contractual and disclosed on every project page.

When source data is missing for a signal (e.g. we have no MCA snapshot yet, or no recent news in our index), that signal falls back to a documented neutral value in the 40–60 range. Audits surface those fallbacks in the "underlying signals" sections so you know which parts of the score are confident and which are best-effort.

Methodology version: v1.0.0. Substantive changes will bump the version and be announced. Older audits keep their original methodology version stamped on them so you always know which rubric produced the score.