Each of 8 DeFiPunk principles can be scored:

• 0 = fails
• 1 = partial / mixed
• 2 = true punk

Let's do a test evaluation of two DeFi companies.

Example: Uniswap

Score = 12/16

Breakdown:

• Permissionless: ✅ (2) → Anyone can swap, no sign-up, no restrictions.
• Self-custody: ✅ (2) → Users keep their tokens in their own wallets.
• Open source: ⚠️ (1) → Uniswap v3 is now GPL, but launched as BUSL; v4 is still BUSL until 2027. Delayed openness = partial credit.
• Privacy: ❌ (0) → Transactions fully public, no built-in privacy.
• Open development: ✅ (2) → Governed by UNI token holders in open forums.
• Trustless core: ✅ (2) → Immutable smart contracts, decentralized logic.
• Security: ✅ (2) → Audited, heavily battle-tested.
• Distributed UIs: ⚠️ (1) → Some community frontends exist, but app.uniswap.org remains the main access point.

Reflection:
Uniswap is strong on permissionless access, self-custody, governance, and security. But it loses points for open-source licensing (BSL delays), lack of privacy, and reliance on a centralized frontend.

Example: Safe Wallet

Score = 14/16

Breakdown:

1. Permissionless: ✅ (2) → Anyone can create a Safe wallet.
2. Self-custody: ✅ (2) → Built specifically for secure self-custody and multisig.
3. Open source: ✅ (2) → Code available and widely forked.
4. Privacy: ❌ (0) → Wallet operations are fully public on-chain.
5. Open development: ✅ (2) → Roadmap and governance are transparent.
6. Trustless core: ✅ (2) → Uses smart contracts + cryptography, not admin control.
7. Security: ✅ (2) → One of the most audited wallets in the ecosystem.
8. Distributed UIs: ✅ (2) → Multiple interfaces, integrations, and APIs exist.

Reflection:
Safe Wallet is almost the definition of a DeFi Punk Superstar excelling on custody, openness, and security. But like most protocols, it struggles with privacy.