A clear distinction between profile work and listing applications
Listing profile remediation addresses an existing warning, flagged field or unresolved profile concern. The first decision is whether the task concerns a current profile, a profile update or a new listing application. That distinction keeps the evidence review focused and avoids preparing the wrong kind of submission. For wider context, see listings and verification.
| Route | Appropriate when | First material to assemble |
|---|---|---|
| Remediation | An existing profile shows an issue | Profile link and notice |
| Profile update | Project details need correction | Current and supporting details |
| New listing | The project seeks a separate listing | Application information |
For an existing warning on CoinMarketCap, CoinGecko, DEXTools or DEXScreener, we begin with what the platform currently displays and the precise outcome your team is seeking. A correction to profile details may instead fit DEXTools and DEXScreener profile updates. New applications follow a different path, including CoinMarketCap listing support or CoinGecko listing support.
Evidence is assembled with care and kept within the agreed review
The review compares the visible profile issue with project information and records your team provides. We note which details are supported, where the record is unclear, and what needs confirmation before a request is drafted.
A practical starting file contains the affected profile link, the warning text or a screenshot, relevant official project pages, and any prior platform correspondence. Include records that support the particular detail under review, rather than sending unrelated documents. If the concern relates to supply information, circulating supply verification may be the more suitable route.
One named point of contact coordinates the case. Materials are handled confidentially within the agreed review, and you can identify items requiring restricted handling. The project remains the source of factual claims and identity records. We flag sensitive or uncertain details for your confirmation; nothing is included in a proposed submission before your sign-off. This keeps the record composed and makes each requested correction traceable to information you have approved.
What changes between the four platform reviews?
The review follows the profile and issue visible on the specific platform, rather than assuming one submission fits all. CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko cases may concern information on a project listing; DEXTools and DEXScreener cases may concern details shown on a token or project profile. We inspect the relevant record before deciding what evidence belongs in the case.
CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko
We compare the profile information associated with the issue against the project records you provide. If the matter is instead a warning on one of these listing profiles, the platform warning guide offers additional preparation context.
DEXTools and DEXScreener
We focus on the particular profile display and the details your team wants corrected or reconsidered. A profile change without an unresolved warning may be better handled through the dedicated profile update service.
Across all four, the case summary separates visible facts from project statements. Your team can see which records support each point and where more clarification is needed before any draft proceeds.
The case file is prepared for a deliberate sign-off
The finished case file gives your team a concise account of the issue, the supporting material and the proposed request. It is prepared for review before any submission or follow-up, so factual statements remain under your control.
- Profile record: the affected page and the warning or detail in question.
- Evidence map: the records connected to each relevant project statement.
- Gap notes: points that need clarification or additional support.
- Draft request: a focused explanation and requested correction, shown for approval.
- Case record: submitted materials and agreed follow-up actions, where applicable.
The work is limited to information the project can substantiate. If a change involves a contract migration or rebrand, the context may need a separate migration and rebranding update. If identity documentation is relevant, we identify that during scoping rather than requesting a broad file of sensitive records in advance.
The platform retains its own review and profile decisions
A careful case file can clarify the project’s evidence; it cannot decide how a platform treats that evidence.
Our work covers the agreed profile audit, evidence organization, request preparation and documented follow-up. The platform controls its own review, profile display, decision on a warning and review timing. No one outside that process can promise a particular outcome. We keep this boundary clear while preparing materials that accurately represent the case.
The two practical checkpoints are factual confirmation by your team and written sign-off on the draft. If the available records do not support a statement, we mark the gap instead of presenting it as established. After approval, we preserve a record of the materials and follow-up actions, giving your team a composed account of what was prepared and what remains outside its control.
A measured first step for your listing record
Remediation may stand alone or sit beside other listing work. If the case points to a fresh application, begin with other crypto tracker listings; if the concern is an existing profile, keep the initial review narrow and evidence-led. This distinction helps your team decide what can be addressed now and what belongs in a separate request.
The first exchange can remain private while we establish the affected profile, the exact notice and the correction being sought. You may also indicate which documents require restricted handling and who has authority to approve factual statements. Your named contact keeps those preferences with the case and presents the proposed request for your review before anything is submitted.
The one detail to share first is the profile link or warning text; your named contact will confirm the evidence needed and the next approval point.
How it works
- 01 — Identify the profile issueProvide the affected profile link, notice or screenshot, and any prior platform correspondence. Note the correction or review your team is seeking.
- 02 — Confirm the review boundariesYour named contact identifies which profiles and records are relevant. The team also notes any materials requiring restricted handling.
- 03 — Map evidence and gapsWe compare available project information with the issue and identify points requiring confirmation. Your team supplies or approves the factual details.
- 04 — Prepare the draftWe organize the case summary, supporting material and proposed request. The draft is shown to your team before submission.
- 05 — Record follow-upAfter written sign-off, we document the submitted materials and agreed follow-up actions for the project record.
Frequently asked questions
Which details are useful for the first profile review?
The affected profile link and the exact warning text are the most useful starting points. A screenshot and any prior platform correspondence add context. Your named contact can then identify which project records support the issue, so you need not send unrelated or sensitive documents at the outset.
Can you prepare a case for DEXTools or DEXScreener?
Yes. We examine the visible profile issue, compare relevant project information with the materials you provide, and prepare a case-specific draft. Your team sees the request before submission and confirms its factual statements. Share the particular profile and notice so the review addresses the displayed issue.
Does the review require KYC documents?
Not in every case. We first establish whether the platform’s request or the issue calls for identity or project verification. The project supplies its own identity records and approves any sensitive information included in a draft. If documentation is needed, your contact will explain its relevance to the case.
Can you ensure a platform clears the warning?
No. CoinMarketCap, CoinGecko, DEXTools and DEXScreener control their own reviews, profile displays and decisions, including timing. We can deliver the agreed audit, evidence organization, draft request and documented follow-up. Your team approves the materials before submission, but the platform determines its response.
How long does preparation usually take?
Preparation follows the time needed to confirm project details, assemble relevant records and approve the draft. Once the affected profile and available evidence are clear, your contact can outline the sequence for the case. Any subsequent platform review occurs separately from our preparation work.
Can you proceed if some project records are missing?
We can assess the available material and identify what remains unsupported. The draft will not present missing evidence as if it exists. Your team can clarify the record or provide further documents before sign-off; the case can then be prepared around the facts you can substantiate.
Tell us about your project
Answer four quick questions and a manager will send you a plan, timing and a price range within the hour. Everything stays confidential.
Loading the form…