The project represents Navient, a major publicly traded US financial services corporation with massive scale and verifiable traction. However, the submission quality is extremely poor, lacking specific data, listing 'leadership' as a technology, and providing vague claims ('most people have used my product'). While the entity's real-world utility and reach are undeniable (scoring high on base metrics), the Quality Factor (Qi) is set to the minimum (0.5) across the board due to the lack of evidence in the input. This results in a score comparable to a mid-sized project, rather than the 700+ expected for a corporation of this size, highlighting the penalty for low-effort documentation.
Ready to Compete for $150k+ in Prizes?
Move this data into a HackerNoon blog draft to become eligible for your share of $150k+ in cash and software prizes
Score Breakdown
Project Details
Algorithm Insights
Recommendations to Increase Usefulness Score
Document User Growth
Provide specific metrics on user acquisition and retention rates
Showcase Revenue Model
Detail sustainable monetization strategy and current revenue streams
Expand Evidence Base
Include testimonials, case studies, and third-party validation
Technical Roadmap
Share development milestones and feature completion timeline