A smaller token count is not automatically a portfolio loss

Name the old asset and the new asset

An old and a new token can have related names while remaining different recorded assets. Preserve their chain, contract or native-asset identity and the source that states the relationship. A ticker resemblance does not prove that a migration happened or that every holder was eligible.

The ERC-20 interface makes display metadata such as symbol and decimals optional. Retain supplied precision information rather than assuming every token uses the same scale. An integer base-unit amount and a displayed token quantity are different fields in your ledger.

State the ratio as an explicit teaching assumption

Suppose an imaginary notice defines 10 old tokens for 1 new token, with the entire supplied 1000-token balance eligible and no fees or rounding adjustment. The model gives 100 new tokens. These are fictional terms, not a real issuer's conversion promise.

If your separately entered credit row says 95 new tokens, the difference from that model is minus 5 new tokens. That is a reconciliation gap. Eligibility dates, exclusions, rounding, multiple credits or fees would need their own actual evidence before explaining the gap or calling it an error.

Do not turn unit changes into an AUD return

For another deliberately invented comparison,1000 old units at AUD 0.10 and 100 new units at AUD 1.00 both multiply to AUD 100. The equality follows from the entered prices and quantities. It does not show executable market values, actual account equity or a profit from the migration.

Retain the valuation date, currency and source separately from the conversion record. A USD quote cannot silently become AUD, and a current price cannot be used to certify what an account was worth on an earlier eligibility date. Quantity reconciliation can be possible even when valuation remains unknown.

Check the eligible scope and every credit row

A first credit of 60 new units followed by a second credit of 40 would reconcile to 100 in the fictional model. Reviewing only the first row would create a false 40-unit gap. Preserve credit identifiers, asset identity and any reversal or correction so duplicate and partial postings remain distinguishable.

Eligibility can change the model independently of the headline ratio. If authoritative evidence makes only 900 of the old 1000 units eligible under the same teaching 10-to-1 ratio, the conditional result is 90 new units. That does not establish the terms of a real migration. It shows why a ratio, a visible balance and an eligible balance require separate evidence and should not be collapsed into one number.

Keep the Australian statement dates unambiguous

If your notice uses 22/10/2026 under a confirmed DD/MM/YYYY convention, preserve that convention alongside the ISO date 2026-10-22. Do not infer the convention from your own location if the notice's author has not specified it. Account capture date, eligibility date and credit posting date are different entries.

Finish with the exact old/new identities, ratio source, eligible balance evidence and credit rows. Missing terms remain unresolved. This record does not authorise a token approval, wallet connection or transfer, and it does not verify the legitimacy of an issuer or the safety of a conversion route.

The optional link below leads to this site's separate crypto signals and Telegram updates offer. The record method is usable without that offer. It does not independently verify the offer, establish country eligibility or turn the teaching example into an actual transaction.

Primary sources and scope

1. Ethereum ERC-20: token interface
   Name, symbol and decimals are optional interface methods; no actual asset or migration is verified. Checked 2026-10-21.
2. Ethereum EIP-155: replay protection
   Chain ID is part of the specified transaction-signing domain; it does not identify a token contract by itself. Checked 2026-10-21.