InfoFi Kaito Mindshare Campaigns: Mechanics, Creators, and Metrics

What are InfoFi and mindshare in Kaito?

InfoFi is an approach to promotion where attention to a project and creator contributions are examined through data about content and its distribution. In a mindshare campaign, the team helps build regular publications on the project's topic, attract suitable content creators, and understand how their activity is reflected in available rankings.

Kaito is used as part of this picture: participants can track the visibility of topics and creators in rankings and campaigns related to mindshare. Such a ranking is useful as a reference but does not replace content analysis. If a participant frequently mentions the project without new facts, the audience gets repetition, not a reason to explore the product.

Before launch, define three things:

• which audience the content should interest;
• what product facts can be published and who confirms them;
• what signs of attention the team will analyze beyond the ranking position.

For the contractor, editorial control matters as much as access to creators. Read more about the work format in InfoFi and mindshare campaigns, and if you are comparing channels, see the guide on KOL campaigns.

How to read leaderboards without mistaking them for the goal

A leaderboard helps see which creators and topics are visible within a specific campaign or ranking. It is useful for monitoring activity, but by itself does not prove that the audience understood the product, started using it, or became more loyal.

First, check what exactly the selected Kaito screen shows: a list of participants, a mindshare score, a creator's position, or another metric. Then determine the observation period and participation criteria. Values can only be compared under identical conditions: period, topic, and set of tracked creators. A snapshot of the ranking at one point in time does not explain why changes occurred.

A practical analysis workflow:

• save the baseline before the start;
• note publications that contain an independent thought or verifiable fact;
• compare the creator's visibility with the target audience's reaction and conversions, if the team tracks them;
• separately record mentions that require a response from the team.

Do not set participants the task of simply climbing the list. Formulate an editorial criterion: for example, explain a specific feature, product change, or use case. For a general approach to campaign measurement, see the metrics breakdown.

How to select creators for an InfoFi campaign

A suitable creator is one whose audience and style match the project's topic, not just someone visible on the leaderboard. Start selection with a content review: open recent publications, evaluate the accuracy of statements, topic consistency, and how the creator interacts with readers.

Create a shortlist and divide creators by role. Some are good at explaining complex products, others work well with news or discussions, and others have a strong local audience. For a technical project, a creator who can correctly explain the mechanics is more useful than broad fame without thematic relevance.

Before inviting, check:

• whether the language and geography of the audience match the task;
• whether the creator offers their own conclusions, not just a retelling of announcements;
• whether they disclose partnerships and the promotional nature of publications;
• whether the team can provide them with material and respond to questions in a timely manner.

Do not promise creators formulations that are not confirmed by the team. For the vetting process, use the KOL evaluation checklist. If you need creators for a specific region, match language, market, and topic rather than choosing from a single popularity table.

Which metrics and content to evaluate

InfoFi metrics are useful when they answer the campaign question: who creates substantive publications, which topics generate interest, and where the audience interacts with the project. Do not reduce evaluation to a single mindshare number: it may show attention dynamics but does not explain discussion quality or subsequent user actions.

Divide observation into levels. At the content level, note accuracy, originality, and the publication's connection to the product. At the distribution level, see which creators and topics gain visibility in the chosen system. At the project level, analyze available signals: audience questions, clicks on tagged links, community inquiries, and recurring misunderstandings. Do not attribute actions to the campaign that cannot be linked to it by data.

A practical report table may include:

• creator, link, and publication date;
• topic and key thesis;
• material format and presence of a call to action;
• audience reaction, if the metric is available;
• team conclusion and next step.

Discuss the reporting format in advance. For example, separately show publications requiring a specialist's response and materials that can be reused in the project's own channels. If the campaign includes other platforms, compare their results in a separate context rather than mixing incomparable metrics.

How to prepare a mindshare campaign step by step

A quality campaign starts with a clear message, not a set of publications. Before launch, the team must define the goal, prepare material, and agree on participation rules; then creators can be selected, content supported, and results analyzed.

The process typically looks like this:

• Briefing: formulate the audience, product theses, constraints, and desired action.
• Preparation: gather verified materials, answers to common questions, and tracking links.
• Selection: choose creators based on thematic fit, language, and content style.
• Launch and support: monitor publication output, respond promptly to questions, and correct factual errors.
• Review: collect publications and available metrics, separate observations from conclusions, and propose the next step.

Before starting, appoint one responsible person from the project who can quickly confirm facts. Prepare a single source of up-to-date information so creators do not rely on outdated announcements. Define which topics cannot be disclosed and how to handle inaccuracies in a public publication.

Duration depends on the scale of preparation, number of creators, and chosen activity window. Do not stretch work without an editorial reason: a new phase should be based on fresh information or a new task, not a repetition of previous theses.

What mistakes hinder a Kaito campaign

The main mistakes are building a campaign around a ranking position, not checking content, and treating any attention growth as proof of product interest. Such decisions give the team a superficial picture and create an incentive for repetitive publications instead of useful conversation.

Editorial control without overly restricting creators helps avoid this. Give participants accurate facts, context, and answers to questions, but leave room for their own analysis. Do not ask them to publish unconfirmed claims, promise token results, or copy the same text. Establish in advance the procedure for correcting errors and marking collaborations.

Kaito has its own rules for display and ranking: the composition of considered data, evaluation criteria, moderation, and time windows are outside the project's control and may change. Therefore, you cannot promise a specific leaderboard position, a fixed score, or continued visibility after activity ends. For their part, the contractor can be responsible for the agreed list of deliverables, creator interaction, and a transparent report on completed placements.

Before signing the plan, clarify what counts as a completed placement, how publications are confirmed, and what happens if material is postponed or removed. To compare InfoFi with other promotion formats, first define the task, then explore other engagement campaigns, rather than choosing a channel based solely on trends.

When InfoFi suits a project and what to combine it with

InfoFi is appropriate when the project has something to explain regularly and the team is ready to sustain a conversation with facts. The format is especially useful for gathering creator attention around a product, update, or new category, provided there are specialists who can answer questions and correct inaccuracies.

If the project cannot yet clearly explain what it does, first prepare basic materials: product description, user documentation, risk answers, and current links. If the task is broad awareness, combine creator content with the project's own publications and community management. If specific platforms and audiences are needed, choose a KOL campaign by topic and region, not by the size of the creator list.

Combine channels so each plays a distinct role:

• InfoFi — systematic work with content and creator attention;
• project's own channels — verified primary information and quick updates;
• community — user questions and feedback;
• PR or paid placements — reach for specific materials with clear labeling.

Coordinate a shared calendar so different teams do not publish conflicting theses. See the service description and possible scope of work on the InfoFi campaigns page, and cost breakdown in the InfoFi pricing material.

Prices

Starting prices in USD. Custom bundles and volume discounts on request. Payment in USDT, USDC, BTC, ETH, SOL, TON or your project token.

How it works

1. Define the goalDescribe the audience and the desired change in understanding of the project. Do not replace the goal with a requirement for a leaderboard position.
2. Prepare the materialGather confirmed theses, current links, and answers to questions creators may ask.
3. Build a creator listCheck thematic relevance, language, publication quality, and transparency of collaboration.
4. Support publicationsTrack material output, promptly clarify facts, and help creators get team responses.
5. Summarize resultsCollect links and available metrics, note data limitations, and turn observations into next actions.