What belongs in a Bithumb listing review file?
| File area | Prepare |
|---|---|
| Project identity | Official name, symbol, website, and operating contacts |
| Product | A concise description, current status, and accessible product links |
| Token | Network, contract address, supply information, and relevant records |
| Evidence | Source documents that support statements in the application |
A review file is a navigable set of project facts and evidence, not a claim that Bithumb requires every item in this table. Start with the exchange’s current application instructions and map each requested item to a file, owner, and source. Add useful context only when it is accurate and easy to check.
Separate confirmed information from items still being prepared. Label drafts as drafts; do not present a planned feature, unsigned agreement, or proposed token change as completed. Use a contents page with links to the relevant files, and give each file a clear date or version label. This makes corrections traceable and lets the project team answer follow-up questions without rebuilding the pack.
How should you prepare project facts for Bithumb?
| Check | What to record |
|---|---|
| Identity | Official project name, symbol, and public channels |
| Product | What users can do now, with working links |
| Token | Network and contract address, checked against the project’s own records |
| Contacts | A responsible owner for each topic and a monitored contact route |
Write a short project summary from verifiable facts. State what the product does, what is live, and what remains planned. Avoid broad claims that cannot be tied to a source. Keep the same spelling, token symbol, network, and address across the application materials, website, and linked project resources.
Use this working checklist before the file is circulated:
- Open every public link in a fresh browser session.
- Confirm that token details match the project’s authoritative records.
- Identify who can approve factual corrections and answer technical questions.
- Mark any pending launch, migration, or product change clearly.
For example, if a project website shows a different contract address from its current technical records, stop and resolve the discrepancy before submission. Do not assume an old announcement explains it. Record the correction and update the affected materials together.
Which project records should you organize before submitting?
| Record group | Preparation check |
|---|---|
| Organization | Current entity and authorized contact information, where applicable |
| Team | Relevant roles, responsibilities, and approved public biographies |
| Token history | Dated records for material changes and decisions |
| Risk and controls | Clear descriptions of project processes and responsible owners |
Build this part of the file from records your team already maintains. Confirm who is authorized to share each document, whether it is current, and whether it contains information that should not be distributed broadly. If a record is not available, list it as an open item rather than substituting an unsupported summary.
The right supporting material depends on the project and on the instructions received. Do not treat a general preparation guide as legal advice or as a complete regulatory assessment. Ask qualified counsel to review jurisdiction-specific questions, and keep their approved wording aligned with the facts submitted elsewhere.
For each record, note its owner, latest version, and the claim it supports. If the project has completed an independent audit or another review, identify the exact document and scope rather than using a vague label. A related audit and KYC support service can help teams organize verification materials, while a centralized exchange listing service can support broader listing preparation.
How do you check that Bithumb listing documents agree?
- Extract every factual claim from the application draft.
- Match each claim to a source record or a public project page.
- Compare names, dates, token details, and project status across files.
- Assign unresolved conflicts to a named owner.
- Recheck corrected files before sharing the final pack.
A consistency check is useful because small discrepancies can create extra clarification work. Compare the application draft with the project website, technical records, public announcements, and any supporting documents included in the file. Do not silently reconcile differences by choosing the most convenient version; find the authoritative source and record the correction.
Use a simple evidence table with four columns: claim, source, owner, and status. Keep the source specific. “Token details” is not enough; point to the relevant record or page. For a statement about a product feature, link the actual product page or approved documentation. When the evidence is not public, note who can provide it through the appropriate channel.
If public token information also needs correction elsewhere, review the related explorer token information and logo update service. For other public listing profile discrepancies, see listing profile remediation. These tasks are separate from preparing a Bithumb application, but consistent project information makes the overall handoff clearer.
How should your team control the Bithumb document handoff?
| Handoff item | Team action |
|---|---|
| Master file | Keep one controlled folder and contents page |
| Versions | Mark drafts, approvals, and final copies distinctly |
| Questions | Assign an owner and record the answer source |
| Communications | Log what was sent and when, without duplicating sensitive files unnecessarily |
Before submission, run a Spec Review: check the current instructions against the prepared file, confirm that every included document is approved for sharing, and list anything outstanding. This is an internal quality check, not an indication of Bithumb’s review criteria. Keep a Run Log of versions shared, corrections made, and follow-up items so the team can respond consistently.
Bithumb controls its eligibility decisions, review outcome, requests for further information, and review sequence; a complete file cannot guarantee acceptance or a particular decision date. Keep your preparation focused on accurate records and prompt, authorized responses rather than trying to predict those decisions.
If a question arrives, route it to the person who owns the relevant evidence. Update the master file and the response together, then record which version was shared. Avoid circulating conflicting drafts across team channels.
Frequently asked questions
Which documents do I need for a Bithumb listing application?
Start with the current instructions provided by Bithumb; this guide is not an official document list. Organize the requested items alongside clear project identity, product, token, contact, and evidence records where relevant. Map each requested item to an owner and source, and mark anything unavailable as open rather than filling gaps with assumptions.
Should we submit a project document that is still a draft?
Only share a draft if the current instructions call for it and the project has approved it for that purpose. Label its status clearly and avoid presenting proposed terms, features, or changes as final. Keep a record of who approved the version and make sure its facts agree with the rest of the file.
How can we check token details before sending our Bithumb materials?
Compare the network and contract address in the application draft with the project’s authoritative technical records and public project resources. Check symbol and supply statements against their sources too. If records disagree, assign an owner to resolve the conflict, update affected materials together, and record the corrected version.
Can a complete Bithumb review file guarantee that the project will be accepted?
No. Bithumb controls eligibility, the review outcome, requests for further information, and review sequence. A well-organized file helps your team present accurate, traceable information and respond consistently; it cannot ensure acceptance or a particular review date.
What should we send for an outside readiness review?
Send the current Bithumb instructions you are using, your draft document index, the project website, and the source records that support the application’s main claims. Identify any confidential files and who is authorized to share them. A reviewer can then define a focused scope and flag inconsistencies or unresolved items.
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…