Quick Answer

Is SavePlanetEarth halal?

Name: SavePlanetEarth (SPE) Shariah Compliance Screening
Item: SavePlanetEarth
Rating: 56.4
Author: Crypto Ummah

SavePlanetEarth is classified as doubtful (mashbooh), with a Shariah compliance score of 56.4/100 under our 27-point screening methodology.

Overall56.4Mashbooh · Doubtful · Risky

Riba66.1Mashbooh

Gharar44.3Mashbooh

Maysir57.5Mashbooh

Full report Methodology

Shariah screening · tap a sub-dial

Project diligence tap a tile →

Moderate Riba Excessive Gharar (High Uncertainty)Moderate Maysir (High Risk)

GhararSharia pillar · 44.3/100 · Review · 15 criteria

Mashbooh. Prohibition of contracts with excessive ambiguity or hidden risk.

Team Transparency & Credibility80

Ethical Practices88

Transparency50

Governance30

Launch Fairness35

Token Distribution35

Speculation / Utility Ratio50

Financial Status30

Audit Quality12

Governance Rights30

Rewards Distribution40

Asset Backing52

Mechanism Type100

Documentation100

Shariah Alignment100

How SPE compares

★ SavePlanetEarth (SPE)

56.4

DOVU

55.8

IMPT

Compare directly: vs Energy Web Token · vs DOVU · vs IMPT

Purify your profits from SPE

A portion of profit from SPE isn't fully yours to keep — here's how to return it

What does "purification" mean?

Even fully screened assets can pick up small amounts of tainted income along the way — purification means giving that specific portion back, not paying extra.

Based on SavePlanetEarth's riba, gharar and maysir screening — see how we calculate purification amounts.

Overseen by Imam Omar Siddiqi, Shariah scholar and Imam of JMIC, among others, with donations paid directly to Jamiya Masjid & Islamic Centre — UK registered charity no. 1089986. Sent wallet-to-wallet; CryptoUmmah never custodies your funds. Always verify the destination address before confirming in your wallet.

Mashbooh · Doubtful · Risky

Your exact purification amount, calculated from SavePlanetEarth's Shariah compliance score.

Your realized profit on SPE (USD) — profit only, not principal

Amount to return0.00 USDC

to Jamiya Masjid & Islamic Centre, a registered UK charity

Purification isn't Zakat and isn't tax-deductible — it's the return of income that wasn't rightfully yours.

Scholar-verified · UK registered charity

Key facts

Chain	Ethereum
Last reviewed	17 Jul 2026

Written by ThanvirFounder, Ex Director S&P Global Energy

Reviewed by Imam Omar SiddiqiShariah Scholar

Islamic Finance Principles Assessment

Riba — Does SavePlanetEarth involve interest?

SavePlanetEarth's disclosed revenue streams — carbon-credit sales, merchandise, and corporate tree-tracking fees — are non-interest in nature, which is a positive baseline. However, treasury composition is undisclosed, so whether idle funds sit in interest-bearing instruments cannot be verified. Muslim investors should treat the absence of disclosure as a caution flag rather than assume cleanliness by default.

Assessment: Moderate Riba Score: 66.1/100

Our methodology examines 10 criteria to evaluate how well SavePlanetEarth avoids interest-based mechanisms.

The project states its revenue derives from project proceeds, sales of certified carbon credits, merchandise, and corporate use of tree-tracking tools — all real-world, non-financial income sources rather than interest-based intermediation. This is a structurally favourable feature compared to many tokens reliant on yield farming or lending spreads. However, no source discloses how treasury reserves are held or invested, meaning a Muslim investor cannot confirm whether idle capital generates interest income. Absent explicit confirmation of non-interest treasury management, this remains an open question rather than a settled point in SPE's favour.

SavePlanetEarth's stated business model centres on selling carbon credits and environmental services, not on lending, borrowing, or interest-bearing financial products. No source describes SPE participating in lending markets, collateralized borrowing, or fixed-yield partnerships; references to "Save"/Solend lending protocols in some retrieved material concern an entirely unrelated Solana project and should not be conflated with SPE. The DeFi flag associated with SPE appears tied to its marketplace/utility function for credit purchases rather than a lending or yield-generating mechanism, meaning the core token function itself shows no direct riba exposure based on available evidence.

Gharar — How much uncertainty does SavePlanetEarth involve?

SavePlanetEarth carries meaningful uncertainty stemming from thin disclosure rather than outright deception. Named leadership and a plausible environmental mission reduce some ambiguity, but unaudited contracts, vague reward language, and unconfirmed asset backing increase it substantially. On balance, gharar here is elevated enough to warrant real caution before committing capital.

Assessment: Excessive Gharar (High Uncertainty) Score: 44.3/100

Our methodology examines 15 criteria including team transparency, audit quality, and governance.

The founder, Imran Ali, is a named, traceable individual with a documented professional background (Citibank, NHS, MBA, PRINCE II) verifiable through press and interviews, and a senior technical advisor with a PhD in Resource Economics is also named. This is a meaningful transparency positive compared to anonymous meme projects. However, governance appears entirely founder/team-centred with no DAO or decentralised voting structure described, open-source status of the codebase is unconfirmed, and treasury holdings, pre-mine allocation, and vesting terms are undocumented in any retrieved source — leaving significant informational gaps around control and fund management.

No security audit of SavePlanetEarth's smart contracts or token could be located in any reviewed source; audit-firm reports retrieved in the research set (covering Substance Exchange, Renzo, Stakehouse, Ankr, and Solana core) all pertain to unrelated projects and cannot be attributed to SPE. This absence of independent verification is a direct and material gharar concern that should be named plainly rather than assumed benign. Additionally, the "eco-based rewards for holders" mentioned in an early founder interview lack documented mechanics, funding source, or fixed-versus-variable structure, compounding uncertainty around what token holders are actually entitled to receive.

Maysir — Does SavePlanetEarth involve gambling or speculation?

SavePlanetEarth is categorised as a meme coin yet claims a distinct real-world utility as a carbon-credit purchasing token, which distinguishes it from pure speculation vehicles. Still, collapsing trading volume and thin historical liquidity suggest secondary-market activity dominated by speculative flipping rather than utility-driven use. The overall picture is one of a stated productive purpose undermined by weak market traction.

Assessment: Moderate Maysir (High Risk) Score: 57.5/100

Our methodology examines 11 criteria to determine whether SavePlanetEarth is a gambling instrument or a genuine economic tool.

Despite the meme-coin classification, SPE's whitepaper describes a specific utility — purchasing certified carbon credits within a marketplace tied to the Sri Lanka Climate Fund's verification framework — which is not equally true of a purely speculative meme asset with no stated function. This distinguishes it from tokens designed with no economic purpose beyond price speculation. That said, the practical uptake of this utility is unverified in these sources, and the token's meme-coin branding and market behaviour still invite speculative trading detached from its stated carbon-credit function.

Weighing the evidence, SPE's deflationary burn mechanism (reducing supply from a 1-billion cap by 407 million tokens) and its claimed link to verified carbon credits point toward an attempt at genuine utility rather than pure gambling design. Against this, trading volume of roughly $5,320/24h, down 69.4%, alongside historically thin volumes since 2021, suggests the market treats SPE primarily as a low-liquidity speculative instrument rather than an actively used utility token. Third-party speculative trading does not itself render the coin's design impermissible, but the weak adoption signal is a legitimate factor for investor caution.

The Full 27-Point Screening

1. Legitimacy (4 criteria)

Criterion	Score	Analysis
Team Transparency	80/100	Founder and multiple advisors are named with verifiable credentials and public interviews/press releases.
Fraud & Scam Risk	55/100	No fraud or rug-pull reports found tied to SPE specifically, but declining trading volume and "investment" style marketing language leave residual uncertainty.
Use Case Legitimacy	78/100	The project states a clear real-world environmental/carbon-credit purpose with a named third-party verification body.
Ethical Practices	88/100	The project's own design targets environmental/carbon-sequestration activity, not any inherently haram sector.

Summary: The project has a named, credentialed founding and advisory team with a traceable public history and no fraud reports specific to SPE, though current market activity is thin.

2. Project Operations (9 criteria)

Criterion	Score	Analysis
Core Protocol Business	88/100	The base protocol operates in the carbon-credit/environmental sector, not a prohibited industry.
Transaction Fees	70/100	Transaction fees are described as feeding a burn mechanism rather than an interest-extraction structure.
Treasury Assets	35/100 (low evidence)	Treasury composition and holdings are not disclosed in any retrieved source.
Revenue Model	82/100	Stated revenue comes from carbon-credit sales and related product/service sales, not interest.
Transparency	50/100	A whitepaper and articles exist, but open-source code status is not confirmed in these sources.
Governance	30/100	Interviews suggest a founder/team-centred structure; no decentralised governance mechanism is described.
Launch Fairness	35/100 (low evidence)	No launch or pre-mine details specific to SPE appear in the retrieved sources.
Token Distribution	35/100 (low evidence)	No breakdown of SPE's token distribution across stakeholders is disclosed in these sources.
Speculation/Utility Ratio	50/100	Genuine stated utility exists, but low and falling trading volume plus investment-style marketing suggest a meaningful speculative element.

Summary: SavePlanetEarth operates as a carbon-credit/environmental initiative with a fee-burn mechanism but lacks disclosed treasury, governance, and launch-distribution details.

3. Financial Health (4 criteria)

Criterion	Score	Analysis
Protocol Revenue	82/100	The described revenue model is non-interest and tied to real-world carbon-credit and product sales.
Financial Status	30/100	Reported trading volume is very low and fell sharply, indicating weak current market standing.
Interest Assessment	80/100	No lending, borrowing, or interest feature is described at the SPE protocol level in these sources.
Audit Quality	12/100	No audit report referencing SavePlanetEarth appears anywhere in these sources; retrieved audits all belong to unrelated projects.

Summary: Revenue appears tied to real-world carbon-credit and product sales rather than interest, but market activity is weak and no audit of the SPE protocol could be located.

4. Token Economics (5 criteria)

Criterion	Score	Analysis
Token Purpose	72/100	The token is explicitly described as a utility token for accessing carbon credits, not framed as a meme asset.
Governance Rights	30/100 (low evidence)	No governance rights for SPE holders are described in any source.
Rewards Distribution	40/100	Only a vague mention of "eco-based rewards" exists, with no documented structure, formula, or funding source.
Speculation Controls	55/100	A token-burn mechanism provides some deflationary anti-speculation effect, though its consistency is not fully documented.
Asset Backing	52/100	The token is rhetorically linked to verified carbon credits, but no formal backing ratio or reserve mechanism is documented.

Summary: SPE is presented as a utility token for accessing carbon credits with a supply-burn feature, though governance rights and reward mechanics remain vaguely documented.

5. Staking Mechanism

SavePlanetEarth has no native staking mechanism, so these five criteria are not applicable and are excluded from the score entirely rather than counted as zeros.

Overall Assessment: SavePlanetEarth presents as a genuine, team-identified environmental utility project with a non-interest revenue model, but weak market traction, undisclosed governance/treasury details, and the absence of any project-specific audit leave significant gaps in verifiable Shariah due diligence.

Scoring note: Meme coin: maysir-capped (C13=50); score already below the cap.

Is SavePlanetEarth halal?

RibaSharia pillar · 66.1/100 · Review · 10 criteria

GhararSharia pillar · 44.3/100 · Review · 15 criteria

MaysirSharia pillar · 57.5/100 · Review · 11 criteria

LegitimacyDiligence dimension · 75.3/100 · Compliant · 4 criteria

ProjectDiligence dimension · 52.8/100 · Review · 9 criteria

FinancialDiligence dimension · 51/100 · Review · 4 criteria

TokenomicsDiligence dimension · 49.8/100 · Review · 5 criteria

StakingDiligence dimension · 100/100 · Compliant · 5 criteria