RIADeFi
Research files · Other

Ketju research: Stacks sBTC

RejectedPublished by Ketju Research

This file describes the economic claim, control, loss, and exit evidence. Client action and amount belong to the advisor. Not investment, legal, tax, or compliance advice.

Research summary

This review reaches an adverse research assessment because withdrawal timing remains unconfirmed, despite a signer committee comparable to an already-approved peer. sBTC uses a genuinely different design from custodial wrappers: 14 to 15 elected signers, including named entities such as Figment, Blockdaemon, and Kiln, approve mints at a roughly 70% threshold instead of using a small custodial multisig. This committee is comparable in size to Lombard BTC.b's approved 14-member, 10-of-14 Security Consortium. But Stacks' own documentation does not state deposit or withdrawal timing for either direction, and this review could not confirm the peg-out mechanics anywhere. A committee of comparable size is not enough on its own. Without confirmed exit terms, this registry cannot certify what a stressed redemption would actually look like.

Observable review triggers

  • Withdrawal or peg-out timing and mechanics are independently confirmed and demonstrated at proposed size
  • Current signer count and threshold are confirmed precisely, resolving the discrepancy across sources
  • Phase 3's permissionless, Proof-of-Transfer-integrated signer model is implemented and independently verified
  • Twelve consecutive months with no depeg or signer-related incident following the above disclosures

Facts on file

Verdict
Rejected
Type
Other
Chains examined
Ethereum
Reviewed
Last confirmed

← All published rejections