RIADeFi
Refusal file · other

Why Ketju rejected GTBTC (Gate Wrapped BTC)

Memo v1Published by Ketju Research

A registry memo, published verbatim and versioned. Superseded versions are recorded, never edited away. A rejection is a judgment for Ketju's client base and thesis, not a universal safety claim. Not investment, legal, tax, or compliance advice.

The memo

REJECTED ON TOTAL OPACITY. GTBTC is not a restaking or staking protocol despite DefiLlama's "Restaked BTC" category tag — it is Gate exchange's branded custodial BTC earn product: a user deposits BTC to Gate, receives a 1:1 tradeable IOU token across five chains, and is told it can be redeemed "at any time." There is no on-chain vault, no disclosed reserve or proof-of-reserve mechanism, no published smart-contract logic governing the yield, and DefiLlama's own protocol record lists zero registered audits. This review could not confirm the issuing entity's name or jurisdiction, the custody model, any admin or freeze capability over the token contracts, KYC or eligibility terms, or redemption fees and timing, because Gate's own terms-of-service, staking, and help-center pages actively blocked every standard access attempt. A product whose own operator will not let standard research tooling read its terms is a disqualifying transparency failure on its own, independent of the underlying custodial counterparty risk this structure otherwise carries.

What would reopen the file

  • Gate discloses the issuing entity's legal name, jurisdiction, and custody model for the underlying BTC
  • An independent, primary-source security audit and a verifiable on-chain or third-party proof-of-reserve mechanism are published
  • Redemption terms, fees, and timing are publicly disclosed
  • Gate's own disclosure pages become accessible to standard research and compliance review tooling

Facts on file

Verdict
Rejected
Exposure
other
Chains examined
Bitcoin
Instruments
GTBTC
Memo version
v1
Reviewed
Next review

← All published refusals