RIADeFi
Refusal file · other

Why Ketju rejected Stacks sBTC

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 Superseded versions are recorded, never edited away.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 UNCONFIRMED WITHDRAWAL TIMING, 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 rather than a small custodial multisig — a committee comparable in size to Lombard BTC.b's approved 14-member, 10-of-14 Security Consortium. But Stacks' own documentation does not specify deposit or withdrawal timing for either direction, and this review could not confirm the peg-out mechanics anywhere. A comparably sized committee is not sufficient on its own; without confirmed exit terms this registry cannot certify what a stressed redemption would actually look like.

What would reopen the file

  • 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
Exposure
other
Chains examined
Ethereum
Memo version
v1
Reviewed
Next review

← All published refusals