[eUSD IP] FinTech Revenue Share Update 2025-12-10
Vote: FOR
I’m happy that the transparency concerns expressed by eUSD stakers have been addressed by UC and Sentz with their excellent addendum to Sawyer’s Q3 report. While there are still concerns with the FinTech Revenue Share programme I hope that the open and honest discussion on the RSR Health forum post and imminent response from ABC Labs and Confusion Capital will improve ecosystem transparency, co-ownership and once again centre the RSR token in the ecosystem. If this is to be done properly I expect the current failings of the eUSD Revenue Sharing Programme to be addressed in the very near term.
[COMMENT] RSR Health
I appreciate the work that has gone into the RSR Health discussion and the depth of engagement it has generated. It is also important to recognise genuine progress and external wins such as CMC20, which meaningfully improve Reserve’s visibility and credibility.
My Asterisks and Caveats:
1. Governance centralisation: Voting power concentration and limited independent participation risk weakening decentralisation and discouraging broader community engagement.
2. Governance flows: Key processes such as DTF basket rebalances lack clear sequencing, benchmarks, and guidance, making it difficult for governors to evaluate decisions confidently.
3. RSR burns: Burns are directionally positive but are not consistently scheduled, communicated, or highlighted, reducing their impact on sentiment and transparency.
4. Index DTF value accrual: Changes to revenue share and platform economics have not always been clearly surfaced, limiting predictability for long-term RSR holders.
5. eUSD mandate: The current mandate and revenue share framework lack clear targets, risk parameters, and long-term alignment for RSR stakers.
6. Index DTF governance and education: Governance remains siloed, with weak onboarding and education for new index DTFs, resulting in limited co-ownership and participation.
Why it matters: If these structural and transparency issues persist, RSR risks becoming increasingly peripheral as the ecosystem grows, despite strong product-level progress.
Suggested direction: Strengthen RSR value accrual and participation by improving transparency around governance power, formalising and communicating burn frameworks, unifying index DTF governance incentives, improving delegate education and onboarding, and clarifying long-term expectations around eUSD and index DTF economics.
[RFC] ETHplus Mandate and DTF Methodology Update
This RFC aims to advance two closely linked ETHplus work streams:
-
Updating the ETHplus mandate, improving scalability by expanding the range of assets eligible for inclusion in the collateral basket; and
-
Codifying a formal ETHplus DTF methodology, in order to align with standards used by newer DTFs such as the CMC20 and LCAP, to establish clear selection principles, rebalancing guidelines, and standardised reporting requirements.
We must now consider updating the ETHplus mandate to include Liquid Restaking Tokens, LRTs to strengthen the DTF’s ability to remain both scalable and risk-adjusted in a market where LST liquidity is deteriorating. Incorporating high quality LRTs that meet the safety and liquidity standards of the existing mandate enables ETHplus to benefit from deeper collateral markets, more resilient liquidity profiles, and competitive yields without compromising its safety-first design.
To support this shift, the methodology outlined introduces a clear set of eligibility requirements and ongoing monitoring guidelines that equip governors to consistently evaluate assets, deliberate on concentration and liquidity risks, and ensure that any LRT exposure added to the basket remains aligned with ETHplus’ core objective of delivering reliable, risk-adjusted ETH yield.
I encourage all governors to review the methodology, share feedback on what resonates, and highlight areas that require further refinement. Once broad consensus is reached, I propose we progress with formal ratification via an on-chain vote.