This RFC outlines the proposed structure for the upcoming $OPEN Stablecoin Index ReGenesis Q4 2025. Comments are open for suggestions, questions, or just a nod of encouragement.
OPEN is an equal-weight index of leading stablecoin networks advancing transparency, composability, and user-owned governance.
In other words, OPEN is a basket of stablecoin-networks governance tokens.
OPEN is deployed on the Reserve protocol, built on Ethereum.
There’s no CEO calling the shots. No hidden team behind closed doors. Decisions aren’t made in the dark. They’re made by the community, through smart contracts and transparent, onchain vlSQUILL governance.
Review the OPEN basket here. Note: it’s not equally weighted at the moment as some tokens are outpacing others, shifting the index composition in real time.
The index rebalances quarterly subject to decentralized governance. Each rebalance offers a chance to update the basket and expand the community with aligned, value-adding contributors.
The experiment has been quite interesting since April 15.
Sept 19-Oct 3 (two weeks) - Open call: Suggest stablecoin networks adds or removals for the $OPEN index. Invite protocols to submit more detailed proposals in this RFC’s comments covering the following bullets:
Project URL
Stablecoin ticker + TVL
Primary stablecoin use cases
Stablecoin key integrations and partners
Gov token ticker, market cap, % circulating
Gov token’s role in the protocol (what-why-how)
Gov token liquidity (CEX/DEX venues + depth for rebalancing)
Onchain vs offchain ops overview covering decentralization/transparency
Blockchain(s) deployed on
Link to audit reports or external research analyses
If available, link to forward-looking investment or roadmap priorities
Link to docs
Take a look at this OPEN constituents dashboard and rip any metrics that help people understand your project.
Oct 3-10 (one week) - Continued public discussion, debate and vlSQUILL Snapshot voting to pick top 10 stablecoin-networks best aligned with OPEN’s methodology
Oct 10-14 (4 days) - vlSQUILL onchain governance vote to implement Q4 2025 basket. Following the vote, the final index composition updated weights and constituents are implemented and announced.
Risks
Selecting stablecoin networks that stall or fail to innovate
Selecting networks with unsustainable or flawed tokenomics
Selecting networks where token inflation outpaces real ecosystem growth
Selecting networks that neglect transparency, composability, or user-led governance
While the Reserve index protocol (that powers $OPEN) has been audited and rebalanced previously, past performance does not guarantee future resilience
My name is Johannes and I’m part of the Frankencoin Association. Some of you already might know us/me. We believe that it would be very fruitful for the $OPEN index to also have non-USD stablecoins included. So we’re throwing our hat into the ring with the Frankencoin Swiss franc stablecoin.
Looking forward to comments and discussions!
With much cheese and chocolate!
Johannes
(Couldn’t post the links, so now all without them)
RFC Comment: Nomination of Frankencoin Pool Shares (FPS) for $OPEN Index (Q4 2025 ReGenesis)
12M trading volume: ~$80m+ across Uniswap, Curve, MEXC
Primary Stablecoin Use Cases
Borrowing: Frankencoin lets holders of mature crypto assets use them as collateral to borrow Swiss Franc stablecoins.
Native Yield: Frankencoin has a built in native yield incentivizing DeFi users to hold ZCHF long-term.
Native Payments: ZCHF can be spent at Spar supermarkets in Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
Payroll & Accounting: Integration with quitt (compliant salary payments), Aktionariat (tokenized equity fundraising), and Zinsli (savings, rent deposits).
Card Payments: Via Zeal and Gnosis Pay, ZCHF can be spent 1:1 at any Visa merchant worldwide, while retaining self-custody (live on the 23rd of September 2025).
DeFi Yield & Collateral: Available on Curve, Uniswap, Morpho for swaps, lending, and programmable yield strategies.
Store of Value: The Swiss franc is one of the world’s most stable fiat currencies (0.4% avg. inflation since 2000 vs ~2% in the US, CHF up 240% against the USD since 1970). ZCHF brings this superior store of value on-chain.
Key Integrations & Partners
Mt Pelerin – Swiss-regulated on/off-ramp with fiat/ZCHF conversions, IBANs, and QR-bill support.
Zeal App + Gnosis Pay – Visa integration, allowing ZCHF to be spent at millions of merchants globally.
Aktionariat – Settlement layer for tokenized equity sales in Switzerland.
quitt – Payroll automation and compliance integration.
Morpho - Liquid markets to e.g. borrow against xCVX
Governance Token
Ticker: FPS (Frankencoin Pool Shares)
Market Cap (Sept 2025): ~USD 13m
Supply: 100% circulating, no central treasury or team allocation.
Liquidity: 100% redeemable through system-integrated AMM. Can be integrated into any of the DEX Aggregators as a liquidity route. Check it here: app(.)frankencoin(.)com/equity
Classification: FINMA/LEXR memo (2024) → utility token, not a security.
Governance Token’s Role in the Protocol (What–Why–How)
What: FPS represents risk-bearing equity + governance utility in the Frankencoin system.
Why: To align the protocol’s sustainability with community incentives: FPS holders absorb liquidation risks, earn system revenues, and safeguard collateral standards.
How:
Profit & loss participation: FPS appreciates as revenues (interest, fees, liquidation surplus) accrue; holders also bear downside if reserve pool is tapped.
Governance: FPS holders exercise veto rights over collateral/minting contract proposals, based on time-weighted voting (innovative design from UZH PhD research).
Bounded scope: Unlike many DAO tokens, FPS cannot vote to distribute treasury funds. Governance is narrowly focused on collateral safety and protocol stability.
Onchain vs Offchain Ops (Decentralization & Transparency)
Onchain:
Oracle-free liquidation auctions: anyone can challenge undercollateralized positions, no oracle dependency.
Collateral onboarding: Public proposal/veto model, fully onchain.
Smart contracts: Open-source, audited, live since Dec 2023 with zero failures.
Offchain:
Fiat access and retail rails handled via Mt Pelerin (regulated intermediary) as well as OTC via Frankencoin’s market makers.
Visa integrations via Gnosis Pay, spendable at every Visa enabled POS globally
Decentralization:
No admin keys.
Lightweight governance prevents capture, while ensuring veto power protects against unsafe collateral.
Neutral non-profit association in Zug stewards ecosystem growth.
Blockchains Deployed On
The Frankencoin system is fully multi-chain via CCIP deployments with all functionalities available on each chain.
Ethereum (mainnet)
Base
Arbitrum
Polygon
Avalanche
Gnosis Chain
Sonic
Audits & External Research
Smart contract audits: Multiple independent audits completed pre- and post-launch. For more details see the “audit” section on the website
Academic research: UZH PhD dissertation: Essays in Decentralized Finance (2024) — game-theory basis for veto governance and oracle-free liquidation: DSpace-CRIS
Short-term goal: Grow ZCHF supply to 1bn CHF (0.5% of Swiss M2).
Long-term goal: Reach 5% of Swiss franc deposits (~100bn CHF market).
CEX listings: Expand FPS and ZCHF liquidity on tier-1 exchanges.
Global adoption: Establish ZCHF as the primary non-USD stablecoin in DeFi.
Tweet-Sized Rationale
Nomination: FPS (Frankencoin Pool Shares) – Governance token of ZCHF, the decentralized Swiss franc stablecoin. Non-USD diversification, oracle-free peg, Visa + supermarket spending, and Swiss regulatory clarity. Fits perfectly with $OPEN’s mission.
Thank you @jonk for the post — really enjoying learning about this project and had a few questions:
Is there a link to view the current collateral makeup for the ZCHF stablecoin? Also welcome any context you can share on when/how of attestations or audits.
It’s interesting that Swiss stablecoins may nott really be able to rely on central issuer models, since near-zero or negative rates make short-term bonds a losing trade. But DeFi designs generating yield from programmatic fees can work. Could you explain where the yield in your system comes from?
How is the ZCHF stablecoin peg maintained in in the system?
When did ZCHF and FPS each launch onchain (month/year)?
Can you quantify current onchain liquidity for FPS and the venues it trades on? This is important for assessing permissionless OPEN minting and redemption health.
· Is there a link to view the current collateral makeup for the ZCHF stablecoin? Also welcome any context you can share on when/how of attestations or audits.
· It’s interesting that Swiss stablecoins may nott really be able to rely on central issuer models, since near-zero or negative rates make short-term bonds a losing trade. But DeFi designs generating yield from programmatic fees can work. Could you explain where the yield in your system comes from?
Correct. The yield of ZCHF comes from the premium on risk-free-rates borrowing against crypto assets is demanding. As it is a CDP with interest, part of this interest is paid out as the savings rate (yield). Both the borrowing as well as the savings rates are controlled via governance votes using FPS.
· How is the ZCHF stablecoin peg maintained in in the system?
Short term: Via market makers and deep markets.
Long term:
If there is a deviation of the ZCHF below 1, paying back the loans becomes a winning/arbitrage trade which creates buying pressure and corrects the price upwards.
If there is a deviation of the ZCHF above 1, the system has integrated so called “stable swaps” which allow to mint ZCHF with other CHF stablecoins (currently only VNX’s VCHF) at 1:1. As VCHF is Fiat backed, they can be minted at 1 CHF and the subsequently minted ZCHF can be sold at above 1 which creates an arbitrage opportunity and pushes the ZCHF price back down to 1.
· When did ZCHF and FPS each launch onchain (month/year)?
The contracts were deployed on the 28th of October 2023 and the system has been live ever since.
· Can you quantify current onchain liquidity for FPS and the venues it trades on? This is important for assessing permissionless OPEN minting and redemption health.
FPS has its own built in AMM which is based on Luzius Meisser’s Continuous Capital Corporation model (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4189472) guaranteeing liquidity at any times. The user interface for this can be found here: https://app.frankencoin.com/equity. The native FPS does have an initial minimum holding period of 3 months before being able to be redeemed against the system (it however remains fully transferrable and liquid). For the purpose of the OPEN index, there is a wrapped FPS (WFPS) available. The market-cap (and therefore liquidity) is currently at 13M USD.
I hope that this gives some insights on Frankencoin and FPS. Should you have any further questions, more than happy to help.
Yield-Optimized Borrowing: reUSD is minted against interest-earning stablecoin collateral (crvUSD/frxUSD) deposited in Curve Lend and Fraxlend markets, creating a unique yield-maximizing CDP structure where borrow rates are set at half the lending rate, half the risk-free rate, or 2%, whichever is greater.
Savings Vehicle: sreUSD (Savings reUSD) provides passive yield to holders through protocol revenue sharing and dynamic off-peg fees, offering a yield-bearing version of the stablecoin.
Leveraged Yield Farming: Users can borrow reUSD against their yield-earning collateral to amplify their exposure to lending market returns while maintaining their original positions.
Stablecoin Key Integrations and Partners
Lending Markets:
Curve Lend: Primary integration across 10+ markets including crvUSD/sDOLA, crvUSD/WBTC, crvUSD/wstETH
Fraxlend: Integration across 4+ markets including frxUSD/sfrxETH, frxUSD/WBTC
Yield Optimization:
Convex Finance: Boosted CRV rewards for Curve Lend positions
Native Yield Farming: Built-in reward mechanisms across lending positions
Liquidity Infrastructure:
DEX Integration: Active trading pairs and liquidity provision
Insurance Pool: Community-backed risk management system
Governance Process: Detailed in protocol documentation
Risk Parameters: Transparent LTV ratios and liquidation mechanisms
Key Metrics Supporting $OPEN Inclusion
Metric
Value
Significance
Protocol TVL
$91M
Substantial locked value
reUSD Supply
83M
Meaningful stablecoin adoption
Governance Token MC
$7.96M
Appropriate size for index inclusion
DEX Liquidity
$2.3M
Strong onchain liquidity depth
Circulating Supply
15.2%
Most tokens vesting over time
Team Vesting
1 year
Short vesting period
Treasury Vesting
5 years
Long-term aligned
Inflation Model
2% post-year 5
Sustainable long-term emissions
Revenue Model
Multi-stream
Sustainable tokenomics
Decentralization
High
Community-governed parameters
Tweet-Sized Rationale
Nomination: RSUP (Resupply) - Governance token of reUSD, the yield-optimized CDP stablecoin backed by interest-earning collateral on Curve Lend & Fraxlend. $2.3M onchain liquidity, minimal team allocation (1yr vest), transparent treasury (5yr vest). Perfect fit for $OPEN’s transparency mission.
This proposal represents Resupply’s commitment to decentralized stablecoin infrastructure with transparent governance, sustainable yield mechanisms, and community-first tokenomics - core values that align perfectly with the $OPEN index methodology.
“For the purpose of the OPEN index, there is a wrapped FPS (WFPS) available. The market-cap (and therefore liquidity) is currently at 13 M USD.”
I have some concerns/questions about that statement:
As I understand, the 13 M is essentially the total market cap of FPS in general (as I understand it from your first post), rather than a measure of how much of that supply is actually wrapped into WFPS with active liquidity. In other words, market cap ≠ available trading liquidity for WFPS.
If the rebalancing logic (during the 3-month holding/redemption window) forces OPEN to interact with WFPS (buy/convert it), we need to know the usable liquidity (i.e. the depth, ask/bid spreads, slippage) of WFPS, not just the headline cap.
Because the native FPS has a minimum 3-month holding period before redemption (though it remains transferable) per your earlier post, there is a “liquidity friction” baked in already.
So my first question is:
Can you break down how much of that 13 M is active WFPS liquidity (i.e. supply that is wrapped, available for trade / redemption) vs. just total FPS in circulation?
And tied to that: what are the observed spreads / depth (e.g. order book sizes) for WFPS on the main venues (or the LP pools)?
Also: in practice, during a rebalancing event, how much slippage or discount would one expect when converting into/out of WFPS?
2. Risk of rebalancing losses under the 3-month redemption scheme
Following from the above, there is a structural risk:
Because native FPS requires a 3-month hold before redemption against the system (though it remains transferable), if we are in the index rebalancing window and need to shift weight away from FPS, we may have to (i) shift into WFPS or (ii) rely on third-party counterparties who hold WFPS.
If liquidity is shallow or counterparties are wary, we may face adverse pricing/discount/slippage, which erodes value from the index rebalancing.
Hence, unless WFPS liquidity is deep and efficient, FPS becomes a fragile leg in the index from a rebalancing standpoint.
My follow-up questions:
Has the team stress-tested how big a rebalancing shift (e.g. from 5 % to 0 %) could be handled in WFPS without large price impact?
Also: In past rebalancing events (if any have occurred), was there any evidence of discounting/slippage when WFPS was used?
Tremendous thanks to both Frankencoin and Resupply for posting such thorough proposals and for taking the time to answer questions and engage here in the forum and in Telegram.
No matter the result of the basket vote, I see the proposals submitted here forming a clear and concise resource library of the finest projects in all of DeFi.
Kudos as well to the accessible and interactive $OPEN Index Dashboard. This is a marvel and I hope listed projects currently not included within the OPEN Index remain on the dashboard as part of the ‘watchlist.’
The OPEN methodology mandates that protocols be evaluated on:
verifiable asset-backing
peg design
mint/redeem logic
safety mechanisms
yield-sharing
decentralized control
I hope Frankencoin will return with some info about the WFPS questions nixnox raised.
@jonk Could you share how you plan to achieve your short term goal of 1B ZCHF supply considering it has been hovering around 12m since inception and you currently have an uncompetitive savings rate compared to USD stables (~2.6% real yield vs ~5%+) and also uncompetitive minting (50~60% LTV)?
@winthorpe Resupply is only months old and already has had an exploit which had to be partially plugged by a large donation from C2TP. It is also very exposed to crvUSD which is currently voting to increase its credit line to YieldBasis to $300M. Could you share your thoughts on why your protocol should be considered Lindy enough to be included in OPEN?
Thanks for the questions, safetydancer. Let me address your concerns:
Regarding the exploit and C2TP’s contribution:
C2TP’s donation was a voluntary gesture to support the protocol and minimize impact on the insurance pool—it was not a bailout or requirement. All bad debt has been fully eliminated, and the protocol’s security has been strengthened following the incident.
It’s worth noting that several platforms currently listed in $OPEN have experienced similar challenges during their growth phases. Security incidents, while unfortunate, are often part of maturing in DeFi when handled transparently and resolved completely.
On the “Lindy” question and team pedigree:
While Resupply itself is young, the protocol is built and maintained by teams from Convex and Yearn—two of the most established and battle-tested projects in DeFi. These teams have been core infrastructure providers since DeFi’s earliest days and bring years of expertise in building resilient, long-lasting protocols. Their commitment ensures Resupply is built on a foundation of proven experience.
Regarding crvUSD exposure:
Yes, Resupply has exposure to crvUSD, but this is a feature, not a bug. CRV itself is also listed in $OPEN, so exposure to the Curve ecosystem is already part of the index thesis.
More importantly, the YieldBasis credit line expansion to $300M represents a significant growth opportunity. Resupply stands to be one of the largest beneficiaries of YieldBasis’s success and the corresponding growth of crvUSD adoption.
We believe our team’s track record, transparent handling of challenges, and strategic positioning in the Curve ecosystem make Resupply a strong candidate for inclusion in $OPEN.
We have at this point 12 stellar applicants for 10 seats. The two incoming protocols are well scrutinized, we should open discussion on which of the existing 10 applicants (many of which were more or less grandfathered in when there was no formal application process) might deserve more scrutiny and merit exclusion.
RSUP - Currently slightly below recommended $10M mcap per index component qualifiers.
This sounds like a great idea.
To thin things out a bit, ALCX, FXN and OGN were all formally added last round, potentially inviting more scrutiny of AAVE, CRV, FRAX, INV, LQTY, RSR and SKY.
Moving to vlSQUILL Snapshot vote to finalize the 10 go-forward constituents for the OPEN basket Oct 14-17. This will be followed by a vlSQUILL onchain ratification vote on Oct 18 and subsequent rebalance execution.
For the Snapshot vote, the community will consider the current 10 constituents plus Resupply Finance (RSUP) for inclusion, informed by the RFC discussion above.
FPS doesn’t yet meet sufficient criteria for inclusion in the Q4 OPEN basket snapshot.
Three areas the community and Frankencoin should consider to collaborate:
Integration: Work with ABC Labs to integrate Frankencoin AMM with minting/redeeming on app.reserve.org. Also with only one swap venue for FPS, what risks does this create for OPEN holders? this question needs some discourse on the forums so the community is vested.
Visibility: Secure a CoinGecko listing for FPS to establish verifiable market data.
Token fit: The current OPEN basket includes only base governance tokens. Wrapped or staked assets could be considered later, but this requires a strong rationale and community consensus. I suggest a post something like “What is the steelman for including wrapped or staked governance tokens in OPEN?” to explore costs, liquidity, and risk dimensions with multiple examples.
The OPEN Stablecoin Index is a live experiment, and each iteration sharpens our methodology. Every cycle improves coordination and readiness for the next rebalance three months out. Grateful for everyone’s collaboration.
This RFC has been moved to onchain ratification vote to be followed by rebalance execution. vlSQUILL vote final step here for 24 hours only, Oct 18 to 19: Reserve app | DTFs
