[RFC] Sagix Club Edelweiss: Crypto upside, crash protection and Swiss stability: a store of value for the next billion people

More DTFs
1

Reserve’s mission, made tangible

Reserve’s origin isn’t DeFi yield optimization. It’s the sound of a currency collapsing in Caracas and the silence of a frozen bank account in Istanbul. But for those who escape to USD, a new problem emerges: The Dollar is a ‘slower burn.’ At 3–8% annual inflation, it’s not a shelter—it’s a slightly better cage.

The mission was — and is — purchasing power preservation for everyone.

ixedel_pmf_v6
ixedel_pmf_v61600×900 183 KB

I’ve deployed ixEDEL (Sagix Club Edelweiss) on Ethereum mainnet as a direct implementation of this mission. Not a stablecoin pegged to an inflating currency — an appreciating defensive basket designed to preserve and grow purchasing power across economic regimes.

Live now - Reserve DTF link below

The problem with USD stablecoins

For someone in Buenos Aires or Lagos, holding USDC is better than holding local currency. But the dollar still inflates at 3-8% annually. And USD stablecoins offer zero yield in their wallets.

They’ve escaped one inflating currency for another — just a slower one.

$ixEDEL offers an alternative:

What they escape What they gain
Local currency hyperinflation Swiss Franc stability (-0.65 correlation to USD)
USD inflation (3-8% annually) Gold + Bitcoin + CHF triple hedge
Zero yield on defensive holdings 3-5% from yield-bearing stables
Bank counterparty risk On-chain, permissionless, self-custody

The triple hedge: BTC + Gold + CHF

ixEDEL combines assets that don’t move together — the foundation of real diversification:

Relationship Correlation Why It Matters
CHF ↔ USD -0.65 When the dollar weakens, CHF strengthens
Gold ↔ BTC 0.15 Different investor bases, uncorrelated movements
Gold ↔ USD -0.35 Gold rallies during dollar uncertainty

This isn’t accidental diversification. It’s engineered resilience.

The numbers

Historical simulation (Jan 2020 - Jan 2026):

Metric ixEDEL Pure BTC Gold USD Stables
Annualized Return 20.9% ~30% ~8% ~5%
Volatility 16.9% 62% 16% ~0%
Sharpe Ratio 1.24 0.81 ~0.5 N/A
Max Drawdown -24% -75% -20% 0%

The Sharpe ratio tells the story: ixEDEL delivers more return per unit of risk than holding Bitcoin alone.

You won’t match BTC in a bull market. But you’ll still be here after the crash.

The path to mass adoption and global financial stability

We are bridging the ‘Complexity Gap.’ Through a Reserve API, Reserve targets a 3x Win:

  • For Users: One-click, mobile-first DTF minting and redeeming via Trust Wallet or MetaMask: Partner with wallet providers.

  • For Wallets: Turning static storage into a high-utility wealth management hub.

  • For Reserve: Scaling RSR-backed assets as the back-end liquidity layer for the world’s most popular apps.

Institutional interest: The second market

While $ixEDEL serves Reserve’s mission for developing markets, it simultaneously solves a problem for institutional investors:

Tactical Hedge / Dry Powder

  • Defensive allocation that preserves optionality

  • Anti-correlated to risk-on crypto positions

  • Rebalancing reserve for larger portfolios

Risk-Adjusted Returns

  • 1.24 Sharpe ratio appeals to portfolio managers

  • -24% max drawdown vs -75% for BTC

  • Sleep-at-night allocation

Counterparty Diversification

  • Gold split between Paxos (PAXG) and Tether (xAUt) (after adding PAXG)

  • Stables across Sky, Maple, Morpho, Steakhouse

  • No single custodian failure breaks the basket

This dual market — mission fulfillment AND institutional utility — is what makes ixEDEL a PMF candidate. It’s not either/or.

$ixEdel is live on ETH main net

I’d value:

  • Feedback on the composition and thesis

  • Support fixing the metadata on Reserve website, it was not working

  • Technical input on the svZCHF liquidity/plugin path

  • Connections to distribution channels serving developing markets

The mission is purchasing power preservation. Let’s make it better.

image
image1280×822 93.6 KB

External Links:

Sagix Club is a trade name of The Genesis Address DAO LLC

7 Likes
4

Re: Composability — ixEDEL as the defensive building block

The psychology of survival: churn as the “silent alpha killer”

The data is clear: Drawdown is the primary cause of churn. Most investors can stomach a 25% drop, but a 75% drop triggers a “fight or flight” response that usually ends in “flight” at the absolute bottom.

The retention matrix

Most crypto investors don’t lose money because they pick bad assets. They lose because they sell after a 60% drawdown and never come back.

This is the “Retention Reality” that kills PMF for crypto products:

Product Bull Market Return Bear Market Drawdown Probability Holding in 2030
Pure ETH 100% -80% Low
stETH (Lido) ~103% -80% Low
ETH+ (Reserve) ~103% -80% Low

The assets aren’t bad. The drawdowns are unsurvivable for most humans.

The solution: structural shock absorption

Sagix Club Casper Serenity ETH: Finality, diversified.

One decade beats one cycle.

$ixETH uses a 30% ixEDEL defensive reserve to smooth drawdowns from -80% to approximately -50%.

Live now: ixETH on Reserve

Product Bull Return Bear Drawdown Sharpe Holding Probability
Pure ETH 70% -80% 0.81 Low
ixETH (70/30) ~60% -50% 0.89 High
ixEDEL 21% -24% 1.24 Very High

The trade-off is explicit: Sacrifice ~10 percentage points of bull-market upside for maximum probability you’re still compounding a decade later.

ixETH composition (8 tokens)

Token Protocol Weight Role
ixEDEL Nested DTF 30% Shock absorber, rebalancing reserve
ETH+ Reserve 28% RSR backstop protection
wstETH Lido 15% Blue-chip LST
cbETH Coinbase 8% Institutional custody
sfrxETH Frax 6% Restaking diversification
rETH Rocket Pool 6% Decentralized staking
weETH ether.fi 4% EigenLayer exposure
ezETH Renzo 3% Additional restaking

The 30% ixEDEL allocation acts as:

  • Shock absorber during crashes

  • Rebalancing reserve that systematically buys ETH when it’s down

  • Profit-taking mechanism that trims during rallies

This is enforced buy-low/sell-high — the discipline most investors know they need but can’t execute emotionally.

The composable architecture

ixEDEL serves as a single-token defensive allocation nested inside themed DTFs. This solves two problems:

1. Token slot efficiency

  • One slot instead of 9 for defensive allocation

  • Critical on ETH main net chain with 15-token gas limits

  • Enables more complex themed strategies

2. Consistent risk management

  • Same defensive core across all products

  • Rebalancing happens at both levels (within ixEDEL and within themed DTF)

  • Investors can choose their risk tier: ixEDEL (defensive) → ixETH (balanced) → pure ETH (aggressive)

Coming next: ixDEFI

ixDEFI (in development) applies the same 70/30 architecture to DeFi protocol exposure:

Category Weight Tokens
ixEDEL 30% Defensive anchor
Oracles/Infrastructure 15% LINK
Lending 10% AAVE, MORPHO
DEX/AMM 10% UNI, CRV, COW
Stablecoins 10% SKY, ENA
Yield/Restaking 10% PENDLE, LDO, EIGEN
High-growth 15% ETHFI, ONDO, SYRUP

Barbell strategy: 45% in highly liquid blue-chips (instant exit) + 15% in high-growth protocols (asymmetric upside) + 30% defensive anchor.

Technical challenge: nested DTF pricing

Currently, ixEDEL prices correctly standalone ($108.80) but shows 0% when nested inside ixETH. The Reserve app requires CoinGecko/CoinMarketCap listing for pricing, which requires a trading pair.

The efficient frontier

The ixAssets family maps to the Markowitz Efficient Frontier:

image
image1471×1030 142 KB

Key insight: Moving from Pure ETH to ixETH, you sacrifice ~10% return to reduce risk by ~20%. That’s a good trade for anyone who needs to still be holding in 2030.

Summary

Product Status Tokens Role Link
ixEDEL Live 9 Defensive foundation Reserve
ixETH Live 8 ETH + defensive reserve Reserve
ixDEFI Development 15 DeFi + defensive reserve Coming Q2

The goal isn’t maximum return. It’s maximum probability you’re still here in 10 years.

One decade of compounding beats one bull run followed by panic selling.

CALL FOR ACTION: Feedback welcome on how to resolve:

  • Nested DTF pricing solutions, so ixETH displays the proper value and quote

  • Moving forward path, liquidity pool, listing on CMC, Coingecko.

Sagix Club is a trade name of The Genesis Address DAO LLC

4 Likes
5

Hey Sagix, love this concept, just minted $1k worth. Let’s make sure to get you involved in the DTF product lab activities so we can support you building this out.

4 Likes
6

Minted some myself. To me, this coin represents the true concept of protecting purchasing power while earning some additional upside as well. I think this is a well constructed index that can weather many a storm and I am excited to be a part of its future.

3 Likes
7

Beautiful design. As governance facilitator, my interest is of course in governance and how ixEdel and ixETH will approach rebalances and adjustments.

What procedures and cadences do you have in mind?

What participation paths do you see for contributors?

Happy to support with ideation and implementation. Thanks for the well-written proposal.

2 Likes
8

Thanks Raphael, really appreciate the governance focus. This is critical for adoption.

Our investment philosophy should shape the governance approach since we do not believe in active trading since fees, spreads, and slippage erode returns.

Instead, we like to focus on buying quality uncorrelated assets that will be there for decades (10, 20+ year horizon). ixEDEL holds gold, bitcoin, Swiss franc, and yield-bearing stables precisely because these are long-duration stores of value.

Proposed rebalancing cadence: Given this philosophy, we are thinking annual rebalancing as the base case. The Open paper (Open Stable: Capturing the Stablecoin Economy — 512M) provides strong research supporting longer rebalancing timeframes and frequent rebalancing often destroys value through transaction costs without meaningful risk reduction. However, we can entertain threshold-based triggers for extraordinary circumstances, say if any single asset drifts significantly from its target allocation, for example if a 20% allocation drifts to 35%, the community could/should initiate a rebalancing proposal outside the annual cycle.

Diversification & liquidity considerations: Currently ixEDEL uses single providers per asset class, but we are in favor of multi-provider diversification:

  • Gold: Currently XAUT only. I initially proposed PAXG for diversification. There was a question about PAXG transaction fees potentially conflicting with Reserve protocol, but I believe this not the case and would support adding it pending confirmation.

  • Bitcoin: Currently cbBTC. Open to adding another BTC wrapper with sufficient liquidity to reduce single-provider risk.

  • Swiss Franc: ZCHF is the most liquid CHF token on mainnet. I’m aware of alternatives but their liquidity is too thin for scaling. Open to suggestions if deeper CHF liquidity emerges. ZCHF is the liquidity bottleneck for scaling the DTF, not sure if it is feasible to mint zchf at frankencoin directly during a zap deposit to avoid AMM slippage, but frakencoin does accept this collaterized minting.

  • Yield optimization: ZCHF can be staked at frankencoin.com for attractive yield, which would significantly improve ixEDEL’s return profile. This would require some development effort but could be worth prioritizing to improve the DTF appeal.

Governance structure: I’m a strong believer in community governance and rsr token holder voting.

  • For ixEDEL/ixETH, stakers should be able to propose:

  • Rebalancing decisions (timing and composition)

  • Adding/removing constituent assets (like PAXG, additional BTC wrappers)

  • Technical improvements (like ZCHF staking integration)

  • Emergency response to incidents

The institutional challenge: One distribution rail is family offices and institutional investors under CVM 175. They need transparent, predictable governance procedures but may not be crypto-native. I’m thinking about how to balance on-chain governance with accessibility for traditional allocators. we need to balance community governance, compliance under cvm175 (and other reg bodies in other countries) and family offices and institutional investors desire to participate in the governance by staking rsr into the dtf.

Would love StableLab’s input on:

  • Optimal voting mechanisms for institutional DTF holders

  • Governance frameworks that work for both crypto-native and traditional investors

  • Reference implementations from other institutional-grade protocols

Happy to collaborate on governance design that serves both decentralization principles and institutional requirements.

2 Likes
9

I agree overall with a longer rebalancing time frame based on the concepts of inversely correlated assets and yield that outpaces general usd inflation. Gold, Bitcoin and the Swiss Franc will be integral parts of this dtf for a long time to come. In terms of the yield bearing usd based stables, I think you have selected an excellent arrangement of coins and vaults and I don’t forsee this needing to be changed much in the future. However, I think it’s not a bad idea to keep an eye across multiple vaults as yields can fluctuate and there might come a better opportunity in which the benefits of higher yield of a defensive stable might outweigh the rebalancing costs.

1 Like
10

Thanks for the questions! Let’s dive in:

Institutional holders are very used to voting with shares, which is similar to voting with tokens. The more shares the more your vote counts.
What’s wildly different is the cadence. Stock voting happens once a year, token voting sometimes multiple times a week.
In my opinion institutional holders love dependability. Clearly defining what governance can change and what it can’t. And when changes happen and how far ahead they get to take a look at what’s proposed.

The framework here is also deeply familiar to crypto native holders. It’s just voting.

I propose to stick to a clear schedule, like many other DTFs already do (quarterly voting) with a one-month up-front deadline for proposals.

The governance surface should be minimal and well-defined. Especially what kind of collateral can get added and what kind of risk assessments take place. If special circumstance necessitate a change in the process, this should be downstream of token holder approval.

One good reference is Morpho, where rebalances is in the hand of curators, that institutional holder often know directly. Protocol governance affects deployed vaults only insofar as new vault types need to be deployed and depositors need to actively move their assets to the new vault. This is a very high security guarantee.

To put it bluntly: As an institutional investor I don’t want any chance of a bunch of degens or a malicious NPRK commander ruging me.

The most important aspects here are clear communications and dependable schedules, plus a tightly and comprehensively defined governance surface that is hard to impossible to expand or alter.

1 Like
11

agreed 100%

the DTF governor can veto proposals and also the institutionals buying the DTFs to distribute can lock the vlRSR into the DTF and actively participate in governance (and get fee revenue). I believe it’s an attractive DTF feature for them

1 Like