[2602 Grant] TYKORA — Prize Vaults for DoC & USDRIF (Tropykus Yield) on Rootstock

[jxlabs]

[2602 Grant] Proposal Milestone update - TYKORA Prize Vaults for DoC & USDRIF (Tropykus Yield) on Rootstock

Hi everyone

We’d like to share an update on the proposed milestones for our grant submission TYKORA based on community feedback. Specifically in Milestone 2.

Grant Request

Total amount requested: 20,000 USDRIF (or rBTC equivalent)

Milestone breakdown (deliverables + dates + amounts)

Timeline is expressed as “weeks from grant approval” to avoid calendar mismatch.

Milestone 1 — Independent security audit (Coinspect)

Duration: 2 weeks (Weeks 1-2)

Amount: 12,000 USDRIF (or rBTC equivalent)

Note: The 12,000 USDRIF budget corresponds to the quoted Coinspect audit fee for the TYKORA smart-contract scope.

Deliverables

Formal engagement with Coinspect for an independent audit of TYKORA Prize Vault smart contracts (DoC + USDRIF)

Audit-ready package:

• Tagged release / exact commit hash
• Deployment & build instructions
• Complete test suite
• Audit report publication (executive summary + technical details as permitted)

Remediation cycle:

• Fixes applied
• Expanded tests
• Re-verification and final tagged audited release

Success metrics / KPIs:

• Audit report delivered
• 100% findings fixed or explicitly documented with mitigation/risk acceptance
• Final audited release tagged and publicly available

Milestone 2 — Production mainnet launch & operational enablement

Duration: 4 weeks (Weeks 3–6)

Amount: 3,000 USDRIF (or rBTC equivalent)

Deliverables

Transition from Sandbox mode → Production mode for both vaults (DoC + USDRIF) on Rootstock mainnet

• Disable any sandbox caps and enable production parameters (if applicable)
• Final parameters locked + keeper runbook + monitoring + verified addresses page

Operational enablement:

• Keeper procedures (close → award → claim)
• Monitoring guidance + operational runbook
• Documented parameters and safety conditions (splits, draw timing, constraints)

Public launch package:

• Verified contract addresses + explorer references consolidated
• Onboarding docs (“How it works”), FAQs, risk disclaimers
• Documentation aligned with audited code

Success metrics / KPIs:

• Production mode enabled
• Keeper lifecycle executed end-to-end on mainnet with a published runbook
• Launch documentation published with verified references

Admin / Controls (Production)

• Deployment-time configuration (performed by the team at deployment):
  • setStrategy(address) — executed during deployment; one-time / not changeable after set
  • setTreasury(address) —executed during deployment; one-time / not changeable after set
• Production owner: a Safe multisig on Rootstock with threshold M-of-N
• Production admin surface (multisig-controlled):
  • setEmergencyMode(bool) — emergency switch (blocks deposits + draw ops; withdrawals remain available)
  • awardDrawManual(drawId, seed) — manual award fallback (exception path only)
  • emergencyCancelDraw(drawId) — cancel/unlock in stuck cases after emergencyDelay
  • startFenwickRepair() / continueFenwickRepair(steps) — repair tooling (rare, only if needed)

(We’ll also explicitly note that key economic parameters like draw period and bps are immutable in the deployed vaults, and strategy routing is not upgradeable after the one-time set.)

Ops SLOs (Measurable)

• Execution liveness: ≥ 95% of draws finalized within 24h of scheduled end when BTC header data is available.
• Manual intervention ceiling: ≤ 5% manual interventions over a rolling 90-day window.
• Disclosure SLAs (whenever manual paths are used):
  • brief public notice within 24h
  • short follow-up explanation within 72h (reason + confirmation that the randomness commitment was not manipulated)

Runbook Artifacts

Milestone 2 will explicitly include:

• a Verified Addresses page (vaults, strategies, underlying tokens, multisig owner, keeper addresses)
• a Monitoring checklist (events + keeper txs + BTC header readiness + draw state transitions)
• where Postmortems/Disclosures publication: We will publish a canonical incident log in TYKORA Docs (permalink, timestamped, with tx hashes). Fast notifications will be shared via Telegram linking to the canonical report. That links to the same docs entry. All of these references will be linked from the Verified Addresses page.

Milestone 3 — Liquidity & adoption activation (TVL impact)

Duration: 4 weeks (Weeks 7–10)

Amount: 5,000 USDRIF (or rBTC equivalent)

Deliverables

Activation plan executed to drive liquidity and sustained participation:

• Coordination with Rootstock ecosystem channels and key communities (DoC/MoC, USDRIF stakeholders, Tropykus)
• Educational content (tutorials, demos, explainers) to reduce onboarding friction

KPI reporting during the activation period:

• TVL per vault (DoC + USDRIF)
• Number of depositors
• Yield routed through Tropykus attributable to TYKORA
• Draw participation metrics + prize distribution transparency

Success metrics / KPIs:

• Public KPI report(s) with verifiable metrics (TVL, depositors, retention proxy, Tropykus supplied liquidity)
• Evidence of measurable post-launch growth (TVL and/or depositors and/or Tropykus utilization uplift)

Thanks,

JXLabs Team

[jxlabs]

Hi @Tane , thanks for the clear guidance.

We’ve updated the thread with [2602 Grant] Proposal Milestone update - TYKORA Prize Vaults for DoC & USDRIF (Tropykus Yield) on Rootstock to explicitly include in Milestone 2:

• Admin/controls: production owner as a multisig (M-of-N threshold), and a clear list of owner/admin functions used for resiliency.
• Ops SLOs: ≥95% draw finalization within 24h (when BTC header data is available), ≤5% manual interventions / 90d, plus the 24h + 72h disclosure SLAs.
• Runbook artifacts: a Verified Addresses page, monitoring checklist, and where incident disclosures/postmortems will be published (TYKORA Docs + Telegram announcements, with links from the Verified Addresses page).

Really appreciate the feedback — it helped tighten the proposal for on-chain evaluation and accountability.

Happy to provide any additional details if needed.

JXLabs team

[DAOplomats]

Great progress on the proposal, @jxlabs the commitment to a 5% ceiling on manual interventions and clear 24h disclosure SLAs is pretty good, exactly what is required. One last thing from our side, we’re mainly looking to understand the actual signer composition of the multisig (to gauge centralization risk), confirmation that the Coinspect audit covers the full bridge scope, and your strategic plan to stretch the 5,000 USDRIF activation budget to hit those TVL metrics.

[jxlabs]

Thanks for the continued review @DAOplomats really appreciate it. Addressing the three items:

1) Multisig signer composition (centralization risk)
Agreed this is key. For production, we plan to move ownership from the deployer EOA to a 3-of-5 multisig, with majority external ecosystem guardians (i.e., 3 external / 2 internal). This ensures JXLabs alone cannot execute owner-only actions without at least one independent signer, while keeping operations practical. We’ll publish the multisig address and signer composition (by role / affiliation, and names where appropriate/accepted) on the Verified Addresses page.

2) Coinspect audit scope and the bridge randomness integration
Yes, the Coinspect audit scope is intended to cover the full TYKORA smart-contract system across both vaults (DoC + USDRIF), including the BTC-anchored randomness flow via the Rootstock bridge (i.e., the award-from-header path, handling of delays/unavailability, and the manual/emergency fallback procedures and controls).
To be precise: Coinspect will audit our integration and usage of the bridge/header data, not the Rootstock bridge implementation itself.

3) Activation budget (5,000 USDRIF) and plan to hit TVL targets
We will keep the 5,000 USDRIF activation budget as the base for Milestone 3, and JXLabs will additionally commit an extra 2,000–3,000 USDRIF from our own treasury to extend the activation runway. This combined budget will be deployed toward high-leverage, measurable adoption levers (education, community onboarding, and a cold-start activation plan) with transparent KPI reporting throughout the activation window.
In parallel, we’re also evaluating additional co-funding via sponsorship mode (ecosystem-aligned partners / collaborators). If external funds are secured, we’ll disclose them transparently and report how they were used alongside the on-chain metrics.

JXLabs team

[krngill]

Hey @jxlabs ,
I was going through this proposal and found it really interesting. I had similar doubts regarding how the rewards would be structured, and I appreciate your detailed breakdown of the weekly rewards stakers will receive based on TVL.

However, I have a question from a psychological angle: if we have a TVL of around $1 million and we are distributing roughly $500 per week for the first prize, we might have 1,000 stakers with $1,000 each in the vault. This means the probability of winning the first prize is roughly 1 in 1,000, which is very low. Do you think it will still be compelling for people to give up the opportunity cost of a consistent yield directly through Tropykus in exchange for this higher but uncertain yield?

My second concern is about the duration. Since it is on a weekly basis, it takes at least a week for results to come out. Is there any way we can decrease the tenure for this kind of offering?

We could potentially offer parallel daily vaults that include an entry fee, similar to a lottery. In this setup:

• Users could be rewarded on a daily basis rather than waiting a full week.
• This would help retain users and encourage them to engage with the platform daily.
• It could create a more effective, “addiction-based” distribution model through more frequent engagement.

[jxlabs]

Thanks for the thoughtful questions @krngill we’ve been discussing the exact same psychology internally, so this is very on point.

1) “1 in 1,000” odds vs lending directly on Tropykus

A small clarification first: TYKORA selects 3 winners per week (50% / 30% / 20%), not one.
So in a simplified scenario with ~1,000 equally-sized depositors, the probability of winning any prize in a given draw is closer to ~3/1,000 (0.3%), not 1/1,000 — and in practice it’s weight-based (proportional to deposit size), not “one wallet = one ticket”.

On the opportunity cost: with typical stablecoin yields (~5–10% APY), the direct weekly yield on a $1,000 position is usually ~$1–$2/week (before any real-world friction). Many users simply don’t feel that as motivating. TYKORA deliberately converts that same yield stream into a larger, emotionally salient upside event, while keeping principal withdrawable (with brief settlement locks only during close/award/claim).

So the durable value proposition isn’t “higher EV” — it’s variance + upside packaging, plus transparent on-chain distribution. This is the same behavioral lever that has made prize-linked savings concepts work historically: people don’t always optimize for predictable micro-yield; many prefer a small chance at a meaningful win.

2) Weekly cadence and whether we can shorten it

Weekly is intentional in v1 because it allows yield to accumulate into prizes that feel meaningful at realistic TVL and APY. If we compress cadence to daily without adding external incentives, the daily yield pool becomes very small, and prize amounts typically lose the “shareable / exciting” property that makes the mechanism work.

We can explore shorter cadences in future versions, but we want to do it responsibly: more frequent draws increase operational complexity, transaction activity, and monitoring surface. For v1 we prefer fewer, higher-signal prize events rather than many low-signal ones.

3) “Daily vaults + entry fee”

That’s an interesting idea, but it’s a different product from TYKORA’s core thesis. Introducing an entry fee shifts the experience closer to a traditional lottery model (users pay principal to participate), which changes the “principal-preserving” framing and adds additional design and risk considerations. Our current direction is to keep TYKORA focused on no-loss / principal-preserving participation and let prize magnitude scale primarily with TVL and yield.

That said, we’re open to running time-bounded promotional boosts (e.g., sponsor-funded prize top-ups) to help the early phase — without changing the core “only-yield-as-prize” model.

Thanks,

JXLabs team

[jxlabs]

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful feedback, comments, and suggestions throughout the off-chain discussion — it helped us strengthen TYKORA’s proposal significantly.

We’ve now published the on-chain proposal for TYKORA on Rootstock Collective. You can review it here: [1304 Grant Proposal] TYKORA Prize Vaults for DoC & USDRIF (Tropykus Yield) | JXLabs - M1 | RootstockCollective

We truly appreciate the community’s time and support, and we’re happy to answer any remaining questions or clarifications in this thread.

JXLabs team

[SEEDGov]

Hello, I have a few questions for you: PoolTogether on Ethereum was very successful when DeFi yields were high and the rewards were therefore very attractive, but then, when DeFi yields dropped, it lost a lot of TVL because the rewards decreased, thereby reducing the incentive to supply capital at a 0% rate for the chance to win a small reward. It’s a model that, in my view, experience has shown works and depends on high yields. Don’t you think that right now, with DeFi generating very low yields, there won’t be much incentive for depositors to participate? At the same time, when there’s little incentive to participate, that leads to even lower rewards, since the pool is smaller. Have you analyzed this? What incentive model are you considering in the current DeFi context to ensure the project’s success and, consequently, a return for Rootstock ecosystem on the required funds?

[jxlabs]

@SEEDGov Thanks for raising this. It’s a fair critique and one we’ve been thinking about since day one, especially given what happened across the broader prize-vault category after the “high-yield era”.

A few key points on how we view TYKORA in the current DeFi context:

1) Yes — prize vaults are yield-sensitive. We’re not ignoring that.
The prize pool in TYKORA is purely a function of realized yield, so if yields compress, prizes compress. That dynamic can create a cold-start / low-yield feedback loop if nothing else is done. We’ve explicitly analyzed this and we’re designing the go-to-market around it.

2) Our baseline assumption is not “crazy yields.”
We are modeling with typical stablecoin money-market yields (roughly the ~5–10% APY range, variable over time). At those levels, incentives won’t look like 2021 — so TYKORA’s success depends on (a) behavioral design + (b) distribution + (c) getting the flywheel started in a realistic way.

3) The durable user value proposition is not “more APY,” it’s “variance + upside with principal preservation.”
Many users (especially in consumer-facing DeFi) don’t optimize for predictable expected value. They engage with variance: the chance of a meaningful win, even if their EV is similar or slightly lower than lending directly. That psychological pattern is observable across lottery-style products, prediction/betting apps, etc. TYKORA is aiming to package stablecoin saving into a more compelling experience without taking principal risk from the mechanism itself (users are not paying tickets; they’re allocating yield).

4) We agree the early phase is the hardest. Our plan is to actively bootstrap it.
We’re not relying on “organic yield alone” in the first weeks/months. The activation milestone is explicitly designed to bridge the early phase until TVL and prizes reach a level that becomes self-reinforcing. Concretely, that includes:

• Distribution + partnerships with Money On Chain / Tropykus / Rootstock communities (where the underlying stablecoins already have users).
• Content + onboarding loops (simple “deposit → participate” flows, weekly winner transparency, social proof).
• Supplemental activation budget from JXLabs + sponsorships, to extend runway and accelerate traction if needed (without changing deployed vault rules).

5) We are honest about what “compelling” looks like at low yields.
Our current directional view is that users start perceiving the experience as meaningfully attractive once the 1st prize is consistently in the ~$50–$100/week range, because that’s where it becomes shareable and emotionally salient. Below that, retention risk is higher — which is why the activation phase exists and why we’re committing to measured reporting.

6) What happens if yields stay low and TVL grows slowly?
We don’t plan to mutate deployed vaults. If the environment remains low-yield for an extended period, the response is:

• intensify activation levers that don’t touch vault immutability (campaigns, partnerships, education, incentives funded externally), and
• if needed, ship a V2 over time (as PoolTogether did) with stronger long-term fairness/retention mechanics (e.g., TWAB-style time-weighted ticketing), while keeping V1 immutable and transparent.

7) Return for Rootstock ecosystem
Even in “normal yield” conditions, the mechanism produces direct on-chain ecosystem impact that can be measured:

• incremental sticky TVL for DoC/USDRIF,
• incremental supplied liquidity into Tropykus,
• recurring on-chain draw activity + public winner transparency,
• measurable onboarding loops via partner communities.

We fully agree that the market context matters, and we’re not presenting this as a guaranteed outcome independent of rates. What we are committing to is: (1) audit + production-grade operations, (2) clear operational SLOs and transparency, and (3) a structured activation plan with KPI reporting.

JXLabs team

[Axia]

I think @Ignas’s latest tweet is relevant to share here. This project feels like it resonates with the sentiment shared.

[jxlabs]

@Axia Totally agree this sentiment is real , a lot of DeFi “works,” but it doesn’t feel engaging anymore for the average user.

That’s precisely the gap TYKORA is trying to fill on Rootstock: a simple, principal-preserving way to use stablecoins that turns predictable yield into a “variance + upside” experience, with fully transparent on-chain draws (3 weekly winners, 50/30/20) and measurable ecosystem impact (sticky TVL + Tropykus utilization).

We’re not claiming this replaces lending — it’s a different product for a different user psychology: people who won’t get excited by “$1.50/week” deterministic yield, but will participate for a chance at a meaningful weekly prize without risking principal.

Appreciate you sharing this. It’s a good articulation of the “why now” for prize vaults on Rootstock.

JXLabs team

[SEEDGov]

Thank you for your detailed response!

@jxlabs

Supplemental activation budget from JXLabs + sponsorships, to extend runway and accelerate traction if needed (without changing deployed vault rules).

@jxlabs

(3) a structured activation plan with KPI reporting.

Could you explain a little more what you mean by that? I still believe that the biggest challenge is attracting liquidity in a market with low interest rates that won’t offer high prizes.

[jxlabs]

Thanks for the follow-up @SEEDGov — happy to clarify.

By “sponsorship mode” we mean a non-custodial, on-chain capability that lets a sponsor add principal to the vault to increase the yield base (and therefore prize size), while opting out of prize eligibility.

Why this matters in a low-rate environment:

• Prizes scale with yield, not only with organic user TVL. If yields are low, early prizes can feel small. A sponsor deposit increases the principal generating yield, which directly increases weekly prize magnitude without changing any draw rules or adding inflationary rewards.
• It helps bridge the cold-start phase. Bigger prizes earlier improves shareability and retention while organic TVL ramps.
• It’s transparent and rule-based. Sponsor deposits and the NoTicketsSet events are on-chain and observable.

Operationally, our commitment is that “sponsorship mode” is a program we are building and actively working on, but we do not have confirmed sponsors yet. The contract support is already there; the remaining work is outreach + partner coordination post-audit.

[Axia]

@SwaptoX tagging you here because @jxlabs is a longtime Rootstock builder and they’re planning to engage Coinspect to audit this project’s codebase, should it pass the onchain vote. Though it would be helpful for you to connect with the team as you embark on auditing SwaptoX’s smart contracts.

[Axia]

@jxlabs I voted FOR this proposal. The team at JXLabs are established Rootstock builders with a proven delivery record, having previously shipped production contracts on mainnet. Both vaults are already deployed, the codebase is public, and an independent Coinspect audit is scoped and ready to begin upon grant approval. TYKORA also introduces a genuinely fun savings experience — the no-loss lottery format gives users a reason to deposit, stay, and share, creating organic growth potential.

Looking forward to seeing the traction and metrics!

[Ignas]

Thanks for mentioning @Axia!

I think the proposal is a reasonable experiment for the ecosystem. The scope is now clear, the cost is not excessive, and the upside is there if it manages to find product market fit.

Looking forward to seeing how users actually behave once it’s live @jxlabs. I will support TYKORA M1!

[Curia]

@jxlabs As mentioned earlier, we find TYKORA to be an interesting experiment. The concept is similar to PoolTogether, which has already demonstrated that this model can work in practice. We believe this approach has the potential to bring additional engagement to DoC/USDRIF holders by introducing a different way to participate in savings.

We’re voting FOR this proposal and look forward to seeing how it performs!

[jxlabs]

Thanks a lot @Axia, @Ignas, and @Curia — we really appreciate the support and the thoughtful engagement throughout the review process.

Quick note: we’ve already been in contact with Coinspect and aligned on the audit kickoff process. If the grant is approved, we’re ready to kick off the audit immediately so we can move fast on security and transparency.

Also @Axia — happy to connect with @SwaptoX if helpful. We’re glad to share anything we’ve learned from shipping + auditing Rootstock-native contracts.

JXLabs Team

[SEEDGov]

Hi @jxlabs, we must admit that we still have some reservations about this proposal, particularly regarding liquidity and TVL creation in a bearish market environment.

However, we voted in favor given its potential to attract new users and create new use cases for DoC and USDRIF, which is exactly what Rootstock needs.

We also appreciate that the team has been highly responsive to feedback and requests for clarification, providing solid and thoughtful answers throughout the process.

Looking ahead, if the proposal is approved, we see two key aspects that will be critical to monitor: first, the activation and engagement plan, which we believe will be central to the project’s success; and second, the audit, which should be conducted by a reputable firm to ensure the security of both users and the system.

[jxlabs]

Thanks everyone for the support and the constructive review throughout the process - we really appreciate it.

We’re happy to share that TYKORA has been awarded Milestone 1, and we’ve already kicked off the smart contract audit with Coinspect. We’ll publish the tagged commit hash and the audit deliverables as outlined in the proposal once the process concludes.

On the point raised about what’s critical to monitor: we completely agree.
Security is the foundation, and that’s why we prioritized engaging a reputable auditor for the vaults and the draw lifecycle. In parallel, as we look beyond M1, activation and engagement will be the key driver of whether TYKORA can reach meaningful usage and measurable ecosystem impact — and we’re committed to reporting transparently on adoption/KPIs during the activation phase if/when the next milestones move forward.

Thanks again. We’ll keep the community updated as the audit progresses.

JXLabs Team