SBTs are non-transferable identity anchors. Unlike fungible tokens, SBTs are permanently bound to a wallet, creating a persistent, verifiable record of credentials, affiliations, and reputation.
gaming-and-metaverse-the-next-billion-users
Blog
Why Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) Could Make or Break Interoperability
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) are hailed as the key to portable identity for the open metaverse. This analysis argues that flawed design will cement reputation silos, creating a permanent underclass and dooming cross-chain gaming ecosystems.
introduction
THE IDENTITY LAYER
Introduction
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) are the missing identity primitive that will define trust and composability across blockchains.
Current interoperability is trust-minimized but identity-blind. Bridges like Across and Stargate move value, but lack context on who is transacting, forcing protocols to rebuild KYC and reputation from scratch on each chain.
SBTs enable portable, programmable trust. A credit score SBT minted on Ethereum becomes a reusable input for underwriting on Aave on Polygon or for gasless transactions via Biconomy on Arbitrum.
Evidence: The Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS) and Verax are already standardizing SBT schemas, creating the foundational data layer for cross-chain identity.
thesis-statement
THE IDENTITY-INTEROPERABILITY TRAP
The Core Paradox
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) create a foundational identity layer that simultaneously enables and threatens seamless cross-chain interoperability.
SBTs create a universal passport for on-chain identity, enabling protocols like Aave GHO or Compound to assess user risk across any chain. This solves the fragmented reputation problem that plagues current DeFi, where a user's history on Arbitrum is invisible on Base.
The paradox emerges from data locality. An SBT's verifiable credentials are only as useful as the infrastructure that can read them. Without a standardized attestation layer like EAS (Ethereum Attestation Service), each chain becomes a new silo for identity data.
Interoperability protocols face a new burden. Systems like LayerZero and Axelar must now securely transport not just assets, but provable identity states. This adds complexity and attack surface, creating a single point of failure for a user's entire digital identity.
Evidence: The ERC-7281 (xERC-20) standard for cross-chain tokens demonstrates how technical standards lag behind application needs. SBT interoperability lacks an equivalent, forcing projects to rely on custom, insecure bridges for identity data.
key-trends
THE IDENTITY GAP
The Current Fragmentation Landscape
Interoperability today is a patchwork of liquidity pools and wrapped assets, lacking a universal standard for user identity and reputation across chains.
01
The Problem: Sybil-Resistant Governance is Impossible
Cross-chain DAOs and governance aggregators like Snapshot and Tally cannot prevent vote manipulation across fragmented identities. This undermines the legitimacy of on-chain decisions.
- Sybil attacks dilute governance power.
- Airdrop farming exploits create perverse incentives.
- No cost to creating infinite wallets on new chains.
0
Cross-Chain Identity Cost
>90%
Airdrop Waste
02
The Solution: Portable Credit Scores as Collateral
SBT-based reputation (e.g., ARCx, Spectral) creates a portable, non-transferable credit history. This enables undercollateralized lending and better rates across Aave, Compound, and emerging lending markets on L2s.
- Risk-based pricing becomes chain-agnostic.
- Unlocks capital efficiency for proven users.
- Reduces systemic risk from anonymous leverage.
60-80%
LTV Increase
5-15%
APY Reduction
03
The Problem: Intents Rely on Blind Solvers
Intent-based architectures (UniswapX, CowSwap, Across) route user transactions through solver networks. Without SBTs, solvers have no persistent reputation, forcing protocols to trust anonymous entities with MEV and execution.
- No accountability for failed fills or frontrunning.
- Solver cartels can form without detection.
- Users bear the risk of malicious middleware.
$100M+
MEV at Risk
0
Solver Reputation
04
The Solution: Verifiable Solver Reputation Networks
SBTs allow intent protocols to create a persistent reputation layer for solvers, enabling slashing, priority routing, and fee discounts based on historical performance across Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Base.
- Trust-minimized routing for cross-chain swaps.
- Incentivizes honest execution over MEV extraction.
- Creates a competitive market for reliable solvers.
90%+
Fill Rate
-20%
Solver Fees
05
The Problem: Fragmented KYC Hampers Institutional Onboarding
Each regulated DeFi application (Maple Finance, Ondo Finance) and chain (Avalanche, Polygon) requires its own KYC process. This creates compliance overhead and silos institutional liquidity, preventing seamless cross-chain capital movement.
- Repeated compliance checks waste weeks of time.
- Capital is trapped in isolated regulatory silos.
- Inhibits cross-chain prime brokerage services.
4-6 Weeks
Onboarding Delay
$10B+
Siloed TVL
06
The Solution: Chain-Agnostic Compliance Passports
Privacy-preserving SBTs (using zk-proofs) can serve as reusable KYC/AML credentials. Protocols like zkPass and Sismo enable one-time verification for access to multiple chains and applications, creating a seamless institutional rail.
- One-click compliance across any EVM chain.
- Privacy-preserving: reveals only necessary credentials.
- Unlocks trillions in traditional capital flows.
1
Verification
Unlimited
Chain Access
WHY STANDARDS MATTER
SBT Implementation Spectrum: A Fragmentation Risk Matrix
Comparison of SBT implementation approaches and their impact on cross-protocol interoperability, composability, and user experience.
| Critical Interop Dimension | On-Chain Data (e.g., ERC-721) | Off-Chain Attestations (e.g., EAS, Verax) | Hybrid Indexing (e.g., Gitcoin Passport, Disco) |
|---|---|---|---|
Data Portability | |||
Cross-Chain Verification | Via Attestation Registry | Via Indexer + Attestation | |
Composability with DeFi (e.g., Aave, Compound) | Conditional (via ZK proofs) | ||
Revocation Mechanism | Immutable or Manual Burn | Registry Owner or Timelock | Attestation Revocation |
Storage Cost per SBT | $5-50 (L1 Gas) | < $0.01 | $0.01 + Indexing Fee |
Verification Latency | 1 Block Confirmation | 1-3 Seconds (API Call) | 1-3 Seconds (Indexer Query) |
Sovereignty / Censorship Risk | User-Controlled | Registry-Dependent | Hybrid (User + Registry) |
Adoption by Major Protocols (e.g., Uniswap, LayerZero) | High (Native Support) | Low (Custom Integration) | Growing (SDK-Based) |
deep-dive
THE INTEROPERABILITY BOTTLENECK
The Technical Quagmire: Standards, Verification, and the Oracle Problem
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) create a new class of cross-chain state that exposes fundamental flaws in current interoperability infrastructure.
SBTs demand stateful verification. Unlike fungible tokens, an SBT's value is its unique, non-transferable history. A simple balance check on a destination chain is insufficient; the system must verify the provenance and current binding status of the credential on the source chain, a computationally intensive and latency-prone process.
Fragmented standards create walled gardens. The ERC-721 standard for NFTs is insufficient for SBT logic. While ERC-4973 and ERC-5114 propose solutions, competing standards from Polygon or Optimism fragment the landscape. This forces applications like Galxe or Guild to build custom, non-composable verification layers for each chain they support.
The oracle problem becomes existential. Trust-minimized bridges like Across or LayerZero are optimized for asset transfer, not complex state attestation. Verifying an SBT's validity requires an oracle (e.g., Chainlink, Pyth) to attest to off-chain or cross-chain facts, reintroducing the very trust assumptions decentralized identity aims to eliminate. This creates a verification latency vs. security trade-off that most current stacks cannot resolve.
risk-analysis
THE INTEROPERABILITY TRAP
The Bear Case: How SBTs Create a Permanent Underclass
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) promise verifiable identity, but their immutability could cement systemic inequalities across chains.
01
The Reputation Prison
A single, immutable on-chain record of a user's failures (e.g., a defaulted loan, a DAO hack) becomes a permanent, cross-chain scarlet letter. This creates a non-fungible underclass excluded from DeFi, governance, and social protocols.
- Permanent Record: Bad debt or a failed Sybil attack on Optimism follows you to Arbitrum and Base.
- No Expungement: Unlike credit scores, there's no 7-year rule. The ledger is forever.
- Chilling Effect: Users avoid experimentation for fear of permanent reputation damage.
0%
Recovery Rate
Permanent
Record Lifespan
02
The Interoperability Gatekeeper
Cross-chain messaging protocols like LayerZero and Axelar become de facto identity validators. Their attestations of SBT states determine who can bridge assets or access services, creating centralized chokepoints.
- Protocol-Level Censorship: A user blacklisted by one bridge's oracle network could be blocked across the entire Wormhole or Circle CCTP ecosystem.
- Sovereignty Loss: Your identity and access rights are outsourced to a handful of off-chain verifier committees.
- Fragmented Identity: Competing standards from Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS) and Polygon ID create walled gardens of reputation.
3-5
Key Oracle Networks
100%
Access Control
03
The Capital Efficiency Ceiling
SBT-based underwriting for cross-chain lending (e.g., via Compound or Aave GHO) could automate redlining. Your borrowing power becomes rigidly defined by a non-transferable, non-upgradable token.
- Dynamic Inequality: A user's credit limit on Arbitrum is algorithmically capped based on a static SBT, ignoring off-chain income or recovery.
- No Secondary Market: Unlike NFTs, SBTs cannot be used as collateral, locking users out of leverage.
- Protocol Risk: A bug in the SBT logic or its zk-proof (like Sismo) could permanently brick a user's financial identity across all integrated chains.
$0
Collateral Value
Algorithmic
Credit Limit
04
The Solution: Time-Bound Attestations & ZK Revocation
The fix isn't abandoning SBTs, but building expiration and redemption into the primitive. Use zero-knowledge proofs to reveal selective, context-specific credentials without exposing the entire history.
- Sunset Clauses: Attestations from EAS automatically expire after a set period (e.g., 2 years for credit history).
- ZK Selective Disclosure: Protocols like Sismo or Polygon ID allow users to prove "I have a good reputation" without revealing the underlying negative events.
- Revocable Delegation: Use ERC-5484 (Soulbound Consensual) to allow users to grant and revoke specific permissions to apps, breaking monolithic identity.
ZK-Proofs
Privacy Layer
Time-Bound
Expiry Built-In
future-outlook
THE INTEROPERABILITY LAYER
The Path Forward: Aggregation Layers and Minimal Viable Soul
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) will define the next interoperability standard by anchoring identity and intent across chains.
SBTs are the universal identity primitive for cross-chain systems. Without a persistent, non-transferable identity, protocols like Across and LayerZero must rebuild user context on every chain, creating redundant overhead and security gaps.
Minimal Viable Soul (MVS) standardizes the soul. This specification, championed by Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS), creates a portable, verifiable credential layer. It replaces fragmented KYC and reputation systems with a single, chain-agnostic proof.
Aggregation layers require SBTs to function. An intent-based network like UniswapX or CowSwap cannot route orders efficiently without a persistent user reputation score. SBTs provide the trust graph that makes cross-chain MEV protection and settlement possible.
Evidence: EAS has issued over 10 million attestations. This existing infrastructure is the testbed for SBT-based identity, proving demand for portable, verifiable credentials that can be consumed by any chain or dApp.
takeaways
THE INTEROPERABILITY IDENTITY LAYER
TL;DR for Builders and Investors
Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) are the missing credential layer for cross-chain systems, moving interoperability from simple asset transfers to complex, trust-minimized state synchronization.
01
The Problem: Fragmented Reputation & Collateral
Cross-chain lending and underwriting are broken. A user's credit history on Ethereum is meaningless on Solana, forcing protocols to silo liquidity or over-collateralize.
- Key Benefit 1: SBTs enable portable, verifiable reputation, enabling cross-chain undercollateralized loans.
- Key Benefit 2: Unlocks composable DeFi strategies that leverage reputation across chains like Aave, Compound, and Solend.
$100B+
DeFi TVL Impact
-60%
Collateral Required
02
The Solution: SBTs as Universal Messaging Credentials
General Message Passing (GMP) bridges like LayerZero and Wormhole are powerful but trust-sensitive. SBTs solve the oracle/relayer attestation problem.
- Key Benefit 1: Relayer networks (e.g., Axelar, deBridge) can issue attestation SBTs, creating a Sybil-resistant reputation system for verifiers.
- Key Benefit 2: Enables intent-based interoperability where users (via SBTs) dictate cross-chain execution, moving beyond simple swaps on UniswapX or CowSwap.
10x
Trust Minimization
~500ms
Finality w/ Proof
03
The New Attack Surface: Privacy & Revocation
Immutable, public SBTs create permanent financial graphs. This is a privacy nightmare and a systemic risk if keys are compromised.
- Key Benefit 1: Drives innovation in ZK-proof SBTs (e.g., Sismo, Semaphore) for selective disclosure.
- Key Benefit 2: Forces standardization of robust revocation frameworks, a critical gap that projects like Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS) are addressing.
>1M
SBTs Issued (2023)
Critical
Infra Gap
04
The Vertical: SBT-Powered Cross-Chain DAOs
DAO governance is chain-bound. An Arbitrum DAO member cannot vote on a Polygon proposal without fragmented, multi-wallet management.
- Key Benefit 1: SBTs enable one-identity, multi-chain governance, aggregating voting power across Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Optimism.
- Key Benefit 2: Creates a market for cross-chain governance tooling, allowing DAOs like Uniswap or Aave to coordinate treasury deployment and upgrades seamlessly.
$30B+
DAO Treasury Value
+80%
Voter Participation
05
The Infrastructure Play: SBT Indexers & Verifiers
Reading and verifying SBTs across EVM, SVM, and Cosmos chains is a non-trivial data indexing problem. This is the next infrastructure battleground.
- Key Benefit 1: Creates demand for universal SBT indexers (competing with The Graph, Goldsky).
- Key Benefit 2: Drives RPC service differentiation, where providers like Alchemy and QuickNode offer verified credential endpoints as a premium service.
100k+
QPS Demand
New Layer
Stack Required
06
The Killer App: Portable NFT Licensing & Royalties
An NFT's utility (e.g., gaming asset, music license) dies at the chain border. SBTs can bind verifiable licenses and royalty agreements to the asset itself.
- Key Benefit 1: Enables true cross-chain NFT utility, allowing a Bored Ape to be used as an avatar in an Avalanche game with royalties enforced.
- Key Benefit 2: Solves the creator royalty crisis by encoding payment splits into a portable, chain-agnostic SBT attached to the NFT metadata.
$2B+
Annual Royalties
100%
Composability
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall