The Cost of Siloed Financial Identities

Every new protocol must fund its own airdrop and build its own reputation system from scratch, leading to massive capital waste and ineffective distribution.

• $100M+ wasted annually on airdrops to Sybil attackers.
• ~90% of airdrop tokens are immediately sold, failing to build lasting communities.
• Zero composability: Reputation on Compound doesn't help you on Aave.

Without portable creditworthiness, capital is trapped in isolated silos, forcing over-collateralization and crippling capital efficiency across DeFi.

• $50B+ in locked collateral that could be productive elsewhere.
• 0x leverage for undercollateralized lending between protocols.
• Protocols like Aave and Compound cannot share user risk profiles, duplicating work.

A universal, composable identity layer that aggregates user history across chains and protocols, turning reputation into a transferable asset.

• Enables under-collateralized lending via portable credit scores.
• Cuts Sybil costs by >80% for protocols using shared attestations.
• Unlocks intent-based UX across UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across.

Every new protocol demands fresh collateral, forcing users to over-collateralize across chains. This locks up $10B+ in idle capital that could be productive elsewhere.\n- Inefficient Leverage: Can't reuse a MakerDAO position on Aave.\n- Siloed Liquidity: LPs must deploy separate capital to Uniswap, Curve, and Balancer.

Creditworthiness and governance power are non-transferable. A top voter on Arbitrum is a ghost on Optimism.\n- No Cross-Chain Governance: DAO power is stranded, weakening collective decision-making.\n- Zero-Portable Underwriting: A flawless repayment history on Compound doesn't lower your rates on Euler.

A base layer for issuing, verifying, and revoking portable claims about identity, credit, and membership. Think Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS) as a primitive.\n- Sovereign Data: Users own and curate their attestation graph.\n- Protocol-Agnostic: Any dApp on any chain can read and write, creating a shared truth layer.

Instead of managing dozens of credentials, users express intents (e.g., "borrow $10k at best rate"). Aggregators like UniswapX or CowSwap for DeFi, but for identity, pull the optimal attestations across chains.\n- Minimized Friction: User approves an outcome, not a series of transactions.\n- Optimized Execution: Solver networks compete to fulfill your intent using your portable identity.

Prove you have a credential (e.g., "credit score > 700") without revealing the underlying data or its source chain. Leverages zkSNARKs and zkVMs like RISC Zero.\n- Maximal Privacy: Protocols get a verified claim, not your entire history.\n- Cross-Chain Proofs: A zk-proof generated on Polygon is verifiable on Base in ~100ms.

Portable identity flips the model from application-specific to user-centric growth. Each new user and attestation makes the entire network more valuable.\n- Exponential Utility: A single good reputation unlocks the best rates everywhere.\n- Viral Adoption: Protocols integrate to tap into a global pool of pre-verified users, not just their own silo.

Every new chain or app requires fresh collateral, creating redundant over-collateralization and fragmented liquidity. This locks up $10B+ in idle capital that could be productive elsewhere.\n- Opportunity Cost: Capital can't follow yield across ecosystems.\n- User Friction: Manual bridging and re-staking for each new protocol.

Systems like EigenLayer, Babylon, and Karpatkey allow staked assets (e.g., ETH, BTC) to be reused for security or credit across chains. This turns identity into a composable financial primitive.\n- Capital Multiplier: One stake secures multiple services.\n- Protocol Benefit: Access deeper, more secure liquidity pools.

Your impeccable repayment history on Aave on Ethereum is invisible to Compound on Base. This forces users to rebuild credit from zero, stifling undercollateralized lending.\n- Market Limitation: Lending is constrained to over-collateralized models.\n- User Exclusion: New users lack the collateral to access credit markets.

Protocols like Cred Protocol and Spectral generate on-chain credit scores from historical data. Zero-Knowledge proofs can attest to this reputation privately across chains via layerzero or Hyperlane.\n- New Markets: Enables undercollateralized lending.\n- User Sovereignty: Users own and port their verifiable reputation.

Each dApp must bootstrap its own user base and liquidity from scratch. This leads to high customer acquisition costs (CAC) and winner-take-most markets, as seen in early DEX wars.\n- Builder Burden: ~80% of effort spent on growth, not product.\n- Network Effects: Hard to compete with incumbents like Uniswap.

Shared identity layers like Lens Protocol, Farcaster, and CyberConnect allow dApps to tap into existing user graphs and social capital. This turns users into composable network assets.\n- Plug-and-Play Users: Instant community and distribution.\n- Viral Growth: Actions and reputation propagate across the graph.