Vimen Token Transparency Filing

Project & Team

Description of Project

Provide a concise narrative that clearly states each of (a)–(e) below.

(a) Problem the project solves — The problem the project is solving.
(b) Operational priorities — Provide a high-level description of how the project expects to support ongoing development and operations over time.
(c) High-level project overview — How the project works at a high level.
(d) Primary token functions — The primary functions of the token (e.g. gov participation).
(e) Control surface reliance — If any, briefly describe the anticipated or possible evolution of the protocol's governance/control model.

(a) Problem the project solves

Index products (baskets of assets held as a single instrument) traditionally require trusted intermediaries: a sponsor, custodian, manager, and transfer infrastructure, each of which introduces fees, counterparty risk, and discretionary control over investor assets, including the ability to change strategy, raise fees, or gate redemptions. On Robinhood Chain specifically, no native mechanism existed for holding a diversified basket of tokenized equities and chain-native assets as a single token, and no price infrastructure existed for chain-native assets at all. Vimen addresses both: fully collateralized on-chain index baskets whose rules cannot be changed after deployment and whose redemption cannot be blocked by any party, and a public TWAP price layer for chain-native assets that the protocol operates and publishes, including a live model of each feed's manipulation cost.

(b) Operational priorities

The protocol is designed to minimize ongoing operational dependency: basket contracts are immutable, hold their own collateral, and function (mint, redeem, verification) without any operator. Ongoing operations consist of the rebalancing engine and oracle keeper (lightweight infrastructure run by the project), frontend hosting, and continued development of curator tooling and public documentation. Ongoing costs are low and are supported by the protocol's share of mint fees: mint fees on baskets are split by an immutable contract, 60% to the basket's curator and 40% to the protocol treasury. This split is a constant in deployed code and cannot be redirected. Development priorities are sequenced publicly and shipped when complete; the project does not commit to dates. If the project's operators ceased activity, all deployed baskets would remain fully functional, redeemable, and verifiable indefinitely.

(c) High-level project overview

Vimen is a protocol for tokenized index baskets on Robinhood Chain. A basket token is an ERC-20 fully backed by fixed quantities of underlying tokens (tokenized equities, ETFs, and chain-native assets) held by its own immutable contract. Minting deposits the underlyings; redeeming returns them pro rata, permissionlessly, with no fee and no party able to block it. Baskets come in two forms. Frozen baskets have a composition fixed forever at deployment. Agentic baskets permit exactly one mutation, a rebalance function callable only by a designated agent key, bounded by immutable constraints (minimum one-day cooldown, maximum 25% turnover of NAV per rebalance, maximum 1% NAV slippage, registered assets only); after every trade the contract recomputes holdings from actual balances, so full collateralization holds by construction. Surplus generated by agentic baskets is swept to an immutable per-basket distributor that pays holders in USDG. Basket creation is permissionless and gated by a token burn rather than approval. The protocol also operates a public price layer of TWAP feeds for chain-native assets, with per-feed manipulation-cost estimates published live. All contracts are verified on the chain's public explorer.

(d) Primary token functions

VIM's primary function is licensing basket creation. Publishing a frozen basket requires permanently burning 10,000 VIM; publishing an agentic basket requires permanently burning 25,000 VIM. Burns are irreversible, grant a permanent license, require no approval from the project, and cannot be revoked. Each license reduces total VIM supply permanently. VIM carries no governance rights (the protocol has no governance mechanism over deployed contracts, by design), no claim on protocol revenue, and no promised yield or return.

Known Project Team

For each existing entity: Labs/DevCo (e.g., Founder, CEO, CTO, COO), Foundation (e.g., President, Executive Director, CFO, COO), and DAO / onchain governance leadership (if applicable) list the:

(a) full names,
(b) official titles,
(c) and prior experience of key team members.

For any non-existent entity, explicitly mention it does not exist. External links may be included but they will not factor into the score.

DAO Structure

Provide a structured description of the DAO's governance, powers, and economic rights. If a DAO does not exist, state so for each sub question. Even if there is no DAO, there must be an answer to (d). Address the lettered items below.

(a) IP ownership & control — State what IP the DAO owns or controls (e.g., codebases/repos, trademarks/brands). Note any license if relevant.
(b) Contract/admin powers — List on-chain or administrative authorities and limits: pause/upgrade roles (e.g., multisig pause), governance-executor authorities, and the method of authority for each (e.g., veto, majority, super-majority).
(c) Locked-token rights (conditional) — If locking/staking for additional rights exists, explain the additional rights and what tokenholders can and cannot decide. If no locking mechanism exists, leave absent.
(d) Current tokenholder governance rights and economic arrangements — If any, describe the current governance rights of tokenholders and any presently operative rights or arrangements relating to treasury actions, fee-routing, rewards, buybacks, or other protocol-controlled resources. If none, state that explicitly.
(e) Control surface reliance — If any, briefly describe the anticipated or possible evolution of the protocol's governance/control model.
(f) Dissolution authority — State who can dissolve/wind up the DAO and by what mechanism (e.g., on-chain vote threshold, board resolution of a legal wrapper).

Primary Foundation

For the Primary Foundation do the following independently. If a Foundation does not exist, state so for each sub question. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist. Definition: The primary Foundation can be explained as the entity which is directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.

(a) Entity — Type and jurisdiction.
(b) IP ownership & control — What IP the entity owns/controls (repos/code, trademarks/brand; license optional)
(c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration — If any, describe the current powers over DAO governance, treasury actions, protocol-controlled resources (e.g. revenue), token administration, or reward parameters, and the method/threshold for each.
(d) Powers over DevCo — Explain whether the foundation can exert direct or indirect influence over decision-making of the DevCo.
(e) Contract/admin powers — Pause/upgrade/governance-executor authorities, and the method/threshold for each (e.g., veto/majority/super-majority).
(f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies — Describe any current governance-approved, contractual, or programmatic mechanisms, if any, by which protocol-controlled resources, treasury assets, fees, revenue, rewards, or token distributions may be directed to this entity, its equityholders, contributors, or other participants. If no such mechanism currently exists, state that explicitly.

Primary DevCo

For the Primary DevCo do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly across each sub-question. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist. Definition: The primary DevCo can be explained as the entity which is directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.

(a) Entity — Type and jurisdiction.
(b) IP ownership & control — What IP the entity owns/controls (repos/code, trademarks/brand; license optional)
(c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration — If any, describe the current powers over DAO governance, treasury actions, protocol-controlled resources (e.g. revenue), token administration, or reward parameters, and the method/threshold for each.
(d) Powers over Foundation — Explain whether the DevCo can exert direct or indirect influence over decision-making of the Foundation.
(e) Contract/admin powers — Pause/upgrade/governance-executor authorities and the method/threshold for each (e.g., veto/majority/super-majority; "3/5 multisig").
(f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies — Describe any current governance-approved, contractual, or programmatic mechanisms, if any, by which protocol-controlled resources, treasury assets, fees, revenue, rewards, or token distributions may be directed to this entity, its equityholders, contributors, or other participants. If no such mechanism currently exists, state that explicitly. Do not discuss hypothetical future dividends, repurchases, or distributions unless formally adopted.

Token Supply & Allocations

Initial Allocation

Download the Worksheet, enable macros, complete the Initial Allocation sheet, then use Convert To CSV to export the file for import here. To make edits after importing, update the worksheet, use Convert To CSV again, then re-import the new CSV.

Airdrop Process

State the project's airdrop status plainly, and back it up:

Never conducted and none planned for TGE: state so plainly.
Planned but not yet executed: state the target user segments (e.g., "stakers of X," "Aave users") and the allocation method (e.g., proportional to balance or net position), and commit to publishing a recipient wallet list in a public channel and providing it to Blockworks quarterly until the initial TGE airdrop is fully completed.
Already executed: state the covered user segments and the allocation method, and point to a per-address source such as CSV/TSV/JSON files, a Dune table, a full Merkle dump, GitHub repo files embedding per-address allocations, or RPC endpoints that expose claim/amount data; explorer links alone do not count.

Transactions & Market Structures

Market Maker Agreements & Deals

Projects must disclose all material terms of market-making arrangements that affect token liquidity. If the project has no agreements or deals with market makers, state that explicitly. For each market maker, include in a table:

(a) Market maker's name — the market maker's name;
(b) Token allocation or loaned amount — the token allocation or loaned amount as a percentage of total supply;
(c) Duration/term of agreement — the duration/term of the agreement; and, where applicable,
(d) Name of agreement structure — label the financial vehicle being used in the agreement (i.e. loan, option/call, retainer model).

If no native tokens were loaned or allocated to market makers, state that explicitly; cash/fiat retainers or fees are not required for (b).

Exchange Agreements & Deals

Projects must disclose all material terms of centralized or decentralized exchange listings that affect token liquidity. For each listing, include in a table:

(a) Exchange name / DEX pool — the exchange name (and, for DEX, the specific pool/pair);
(b) Token allocation for listing — the token allocation supplied or committed for listing as a percentage of total supply;
(c) Term Duration — the duration/term of any listing lockups, liquidity, or incentive programs; and, where applicable,
(d) Native-token listing fees — whether any listing fees were paid in native tokens, with amounts (tokens or % of supply), recipients, and any vesting or lock terms tied to the partnership.

If the project has no agreements or deals with CEX or DEX, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit; cash/fiat fee amounts are not required for this item.

Financial Disclosures & Risks

Prior Token Sales & Fundraising

Disclose all prior token sales by the Project — including fundraising rounds, any material OTC sales to investors, and any discounted market-maker sales. For each sale, provide:

(a) Series Name;
(b) Early-Stage Investment Instrument used (i.e. SAFT, STAMP, SAFE, SAFE+Token Warrant, etc.);
(c) Date of sale (at least month & year);
(d) Number of tokens sold (or % of total supply);
(e) Vesting schedule.

If no prior sales occurred, state that explicitly (e.g., "No prior fundraising, OTC, or discounted MM sales have occurred.").

Previous Exploits Affecting The Native Token

If any, list prior exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply. This question is not asking about general protocol, application, or smart contract exploits unless the incident directly affected the native token itself. If no prior incidents, state this explicitly (e.g., "No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of YYYY-MM-DD").

(a) Date & component affected — Date (YYYY-MM or YYYY-MM-DD), chain(s)/component affected.
(b) Exploit vector summary — Plain-language summary of the exploit vector (what the hack was).
(c) Quantified impact — Quantified impact (assets/tokens affected or a clear "no loss of funds" statement).
(d) Remediation/response taken — Remediation/response taken (patches, upgrades, governance actions, compensation).
(e) Current status — Current status (resolved, in litigation, under investigation, refunded, etc.).
(f) References — Link(s) to post-mortem/advisory/PR.

Material Risk Factors (Regulation, Technology, Token Economics)

Describe material risk factors across the three categories below. Each category includes prompts to address at a minimum.

(a) Regulatory, Legal & Tax Risks — Describe how evolving laws and regulations could affect the project by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
Impact of Regulatory Change on TGE and Listings: (If applicable) How could evolving or conflicting laws and regulations affect your ability to complete the TGE, deliver tokens to purchasers, and list or maintain the token on trading venues in key jurisdictions?
Entity-Level Regulatory Impact: (If applicable) How could regulatory or legal changes impact your core entities (Foundation, DevCo, DAO, affiliated service providers), including enforcement actions, licensing requirements, or forced changes to structure or operations?
Tokenholder Tax Treatment: (If applicable) What uncertainties exist around how tokenholders may be taxed, and make clear that tokenholders are responsible for understanding their own tax obligations?
Jurisdictional & User Access Restrictions: (If applicable) If the project restricts access for certain jurisdictions or user types (e.g., U.S. persons, sanctioned countries, retail vs. professional), what are those restrictions and what risks do they create for users and for the project?
(b) Protocol, Technology & Security Risks — Describe risks to network and contract reliability, correctness, and safety by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
Bugs and Design Flaws: (If applicable) What bugs, design flaws, or implementation errors could exist in your core protocol code, smart contracts, and any bridges, rollups, or oracles that you depend on, and how could these lead to loss of funds or disruption of the protocol?
Security Measures & Their Limitations: (If applicable) What security measures have you taken (audits, formal verification, bug bounties), and what types of failures might these measures still fail to detect or prevent?
(c) Token Economics, Unlocks & Incentive Risks — Describe how the token's economic design and supply schedule could affect holders by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
Critical Economic Assumptions: (If applicable) Which economic assumptions (e.g., staking yields, fee revenue, liquidity incentives, MEV capture, demand for blockspace) are critical for protocol security, utility, and governance, and what happens if those assumptions fail?
Governance Control over Monetary Policy & Rewards: (If applicable) To what extent can governance change monetary policy, fee parameters, or reward allocations (e.g., inflation rate, treasury flows, incentive programs), and how could such changes adversely affect tokenholders?

This Token Transparency Filing is provided for general informational purposes only. Blockworks reviews completeness only and does not verify or warrant the accuracy of individual answers. Vimen is solely responsible for the content, accuracy, and legality of its disclosures.