Project & Team
Description of Project
Provide a narrative description of the purpose of the project.
Disclaimer: This Token Transparency Filing is prepared by ENS Labs Ltd., a Singapore company limited by guarantee, speaks as of August 4, 2026, and is provided for general informational purposes only. Neither ENS Labs Ltd. nor Blockworks makes any representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the information provided, and each disclaims liability for any errors or omissions in the content or for any actions taken in reliance on this content.
This filing does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, tokens, or other financial instruments, and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax or other professional advice.
ENS Labs Ltd. undertakes no obligation to update or revise this filing except as required by applicable law.
(a) Problem the project solves
ENS is the most widely used decentralized naming protocol on Ethereum that maps human-readable names such as alice.eth to machine-readable identifiers including Ethereum addresses, other cryptocurrency addresses, content hashes, metadata, and more, which improves the usability of blockchain addresses and online identity (https://basics.ensdao.org/about-ens; https://docs.ens.domains/learn/protocol/).
(b) Operational priorities
Public materials show that ENS prioritizes operating a durable naming system, funding ongoing development, and supporting community-led growth. ENS says more than 35 million names have been registered directly (e.g., .eth domains) or through ecosystem name systems like Base, Uniswap and World. The ENS constitution says income generated to the ENS treasury is to be used first to ensure the long-term viability of ENS and to fund continuing development and improvement of the ENS system, with excess funds available for other web3 public goods (https://basics.ensdao.org/about-ens; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/constitution/).
(c) High-level project overview
ENS is a distributed, open, and extensible naming system on Ethereum in which top-level domains such as .eth are managed by registrar smart contracts, registrations are executed through smart contracts, and ownership is secured by Ethereum (https://docs.ens.domains/learn/protocol/). The ENS registry is the core contract at the heart of ENS resolution; all ENS lookups start by querying it, and the registry records the owner, resolver, and TTL for each domain (https://docs.ens.domains/registry/ens/). ENS also supports reverse resolution and importing DNS names through DNSSEC, while .eth names can be used for websites and web3 sign-in flows (https://docs.ens.domains/learn/protocol/; https://basics.ensdao.org/about-ens).
(d) Primary token functions
The $ENS token is an ERC-20 governance token on Ethereum used to govern key components of the ENS protocol, and each token represents one vote in the DAO (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-token). Holders can delegate voting power of their tokens to delegates, who can submit and vote on proposals related to protocol changes, governance and treasury management (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-token; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/governance/process/). The only official governance token for ENS DAO is token.ensdao.eth on Ethereum mainnet (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/token/).
(e) Control surface reliance
ENS is governed through the ENS DAO, which governs the ENS protocol and treasury (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/). ENS holders cannot vote or create proposals until they delegate their voting rights, and delegation does not lock tokens. Submission of social proposals requires a minimum of 10,000 delegated ENS through off-chain Snapshot voting, while submission of executable proposals requires a minimum of 100,000 delegated ENS through the on-chain Governor contract. Executable proposals are subject to a seven-day voting period and a minimum two-day timelock (https://basics.ensdao.org/proposals; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/submit/). Public sources also show treasury and registry control concentrated in DAO-linked contracts: the ENS Registry is owned by the ENS Root, which is owned by the ENS DAO Wallet, and registration revenue goes to smart contracts controlled by the ENS DAO (https://docs.ens.domains/registry/ens/; https://basics.ensdao.org/protocol-revenue).
The ENS governance model may continue to evolve through tokenholder-approved proposals submitted through the ENS DAO’s public governance process. The relevant proposal was approved by tokenholders on August 8, 2026, Next Era of ENS DAO: Empowering the ENS Foundation(https://discuss.ens.domains/t/draft-executable-next-era-of-ens-dao-empowering-the-ens-foundation/22329). The proposal transferred administrative control of the ENS DAO’s endowment to the ENS Foundation, together with related intellectual property arrangements, while the operational wallet, DAO-held ENS tokens, and protocol control remain with ENS tokenholders.
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.
Labs / DevCo
Full Name | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|
Nick Johnson | Founder | Nick Johnson founded ENS in 2017 (https://basics.ensdao.org/about-ens). He was a software engineer at Google, became a core contributor at the Ethereum Foundation, and worked on Swarm before developing the naming system that became ENS (https://ens.domains/blog/post/beginners-guide-to-ethereum-and-ens). |
Jeff Lau | CTO | Jeff Lau is a cofounder of ENS and CTO at ENS Labs. He joined the ENS team in 2017 building and leading the first two iterations of the ENS app. From there he has contributed to the core ENS smart contracts before transitioning into leadership and technical strategy for ENS. |
Katherine Wu | COO | Katherine Wu is the Chief Operating Officer of ENS Labs, where she oversees the company’s growth initiatives, strategic direction, and operations. Previously, she was the Senior Lead at Coinbase Ventures, where she led investments and played a key role in establishing it as one of the most active corporate venture funds. Katherine has over a decade of experience spanning legal, investment, and advisory roles, working with premier projects and industry-leading companies in the web3 space. Before Coinbase, Katherine was a Principal at Notation Capital, an early-stage venture capital firm, and was the first business hire at Messari, a leading provider of crypto market intelligence products. |
Foundation
Full Name | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|
Alex Van de Sande | Director | Alex Van de Sande was an early member of the Ethereum Foundation, where he worked on design and user experience for Ethereum (https://vandesande.design/) |
Kevin Gaspar | Director | Kevin Gaspar (validator.eth) is a long-time Ethereum and ENS contributor, involved with Ethereum since 2014 and ENS since its launch. He works on ecosystem and community initiatives at ENS Labs, runs ENS Fairy, and serves on the ENS DAO Security Council (https://discuss.ens.domains/t/6-47-social-proposal-for-a-new-security-council/22219/14). |
Nick Johnson | Director | Nick Johnson was a software engineer at Google, later joined the Ethereum Foundation as a core contributor, and worked on Swarm before spinning ENS into an independent organization (https://ens.domains/blog/post/beginners-guide-to-ethereum-and-ens). |
DAO / Onchain Governance
Full Name | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|
Nick Johnson | Council Member | Founder of ENS |
Hudson Jameson | Council Member | Ethereum Foundation (2016–2021): coordinated network upgrades; emergency response team for on/off-chain security events. |
Pablo Sabbatella | Council Member | Founder, Opsek — operational security audits/training for Web3 orgs (Optimism, Electric Capital, Sky, and 50+ others). |
Colton Liberacki | Council Member | Governance Lead KPK |
Alex Van de Sande | Council Member | ENS Foundation director for several years. |
Griff Green | Council Member | Previous member, ENS Security Council. |
Alex Netto | Council Member | Previous member, ENS Security Council. |
Kevin Gaspar | Council Member | ENS Foundation director since Oct 2021 (4+ years); fiduciary responsibility for the DAO's legal entity, executing DAO instructions and signing agreements on its behalf. |
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).
(a) IP ownership & control
ENS DAO exists and exercises governance authority over specified ENS protocol contracts and ENS DAO treasury through tokenholder-approved proposals (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/).
The ENS trademark portfolio is held by ENS Labs Ltd. on behalf of the DAO (see Item 5(b)), and the core ENS repositories are maintained by ENS Labs and published under open-source licenses. Control of the protocol's core onchain assets rests with the DAO as described in Item 3(b): the ENS Registry is owned by the ENS Root, which is owned by the ENS DAO Wallet, and registration revenue flows to contracts the DAO controls. The core ENS contracts and libraries are published under open-source licenses (principally MIT), as described in Item 3(b). Under the active on-chain executable proposal, Next Era of ENS DAO: Empowering the ENS Foundation (see Item 1(e)), registered intellectual property associated with the ENS project, including trademarks currently held by ENS Labs Ltd., is anticipated to be consolidated in the ENS Foundation, subject to approval through the DAO governance process.
(b) Contract/admin powers
Pause roles: none exist. The core ENS contracts contain no pause function.
Upgrade roles: none exist as admin keys. The core contracts are not upgradeable proxies; protocol changes are made by the DAO replacing components (for example, adding or removing .eth registrar controllers or changing resolvers) through an executable proposal, which requires 100,000 delegated ENS to submit, a 1% quorum, majority approval, a seven-day voting period, and a minimum two-day timelock (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/governance/process/).
Powers of the named contracts: wallet.ensdao.eth is the DAO's timelock and treasury wallet; it executes passed proposals, holds DAO operating funds, and owns the ENS Root, which owns the ENS Registry, giving the DAO control of TLD ownership and .eth registrar configuration, including pricing. token.ensdao.eth is the $ENS token contract; as its owner, the DAO may mint up to 2% of total supply no more than once per year, and no other party can mint (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-token). governor.ensdao.eth is the Governor contract; it receives proposal submissions and delegate votes and queues passed proposals into the timelock, and holds no funds or protocol powers of its own. The Security Council is a 5-of-8 multisig whose sole power is cancelling queued timelocked proposals it deems malicious; it cannot propose, amend, or initiate governance actions (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/security-council/).
(c) Locked-token rights (conditional)
ENS holders cannot vote or create proposals until they delegate, and delegation does not lock tokens. Tokenholders may delegate voting power to themselves or another address and may change their delegate. Voting and proposal-submission rights depend on delegated voting power and the applicable governance thresholds (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/governance/process/). No locking or staking mechanism confers additional rights.
(d) Current tokenholder governance rights and economic arrangements
ENS governance is proposal-based. Executable proposals are proposals for smart contract operations executed by accounts the DAO controls, and they have a 1% quorum requirement, with minimum of 50% approval to pass (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/governance/process/). Social proposals also have a 1% quorum requirement, with minimum of 50% approval, and constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority and at least 1% of all tokens participating (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/governance/process/; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/constitution/).
Delegates use delegated $ENS to submit and vote on proposals related to protocol changes and DAO treasury spending, while registration revenue goes to smart contracts controlled by the ENS DAO and the constitution says treasury income is used first for ENS viability and ongoing development (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-token; https://basics.ensdao.org/protocol-revenue; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/constitution/). Public sources reviewed did not identify any tokenholder right to dividends or revenue distributions.
(e) Control surface reliance
The ENS governance model may continue to evolve through tokenholder-approved proposals. A relevant proposal was approved by tokenholders on August 8, 2026, Next Era of ENS DAO: Empowering the ENS Foundation(https://discuss.ens.domains/t/draft-executable-next-era-of-ens-dao-empowering-the-ens-foundation/22329). The proposal transferred administrative control of the ENS DAO’s endowment to the ENS Foundation, together with related intellectual property arrangements, while the operational wallet, DAO-held ENS tokens, and protocol control remain with ENS tokenholders. submitted through the ENS DAO’s public governance process. The proposal was approved by token holders on August 8, 2026 [https://www.tally.xyz/gov/ens/proposal/80619211450810140112687536515944199882433060764177806587986222097717655810120](https://www.tally.xyz/gov/ens/proposal/80619211450810140112687536515944199882433060764177806587986222097717655810120))
(f) Dissolution authority
The ENS Foundation materials say the DAO may instruct the directors to take action on behalf of the Foundation and that the Foundation's Articles of Incorporation give significant powers to the ENS DAO, while the token allocation post says tokenholders have the right to appoint and dismiss directors and to instruct the Foundation to take real-world actions (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/foundation/; https://paragraph.com/%40ens/ens-token-allocation-claiming-opens-nov-8). The corporate documents further provide that ENS tokenholders constitute the "Council" and that the Foundation must be wound up if the Council delivers notice to the Foundation declaring that it is to be wound up. Following satisfaction of the Foundation's debts and liabilities, any surplus assets must be transferred to one or more charitable objects selected by the Council and may not be distributed to members or directors.
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 was directly/indirectly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch. If the original Foundation has been dissolved and in its place a "new Foundation" was created, then detail the "new Foundation".
- (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.
(a) Entity
The ENS Foundation is an exempted foundation company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, limited by guarantee, with no share capital and limited liability (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/foundation/).
(b) IP ownership & control
The ENS Foundation currently holds no registered intellectual property. The privacy policy for ens.domains identifies the site as operated by the Foundation. Under the active onchain executable proposal, Next Era of ENS DAO: Empowering the ENS Foundation (see Item 1(e)), it is anticipated that registered intellectual property associated with the ENS project, including the ENS trademarks, would be held by the Foundation, subject to approval through the DAO governance process and completion of the related restructuring steps. The Foundation has no subsidiary entities.
(c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration
The ENS Foundation holds no powers over DAO governance, treasury actions, protocol-controlled resources, token administration, or reward parameters, except that under the proposal described in Item 1(e), approved by ENS tokenholders on August 8, 2026, the Foundation Board holds administrative control of the ENS DAO's endowment, with all transactions subject to a nine-day timelock and Security Council cancellation.
(d) Powers over DevCo
ENS Labs Ltd. and the ENS Foundation are separate legal entities. The ENS Foundation serves as a key counterparty to ENS Labs and provides grant funding to support ENS Labs' software development activities pursuant to DAO-approved funding arrangements. Foundation directors will have funding control over ENS Labs, which requires a majority approval from independent directors.
(e) Contract/admin powers
The Foundation holds no contract or admin powers over the protocol.
(f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies
The Foundation is a non-profit and cannot pay out dividends to its directors or members (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/foundation/). Public sources also say directors may ask the DAO for reimbursement of listed Foundation operating fees when incurred (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/foundation/).
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 was directly/indirectly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch. If the original DevCo has been dissolved and in its place a "new DevCo" was created, then detail the "new DevCo".
- (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.
(a) Entity
The primary DevCo-like entity identified in public sources is ENS Labs Ltd., formerly True Names Ltd. (renamed 12 September 2022). Public sources identify True Names Ltd. as the original ENS development company incubated at the Ethereum Foundation in 2017 before being spun out as an independent organization in 2018 (https://ens.domains/blog/author/enslabs.eth; https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-labs; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/2.1/).
ENS Labs Ltd. is a Singapore company limited by guarantee, responsible for core ENS software development.
(b) IP ownership & control
ENS Labs Ltd. owns the public ENS code repositories in the ensdomains GitHub organization (https://github.com/ensdomains), including ens-contracts (the core ENS contracts), ens-app-v3 (the ENS Manager app), ensjs, ens-metadata-service, and docs, each published under the open-source licenses listed below.
Public sources indicate that ENS Labs owns or controls the ENS trademark portfolio, including registrations for the ENS name and logo in multiple jurisdictions. These include the ENS trademark and logo registered in Singapore under registration number 40201821218Y (registered on 18 October 2018) and in the European Union under registration number 019141121 (registered on 20 September 2025) (https://digitalhub.ipos.gov.sg/FAMN/eservice/IP4SG/MN_TmSimilarMarkSearch; https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/).
ENS public repositories use the following open-source licenses: MIT License (https://github.com/ensdomains/ens-contracts/blob/master/LICENSE.txt), BSD 2-Clause License (https://github.com/ensdomains/ens/blob/master/LICENSE), Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) (https://github.com/ensdomains/docs/blob/master/LICENSE), The Unlicense (https://github.com/ensdomains/name-reservations/blob/master/LICENSE), and GNU General Public License v3.0 (GPL-3.0) (https://github.com/ensdomains/pancake-frontend-candidate-010/blob/main/LICENSE).
(c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration
ENS Labs reserves none of the above powers.
(d) Powers over Foundation
ENS Labs Ltd. has no influence over the ENS Foundation. It holds no role in Foundation governance and no power to appoint, remove, or instruct Foundation directors; those powers rest with ENS tokenholders. ENS Labs Ltd. and the ENS Foundation are separate legal entities, and the Foundation serves as a key counterparty to ENS Labs, providing grant funding for ENS Labs' software development pursuant to DAO-approved funding arrangements.
(e) Contract/admin powers
ENS Labs reserves none of the above powers.
(f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies
Currently active: a DAO-approved grant stream to ENS Labs totaling $9.7m annually (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/2.1/; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/5.22/). No other mechanism currently directs protocol-controlled resources, treasury assets, fees, revenue, rewards, or token distributions to ENS Labs, its members, or its contributors. Historically, ENS Labs was founded with a $1 million Ethereum Foundation grant, later received grants from Chainlink, Protocol Labs, and others, was funded by ETH raised in the short-name auction, and has never received VC funding (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-labs).
Affiliated Protocol Contributor
Definition (for this section): An Affiliated Protocol Contributor (APC) is a non-issuer company - not the protocol's primary Foundation or DevCo - that materially contributes to the protocol's code, operations, governance, or funding. For example, Blockworks Advisory would be considered an APC of Ethena because it materially contributes to its operations through Ethena's risk council. Provide a structured description per APC. If no APCs exist, state that explicitly across each sub-question. Items below apply per APC.
- (a) Identity & role — Legal name, entity type, jurisdiction, and role (e.g., core development, security, infrastructure, market making, operations).
- (b) Parameter control & scope — For each existing APC, if any, what major protocol parameters the APC controls; include the method of authority (e.g., veto, majority, super-majority). If none, say so.
- (c) Contract/admin powers — For each existing APC, if any, provide the pause/upgrade powers (e.g., multisig pause), governance-executor authorities and limitations; include the method of authority for each (e.g. veto, majority, super-majority). If none, say so.
- (d) Compensation and material economic arrangements — For each existing APC, if protocol-generated resources or economic value is dynamically routed to the APC, describe the arrangement. If applicable, include the resource sources, routing mechanism, payment frequency, and duration. If no protocol resources or resources-linked economics are routed to the APC, state that explicitly.
(a) Identity & role
There are no APCs as described under the definition above, however, there are teams who have received annual funding from the ENS DAO via grants for specialized projects.
(b) Parameter control & scope
There are no APCs as described under the definition above, however, there are teams who have received annual funding from the ENS DAO via grants for specialized projects.
(c) Contract/admin powers
There are no APCs as described under the definition above, however, there are teams who have received annual funding from the ENS DAO via grants for specialized projects.
(d) Compensation and material economic arrangements
There are no APCs as described under the definition above, however, there are teams who have received annual funding from the ENS DAO via grants for specialized projects.
Token Supply & Allocation
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. The table is the final answer.
Ticker | Date | Allocation Category Name | Recipient Type | Allocation % | Allocation Tokens | TGE Unlock % | TGE Unlock Tokens | Cliff Months | Cliff Unlock % | Linear Vesting Months | Cadence Months | Circulating Treatment | Notes on what each category is used for | If applicable: Contract / Wallet address |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Community Treasury (Unlocked) | Community Treasury (Unlocked) | 0.05 | 5000000 | 0.05 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Community Treasury (Locked) | Community Treasury (Locked) | 0.45 | 45000000 | 0.45 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 48 Months | 1 | Conditional | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Airdrop | Airdrop | 0.25 | 25000000 | 0.25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Core Contributors | Core Contributors | 0.18955 | 18955000 | 0.18955 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Select Integrations | Select Integrations | 0.025 | 2500000 | 0.025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | External Contributors | External Contributors | 0.0129 | 1290000 | 0.0129 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Future Contributors | Future Contributors | 0.0125 | 1250000 | 0.0125 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Launch Advisors | Launch Advisors | 0.0058 | 580000 | 0.0058 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Keyholders | Keyholders | 0.0025 | 250000 | 0.0025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Active Discord Users | Active Discord Users | 0.00125 | 125000 | 0.00125 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No | ||
ENS | 10/31/2021 | Translators | Translators | 0.0005 | 50000 | 0.0005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n/a | n/a | No |
Vesting Insider Tokens
If there are no post-TGE token compensation plans, state explicitly they do not exist across each sub-question. If there are, explain each of (a)–(b) below.
- (a) Post-TGE employee lock as % of total supply — State the current total amount of tokens locked attributable to post-TGE employees, expressed as a percentage of total supply.
- (b) Typical post-TGE vesting schedule — Describe the standard vesting terms used for post-TGE grants, including: cliff length (or "no cliff"), vesting frequency (e.g., monthly/quarterly), and total duration.
(a) Post-TGE employee lock as % of total supply
No post-TGE token compensation plans exist. 0% of total supply is currently locked attributable to post-TGE employees.
(b) Typical post-TGE vesting schedule
No post-TGE token compensation plans exist, so no standard vesting terms (cliff, vesting frequency, or duration) apply.
Disclosure of Token Advisory Billings
Disclose current token-based compensation for external advisors and service providers (e.g., legal, marketing, technical, growth) funded from the on-chain treasury. Do not disclose individual payments to advisors receiving fiat-only compensation. If there are no advisors contracted in tokens then state across each sub-question that no token-based advisory compensation exists.
- (a) Existence — Whether any such token-based payments or advisory commitments exist (or explicitly state that no token-based compensation for advisory commitments exist).
- (b) Total token allocation — For all existing token-based advisors, disclose the total token allocation across all advisory services.
- (c) Payer entity — For each existing token-based advisor, share the payer entity (e.g., Foundation, Labs/DevCo, DAO/treasury).
- (d) Description of advisory/services — For each existing token-based advisor, provide a brief description of the advisory/services (e.g., "legal and regulatory advisory," "growth and BD support," "security advisory").
(a) Existence
Token-based advisory compensation does not exist
(b) Total token allocation
Token-based advisory compensation does not exist
(c) Payer entity
Token-based advisory compensation does not exist
(d) Description of advisory/services
Token-based advisory compensation does not exist
KOL Marketing Activities
Disclose ongoing KOL/influencer relationships that partially or fully received tokens for payment. You do not need to disclose KOL/influencers that do not receive tokens for payment. If no KOL engagements exist, state for each sub-question that no KOL engagements exist.
- (a) Existence & scope — State plainly whether KOLs receive tokens for payment.
- (b) Usernames & roles — List usernames/handles (with platforms) for KOLs that received token-based compensation and describe the nature of their activities. Legal names are not required.
- (c) Token allocation & vesting/locks — Provide the aggregate token amount across all such arrangements and summarize vesting, lock, or release terms.
(a) Existence & scope
No KOL engagements exist.
(b) Usernames & roles
No KOL engagements exist.
(c) Token allocation & vesting/locks
No KOL engagements exist.
Labelled Unissued & Operational Token Wallets
For each wallet that holds Unissued Tokens or is essential to operations (e.g., foundation, operations, treasury, investor reserve), disclose:
- (a) A category label explaining the wallet's primary function.
- (b) chain the wallet is on.
- (c) The unique address of the wallet.
- (d) The mechanism of control (e.g., DAO, multisig).
- (e) One verification link to a blockchain explorer.
Definition: Unissued Supply = tokens authorized by the contract but not yet issued to any party; where they sit (treasury or mint authority) does not change that they are unissued. For instance: if a token has a total supply cap of 1B, and 400M tokens have been issued to investors, the team, and users (whether vested or unlocked), then those 400M count as issued supply. The remaining 600M are authorized but unissued supply, even if they are already minted into a DAO treasury wallet.
Title | Primary Function | Chain | Address | Control Mechanism | Explorer Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENS DAO Treasury (DAO Wallet) | DAO operating funds | Ethereum | 0xFe89cc7aBB2C4183683ab71653C4cdc9B02D44b7 | Safe Multisig | |
ENS Endowment | Long-term reserve fund | Ethereum | 0x4f2083f5fBeDe34C2714aFfb3105539775F7Fe64 | Historically a Safe multisig managed day-to-day by karpatkey under a DAO mandate. | |
ENS Labs Wallet (Cold Wallet) | Entity operating funds | Ethereum | 0x690F0581ecECcF8389c223170778Cd9D029606f2 | Controlled by ENS Labs | |
ENS Token Lock | ENS DAO Community Treasury | Ethereum | 0xD7A029Db2585553978190dB5e85eC724Aa4dF23f | Non-custodial linear-vesting contract |
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).
Market Maker Name | Token Allocation Committed | Term Duration | Structure Name |
|---|---|---|---|
None. ENS Labs confirms there are no market maker agreements. | None. ENS Labs confirms there are no market maker agreements. | None. ENS Labs confirms there are no market maker agreements. | None. ENS Labs confirms there are no market maker agreements. |
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.
Exchange Name | Token Allocation Committed | Term Duration | Native Token Listing Fees |
|---|---|---|---|
ENS Labs confirms there are no CEX or DEX agreements involving token allocations, lockups, liquidity commitments, or native-token listing fees. $ENS is available on centralized and decentralized exchanges (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-token) | None. | N/A. | N/A/ |
Liquidity Deals and Market Activity
If a category does not exist or is not applicable, make that clear in plain language.
- (a) Token repurchases or secondary-market accumulations (if any) — Source of funds, treatment (burn, treasury retention, POL, redistribution, or other), policy controller (who can change the secondary-market accumulation strategy), and whether those tokens may be re-used, re-issued, or permanently removed from circulation.
- (b) Protocol-owned liquidity (POL) (if any) — Where deployed, total token or dollar size across deployments, policy controller (who can change the POL strategy), and unwind/exit policy.
- (c) Liquidity deals / purchased TVL (if any) — The total size across all deals, and where the capital participates - no counterparty names needed.
- (d) Token-secured loans/lines (incl. against unissued tokens) (if any) — Principal, gross position size, collateral, counterparties, and unwind/exit policy.
(a) Token repurchases or secondary-market accumulations (if any)
Not applicable. No investor token sale occurred.
(b) Protocol-owned liquidity (POL) (if any)
Not applicable
(c) Liquidity deals / purchased TVL (if any)
None
(d) Token-secured loans/lines (incl. against unissued tokens) (if any)
None
Resource Disclosures
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.").
Series Name | Investment Instrument | Date Of Sale | Number of tokens sold | Vesting Schedule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Investor allocation | Investor allocation | Not applicable. No investor token sale occurred. | Not applicable. | Not applicable. No investor token sale occurred. |
Operational Funding, Economic Flows, and Resource Provisioning
Provide a narrative description of the Project's material funding sources, economic flows, and operational provisioning, broken out by entity: Foundation, Lab/DevCo, and DAO. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly.
- (a) Entity existence — Explicitly state whether each of Foundation, Lab/DevCo, and DAO exists.
- (b) Material sources of funding or economic inflows — For each existing entity, describe its primary sources of operational funding or economic inflows, if any (e.g., service fees, grants, donations, treasury reserves, token reserves, staking rewards, validator/sequencer income, partnership payments, retained revenue, or other protocol-related receipts).
- (c) Operational use of resources — For each existing entity, briefly describe how those resources are generally used (e.g., development, operations, security, ecosystem support, grants, liquidity support).
- (d) Onchain Resource Usage — For each existing entity, provide links to public dashboards and token holder relations reports that help explain on-chain financial activity, treasury activity, fee flows, rewards, or other protocol-controlled resources. Make certain to explain what each link is for.
(a) Entity existence
The ENS Foundation, ENS Labs, and ENS DAO exist.
(b) Material sources of funding or economic inflows
ENS DAO
The ENS protocol generates revenue from the registration of .eth ENS names.
.eth ENS names can be registered on app.ens.domains, as well as third-party registration platforms, such as ENS Fairy, ENS.vision, and Rainbow wallet.
All revenue generated by the registration of .eth ENS names goes to smart contracts that are controlled by the ENS DAO.
Realtime protocol revenue can always been seen on Google Data Studio and Dune.
ENS DAO funding may be distributed in accordance with Article III of the ENS DAO Constitution, which provides:
Any income generated to the ENS treasury is to be used first of all to ensure the long-term viability of ENS, and to fund continuing development and improvement of the ENS system. Funds that are not reasonably required to achieve this goal may be used to fund other public goods within web3 as ENS governance sees fit.
ENS governance will not allocate funds to a team or individual who does not commit to uphold the same principles outlined in this constitution in their use of the allocated funds.
ENS Labs
Public governance materials also say True Names Ltd. requested a daily $11,500 USDC grant stream for calendar year 2022, backdated to January 1, 2022, and that ENS DAO later approved an additional daily 15,075.33 USDC stream to ENS Labs starting January 1, 2025, for a total 26,575.34 USDC/day (https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/2.1/; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/5.22/). | ENS Labs also says it was funded by ETH raised in the short-name auction and has never received VC funding, while public sources continue to say no investor token allocation was made at launch. Public governance materials also say ENS proposed converting 6,000 ETH to USDC for operating expenses tied to ENS Labs, service-provider streams, and DAO working groups (https://basics.ensdao.org/ens-labs; https://paragraph.com/%40ens/ens-token-allocation-claiming-opens-nov-8; https://docs.ens.domains/dao/proposals/6.1/). | Not applicable. These grants and budget streams did not involve token vesting.
ENS Foundation
Funding for the foundation
- a single transfer of 1,000,000 ENS, restricted to Foundation employee compensation to support the Foundation in funding future employee compensation as the Foundation matures
- Treasury management is implemented with a dedicated security layer: the Foundation Board, acting through approved signers, assumes administrative control of the Endowment Safe (endowment.ensdao.eth, approximately $65 million in ETH and stablecoins as of July 2026)
More details about the foundation and funding can be found in the proposal here.
(c) Operational use of resources
ENS DAO - Security, ecosystem support
ENS Labs - Development of core protocol, operations, security.
ENS Foundation - Operations, grants
(d) Onchain Resource Usage
The ENS Foundation:
- https://app.syncrone.fi/public/ens(endowment)
- https://etherscan.io/address/0x9C7dB6B1085ec4D07f75c0BD91AD3FcD368fA19E(primary funding)
ENS Labs:
- https://etherscan.io/address/0x690F0581eCecCf8389c223170778cD9D029606F2(primary funding)
- https://discuss.ens.domains/t/ens-labs-quarterly-progress-reports/20565(quarterly updates)
ENS DAO:
- https://etherscan.io/address/wallet.ensdao.eth(dao funding)
- Realtime protocol revenue can been seen on Google Data Studio and Dune
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.
(a) Date & component affected
There is no record of exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply as of 2026-08-25.
(b) Exploit vector summary
There is no record of exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply as of 2026-08-25.
(c) Quantified impact
There is no record of exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply, as such there has not be loss of funds.
(d) Remediation/response taken
There is no record of exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply as of 2026-08-25.
(e) Current status
There is no record of exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply as of 2026-08-25.
(f) References
There is no record of exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply as of 2026-08-25.
[Optional] Offchain Foundation Or DevCo Income Statement
Provide a single income statement, expense summary, or comparable operating statement for the primary Foundation or Developer Company. A consolidated or entity-level presentation is acceptable. Balance Sheet and Statement of Cash Flows may be included but are not required. This item is intended to provide transparency into offchain operating resources and expenditures only.
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. Ethereum Name Service is solely responsible for the content, accuracy, and legality of its disclosures.