Question
Provide a concise narrative that clearly states each of (a)–(e) below.
Response
MultiversX is a sharded public blockchain designed to deliver simultaneous decentralization, security, scalability, efficiency, and interoperability. The core problem the protocol addresses is the inability of prior-generation blockchain architectures to achieve all five of these properties concurrently — a constraint sometimes called the scalability trilemma.
(Source: MultiversX Ecosystem Overview, MultiversX Whitepaper)
The MultiversX Foundation funds ongoing operations across six categories: core protocol R&D (56.7% of 2025 spend through Q3), developer platform work (11.8%), ecosystem grants and developer support (11.3%), product development (14.5%), marketing and community (4.1%), and operations, legal, and compliance (1.6%). The Foundation also maintains an active vulnerability disclosure program and coordinates security response through a dedicated security reporting channel.
MultiversX implements a distributed transactional computation protocol built on adaptive state sharding and Secure Proof of Stake consensus. The network splits both state and network participants across multiple shards, reassigning validators across epochs to prevent collusion. The current architecture also supports Sovereign Chains (application-specific chains secured by MultiversX), ESDT native tokens, smart contracts via the MultiversX Virtual Machine, and cross-chain bridging.
EGLD is the native coin of the MultiversX network. It is used for transaction fees, smart contract and token operation costs, validator staking, delegation, and on-chain governance voting by staked or delegated users. Following the governance-approved economic evolution (94.55% approval, late 2025), the token economics now incorporate tail inflation with a 10% fee burn and 90% of base fees directed to builders.
Protocol changes are governed by stake-weighted on-chain governance, with proposal creation requiring a 500 EGLD fee and staked or delegated users holding voting rights proportional to their stake. The Foundation serves as an additional stewardship layer, with the Foundation board acting as custodian of treasury assets and the Foundation funding core protocol R&D and ecosystem initiatives. MultiversX Lab operates as a commercially separate entity developing user-facing products. The October 2025 economic overhaul — transitioning from a capped supply to a tail-inflation model with burn mechanisms — passed on-chain with 94.55% approval, demonstrating that material protocol parameter changes are executed through the governance mechanism rather than unilaterally.
(Source: Governance Overview, State of the Foundation Report, MultiversX Economic Evolution Governance Proposal)
Question
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.
Response
Full Name | Entity | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|---|
Beniamin Mincu | Labs | CEO, Co-Founder | Led marketing, business, and community for the NEM core team (May 2014 – Oct 2015); co-founded and served as CEO of Metachain Capital, a digital asset investment fund (Sep 2016 – Dec 2017). |
Lucian Mincu | Labs | CIO, Co-Founder | Engineer with years of experience designing complex infrastructure and network solutions for the German government. |
Lucian Todea | Labs | COO, Co-Founder | Entrepreneur with over 20 years of technology-sector experience; founder and CEO of Soft 32 and mobilPay; angel investor in TypingDNA and SmartBill. |
The Foundation report identifies the Foundation board as the ultimate custodian of treasury assets and describes the board as operating independently. No public source names the individual members of the Foundation board or identifies a named president or executive director. | Foundation | ||
The MultiversX protocol operates on-chain governance through the governance module. There is no separate named DAO leadership body. Governance authority rests with staked and delegated EGLD holders, with voting power proportional to stake. No named governance officers or DAO stewards are publicly identified. | DAO | ||
Blockworks note: (Source: Who is building MultiversX?, CryptoSlate — Beniamin Mincu, Governance Overview) |
Question
Provide a structured description of the DAO's governance, powers, and economic rights. If a DAO does not exist, state so. Address the lettered items below. Even if there is no DAO, there must be an answer to (d).
Response
No public source confirms which entity — MultiversX Foundation, MultiversX Labs S.R.L., or another entity — holds registered IP, trademark rights, or protocol codebase ownership for MultiversX. The Terms of Use state that the website and its contents are owned by "MultiversX, its licensors, or other providers" without naming a legal entity.
(Source: Terms of Use)
On-chain governance is implemented via special governance transactions. Any user can create a proposal by paying a 500 EGLD non-refundable fee and specifying a commit hash and voting epoch window. Any staked or delegated user may vote during the active voting period, with voting power proportional to stake. Delegation and liquid staking contracts can forward votes on behalf of delegators. Proposal outcomes are determined by configurable quorum, acceptance, and veto thresholds. Governance configuration parameters are updatable by governance contract owner calls.
(Source: Governance Overview)
Staked and delegated EGLD holders may vote on protocol governance proposals during active voting periods. Voting power is proportional to stake size. Liquid staking and delegation contracts can forward votes on behalf of underlying holders. Staking does not grant any additional rights beyond proportional governance voting.
(Source: Governance Overview)
EGLD stakers and validators earn staking rewards from protocol emissions and a share of transaction fees. The governance-approved economic evolution (passed late 2025) directs 90% of base transaction fees to builders and burns 10% of base fees, with tail inflation funding validator rewards. Public sources do not disclose any formal mechanism for EGLD holders to claim treasury distributions or Foundation assets.
(Source: Economics, MultiversX Economic Evolution Blog)
No public source describes a formal mechanism for dissolving or winding up the MultiversX DAO or its governance structure, whether by on-chain vote, Foundation board resolution, or any other threshold-based mechanism.
Question
For the Primary Foundation do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist.
Definitions: The primary Foundation and DevCo can be explained as those entities which are directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.
Response
MultiversX Foundation is a Liechtenstein non-profit entity. The Foundation report describes it as the ultimate steward and grantmaker of the MultiversX protocol, incorporated in Liechtenstein as a non-profit.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
No public source confirms that the MultiversX Foundation holds registered IP, trademarks, or codebase ownership rights for the MultiversX protocol. The Foundation report describes the Foundation as funding core protocol R&D and ecosystem initiatives and holding majority stakes in xMoney and xPortal, but does not identify specific IP assignments.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
The Foundation board acts as ultimate custodian for all treasury fund movements. Treasury assets are held across designated wallets for three purposes: treasury reserves (long-term strategic holdings), operational wallets (day-to-day expenses), and grant program pools (ecosystem support). All significant fund movements require multi-signature approval from multiple authorized signatories, with the Foundation board as the final approving authority. The Foundation holds majority stakes in xMoney and xPortal. No public source identifies the Foundation holding specific on-chain protocol admin keys, upgrade authorities, or token minting controls.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
The Foundation report states the Foundation board operates independently, making decisions solely in the best interest of the MultiversX protocol and its global ecosystem, distinct from the operational goals of any commercial labs or ventures. The Foundation holds 100% ownership of MultiversX Lab, giving it structural ownership authority over the DevCo. No public source describes a formal mechanism by which the Foundation board exercises day-to-day operational control over MultiversX Labs S.R.L. management decisions.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
No public source identifies the MultiversX Foundation as holding specific pause, upgrade, or governance-executor authority over protocol smart contracts. The Foundation's role as described in public materials is treasury stewardship and ecosystem funding, not direct protocol contract administration.
The Foundation treasury is diversified across three asset classes: shares and equity (65%), crypto including EGLD and other assets (30%), and stablecoins and fiat (5%), totaling approximately $105 million. The monthly operational burn rate is approximately $500,000. The Foundation directs treasury resources to six spending categories: protocol R&D, developer platform, ecosystem grants and developer support, product development, marketing and community, and operations, legal, and compliance. No publicly disclosed policy directs protocol fees or on-chain revenues specifically to the Foundation.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
Question
For the Primary DevCo do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist.
Definitions: The primary Foundation and DevCo can be explained as those entities which are directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.
Response
MultiversX Labs S.R.L. is a Romanian limited liability company (societate cu răspundere limitată), incorporated on 30 May 2018, previously registered as Elrond Network S.R.L. Its registered address is Str. Nicolaus Olahus Nr. 5, Corp B, Et. 9, Sibiu, Romania. Its fiscal code is 39424028 and Romanian trade registry number is J2018000782327. A related entity, MultiversX Labs AG, is also registered in Liechtenstein (LEI: 529900GP5EXX3V7J5104). The Terms of Use confirm Romanian law governs the website and operations.
(Source: Romanian Registry via B2BHint, RISCO.ro, LEI Record MultiversX Labs AG, Terms of Use)
The Terms of Use state that the MultiversX website and its contents are owned by "MultiversX, its licensors, or other providers." The Foundation report identifies MultiversX Lab as the commercial product-development arm responsible for products including xPortal and xMoney. The Foundation holds 100% ownership of MultiversX Labs (per the Foundation's related-party disclosure table), with separate management. No public source provides a detailed IP ownership map covering protocol codebase, trademarks, or other registered IP.
(Source: Terms of Use, State of the Foundation Report)
MultiversX Labs S.R.L. drives commercial product development that creates on-chain activity and demand. No public source identifies the DevCo as holding specific on-chain governance powers, treasury admin rights, or token administration authorities over the protocol.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
The Foundation report states the Foundation board operates independently. The Foundation holds 100% ownership of MultiversX Labs, meaning influence runs from Foundation to DevCo, not in the reverse direction. No public source describes a mechanism by which MultiversX Labs S.R.L. can direct Foundation decision-making.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
No public source identifies MultiversX Labs S.R.L. as holding pause, upgrade, or governance-executor authorities over protocol contracts.
MultiversX Labs S.R.L. is the commercial development arm for xPortal and xMoney. xMoney secured a $21.5 million external funding round (announced September 2025), in which the Foundation retains a majority stake. xPortal is described as a self-sustaining Crypto Super App. No public, formally adopted policy directing protocol treasury assets, fees, or token distributions specifically to MultiversX Labs S.R.L. is disclosed.
(Source: State of the Foundation Report)
Question
Disclose launch and initial supply details in a single initial allocation schedule covering the token's launch.
Response
Total genesis supply: 20,000,000 eGLD at genesis — bootstrapping supply for the network economy. Initial circulating supply was 7,498,333 eGLD (37.49%) on 4 Jul 2019, with the full 20,000,000 eGLD genesis schedule reaching 100% by 4 Jan 2023. The network now operates under a tail-inflation model following a governance vote approved at 94.55% in late 2025, with no fixed supply cap.
The IEO was conducted on Binance Launchpad from 22 Jun 2019 to 2 Jul 2019 at a price of $0.65 per eGLD-equivalent (5 billion ERD tokens sold, equivalent to 5 million eGLD post-swap). The private sale closed in June 2019 at $0.50 per eGLD-equivalent.
The native market symbol is EGLD.
The original genesis supply cap was 20,000,000 eGLD, with a theoretical maximum of 31,415,926 EGLD under the prior model. Following a governance vote approved at 94.55% in late 2025, MultiversX transitioned to a tail-inflation model starting at approximately 8.757% annually with a 10% fee burn mechanism. The supply cap has been removed and the supply regime is now inflationary with a KPI-linked adaptive decay and burn offset.
(Source: Token Metrics, Economics, CoinCodex IEO Details, CoinCarp Token Sale, MultiversX Economic Evolution Blog, Governance Proposal)
Question
Address each of the following sub-items based on the project's airdrop status. If a sub-item does not apply to the project's situation, state that explicitly.
Response
Planned but not yet executed airdrop: Not applicable. MultiversX has no planned or announced airdrop for EGLD. The genesis distribution was completed in 2019–2020 through sale and swap mechanisms rather than an airdrop, and no forward-looking TGE airdrop exists for which a recipient wallet list commitment would apply.
Executed airdrop: Not applicable. MultiversX has never conducted an airdrop for EGLD. No per-address allocation source exists — no CSV/TSV/JSON file, Dune table, Merkle dump, GitHub repository, or RPC claim endpoint — because no airdrop distribution occurred.
No airdrop planned or conducted: No airdrop has ever been conducted for EGLD, and no airdrop is publicly planned. The genesis token distribution was executed through an IEO on Binance Launchpad and a private sale in June–July 2019, followed by a 1,000:1 token swap for existing ERD holders upon mainnet launch in July 2020. No per-address airdrop recipient data exists because no airdrop occurred.
(Source: Token Metrics, The Elrond Mainnet Token Swap Begins on Binance)
Question
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; doing so earns full credit. For each market maker, include in a table:
If the project has no agreements or deals with market makers, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit. If no native tokens were loaned or allocated to market makers, state that explicitly; cash/fiat retainers or fees are not required for this item.
Response
Blockworks note: No market maker agreements or native token loans to market makers have been publicly disclosed by MultiversX or the Foundation. An October 2025 economic blueprint published by MultiversX referenced building a regulated market-making framework as part of a future institutional ETF partnership initiative, but no executed market maker agreements with specific terms, token allocations, or named counterparties have been disclosed.
(Source: MultiversX Economic Evolution Blog)
Question
Projects must disclose all material terms of centralized or decentralized exchange listings that affect token liquidity. For each listing, include in a table:
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.
Response
Blockworks note: No CEX or DEX listing agreements disclosing token allocations, term durations, or native-token listing fees have been publicly disclosed by MultiversX, the Foundation, or MultiversX Labs S.R.L. EGLD is listed on major centralized exchanges including Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, OKX, and Bitget, and trades on the xExchange DEX natively on MultiversX. The terms and economics of those listings are not publicly disclosed.
Question
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:
If no prior sales occurred, state that explicitly (e.g., "No prior fundraising, OTC, or discounted MM sales have occurred.").
Response
Blockworks note: No seed or pre-seed round has been publicly documented with named investors or a disclosed investment instrument type (e.g., SAFT, SAFE, or token warrant). The private sale and IEO were the two token distribution events prior to genesis. No additional OTC sales, discounted market maker sales, or subsequent token fundraising rounds have been publicly disclosed.
(Source: Token Metrics, CoinCodex IEO Details, CoinCarp Token Sale, ICO Analytics)
Question
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").
Response
2025-05-14; Smart Contract ESDT / VM opcode path (MultiversX mainnet)
The transferValueAndExecute function lacked a validation check, allowing a crafted payload to mimic an ESDT transfer through Smart Contract Results and credit balances on the destination shard. The bug had not been detected in at least three prior formal security audits or multiple automated verification scans.
150 quadrillion wrapped USDC erroneously credited to a user wallet; a second wrapped USDT balance anomaly also occurred. 99.999% of funds were recovered.
Emergency validator coordination involving 25+ staking providers; temporary network node pauses; internal review; rollout of patch v1.8.13.0; follow-on auditing and input-validation hardening across affected code paths.
Resolved. Network returned to regular operation within 2 hours and 30 minutes. No users were directly affected by net fund loss per the incident report.
Question
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?
Question
Identify to the best of your ability the token's current deployments across chains, including project-issued deployments, project-endorsed representations, and, if possible, documented third-party wrapped or bridged representations.
For each entry, provide:
Multiple entries on the same chain are permitted.
Definition: A protocol-level asset is an asset whose balances and transfers are handled directly by the blockchain's core rules, rather than by a token smart contract. For protocol-level assets without a token contract address, enter "No contract address" and identify the asset and chain.
Response
Token Contract Address or Onchain Asset Identifier | Chain | Deployment Type | Project Relationship | Supporting Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
mvx:1/slip44:508 | MultiversX | Protocol-level asset | native-token |
This Token Transparency Filing is provided for general informational purposes only and does not verify or warrant the accuracy of individual answers.
Blockworks note: The ERD-to-EGLD swap was a 1,000:1 denomination conversion for existing holders, not a distribution of new tokens to a qualifying user segment, and therefore does not constitute an airdrop under this framework. Distribution to initial holders occurred through the Binance Launchpad IEO and private sale, both documented in the sources above.
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?
Response
MultiversX Labs S.R.L. is a Romanian entity incorporated in Sibiu. The website Terms of Use state that Romanian law and exclusive Romanian jurisdiction govern the terms, and that users accessing from outside Romania do so on their own initiative and bear responsibility for local-law compliance. This creates risk that changes in Romanian law, EU digital asset regulations under MiCA, consumer protection standards, or cross-border regulatory enforcement could require changes to how MultiversX.com and related services are offered or restrict access for users in certain jurisdictions.
A related entity, MultiversX Labs AG, is registered in Liechtenstein, and the MultiversX Foundation is a Liechtenstein non-profit. Liechtenstein is an EEA member state, meaning EU regulatory developments — including MiCA, AML/KYC frameworks, and digital asset taxation rules — apply to the Foundation's jurisdiction.
The Terms of Use direct users to seek advice from qualified accountants, financial advisors, tax advisors, and legal counsel before making investment or financial decisions connected to MultiversX. No project-specific tokenholder tax analysis is provided in publicly available materials. Tokenholders are solely responsible for determining their own tax treatment in their respective jurisdictions.
The governance-approved removal of EGLD's supply cap and transition to a tail-inflation model constitutes a material change from the project's prior capped-supply marketing. This may have tax or securities-characterization implications in certain jurisdictions and could affect how regulators classify EGLD in markets where it was previously analyzed under a fixed-supply framework.
(Source: Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, Romanian Registry via B2BHint, LEI Record MultiversX Labs AG)
MultiversX implements adaptive state sharding, Secure Proof of Stake consensus, validator reassignment across epochs, the MultiversX Virtual Machine, and cross-shard smart contract execution. The interaction between these components creates attack surfaces that differ from non-sharded blockchains and require correct behavior across consensus, sharding, and execution layers simultaneously.
The May 2025 Smart Contract ESDT incident demonstrated that latent implementation bugs can evade multiple formal security audits and automated verification scans and still produce unauthorized balance crediting across shards in production. The incident required emergency validator coordination across 25+ staking providers, temporary node pauses, and a patch rollout — confirming that rare interaction-level edge cases in mature codebases remain a material operational risk even after comprehensive audit programs.
The Supernova upgrade (approximately 90% complete as of the October 2025 Foundation report, representing over 90,000 lines of new code) introduces sub-second finality and constitutes the largest protocol change since genesis. Upgrades of this scope carry integration risk across consensus, sharding, and execution subsystems.
MultiversX operates active risk controls including a responsible disclosure program, a live security reporting channel, validator coordination procedures, and recurring audits. These controls reduce risk but do not eliminate it.
(Source: MultiversX Whitepaper, Incident Report — Smart Contract ESDT Bug, Responsible Disclosure Policy, State of the Foundation Report)
The October 2025 governance vote removed EGLD's previously marketed hard supply cap of approximately 31.4 million tokens and replaced the fixed emission schedule with a tail-inflation model starting at approximately 8.757% annually, subject to KPI-linked adaptive decay. The 10% fee burn is designed to offset inflation as network usage grows, but burn volumes depend on on-chain transaction activity. If fee burns do not keep pace with emissions, net supply will expand persistently. As of May 2026, over 48% of circulating EGLD is staked (approximately 14.5 million EGLD staked), providing demand-side pressure on circulating supply, but staking participation rates can change.
Governance configuration values — including quorum, acceptance, and veto thresholds — are updatable by contract owner calls. This means future governance or admin-level parameter changes could alter fee economics, validator incentives, or inflation parameters in ways that differ from current tokenholder expectations.
The governance proposal process allows any party to create a proposal by paying a 500 EGLD fee. While veto thresholds and quorum requirements constrain outcomes, concentrated stake could influence proposal results. The 94.55% approval rate for the economic evolution proposal indicates current stake is concentrated enough to pass major economic changes without broad opposition.
(Source: Economics, Token Metrics, Governance Overview, MultiversX Economic Evolution Blog, Governance Proposal)
