ICO vs STO

Maciej Zieliński

08 Mar 2022
ICO vs STO

Modern technologies make more and more people try to raise capital in order to make their ideas a reality. The ICO (Initial Coin Offering) and STO (Security Tokens Offerings) methods which we describe below can help with this immensly! The entire acquisition process is based on digital assets, crypto tokens, blockchain technology and smart contracts.

What is Initial Coin Offering (ICO)?

Initial Coin Offering (ICO), is a method of raising capital in the form of cryptocurrency or tokens in order to finance a project. This method is very often used when finalizing blockchain startups. Initial cain offering is equivalent to initial public offering (IPO) in the cryptocurrency industry. A company that wants to raise money to create a new coin, application or service can launch ICO as a way to raise funds. A crypto token is typically created as a currency that matches the currently created ico projects. This means that a project that wants to raise funds for its own idea should create a crypto cain or a token that allows for financial settlements between project developers and investors. This is different from traditional trade markets because it is based on crypto assets and a smart contract that accounts for them.

Place for ICO

Nevetheless, there are many cryptcurrency markets and crypto exchanges which allow token sales and organizing ico projects and initial cain offerings. Interested investors may purchase a preliminary coin offer to receive a new cryptocurrency token issued by the company. These utility tokens are associated with a product or service offered by your company, or may simply represent your participation in a company or project.

How do initial coin offerings work?

When a blockchain project wants to have a sucessful ico and raise coins through that ICO, the first step of the organizers should be to determine how the project can be organized. An ICO can be organized in several different ways, including:

  • Static Price: A company can set a specific financing target or limit, which means that, every token sold in ICO has a fixed price, and the total supply of tokens is fixed.
  • Static Supply and Dynamic Price: ICO may have a static token supply and a dynamic funding goal – that means the amount of money received in the ICO determines the overall price per token.
  • Dynamic supply and static price: Some ICOs have a dynamic supply of tokens, but a fixed price, which means that the amount of funding received is determined by supply of the market.
How do ICO work?

In addition to the structure of ICO, a cryptocurrency project should normally have a white paper which is made available to potential investors through a new token web page. The project promoters use white paper to explain important information related to ICO, namely to present:

  • What is the project about
  • How many virtual tokens are kept by the founders
  • What kind of payments (and currencies) will be accepted
  • How long will the ICO campaign last
  • The demand the project will satisfy after its completion
  • How much funding is needed for the project
  • minimum entry barrier
  • what do we gain access to as part of our investment

The project should present the whitepaper as part of the ICO campaign it creates to encourage enthusiasts and sympathizers to purchase some tokens. Investors can generally use either a fiscal or digital currency, or use other financial instruments to buy new tokens. As part of the capital they have invested, investors enjoy high profitability, along with the benefits of the token, while also helping to achieve the project objective. Let us remember that if the money collected in the ICO is less than the minimum amount required by the ICO criteria, then all money can be returned to the project investors. If the funding requirements are met within a certain period of time, the money collected is spent on the project's objectives. It is worth noting that the investment on the basis of tokens or coins provides anonymous participation in the project.

Who can launch an ICO?

Currently, anyone who has access to the relevant technology can launch a new cryptocurrency (unless it is restricted by national law). Unfortunately, out of all possible ways of financing, ICO is probably one of the easiest forms which can be used to commit fraud. To avoid scams you should:

  • check who is behind a successful ico
  • obtain as much knowledge as possible regarding what a given cryptocurrency token offers
  • find out if we are dealing with a well executed digital campaign
  • obtain information regarding the investment contract
  • analyze the regulatory scrutiny of the project
  • determine whether purchasing a token grants us any ownership rights, or at least fractional ownership

Pros and cons of ICO

Online services can help you generate and acquire cryptocurrency tokens, so your business can consider launching ICO with ease. ICO managers generate tokens according to the terms of the ICO, receive them, and distribute tokens to retail investors. Let us remember that ICO is not strictly regulated by financial bodies such as the SEC, and therefore funds lost as a result of fraud or incompetence may never be recovered. The advantages of ICO are undoubtedly that a company can obtain rapid capital for the development of a project and investors can expect high return rates on their investment.


What is STO (security token offering)?

STO, or Security Token offering, is increasingly important in the financial world. STO is a process in which investors introduce a cryptocurrency coin or token. Such securities or financial instruments have a monetary value and can be traded on STO cryptocurrency exchanges where the information is recorded in public blockchains This process is often seen as a hybrid approach between the initial coin offering (ICO) and the more traditional initial public offering (IPO) for shares.

ICO vs STO: what is STO?

What are security token offers?

The security token offering (STO) is in fact a public event where tokens are sold through cryptocurrency exchanges. Tokens can then be used for trade in real financial assets such as shares. STO were already used in many investment scenarios and are more enthusiasticly perceived by both mainstream and institutional investors.

What is the difference between Initial Coin Offerings and security token offerings?

How do ICO and STO compare to one another? The ICO and the security token offerings (STO) generally follow the same process. They represent the initial distribution of coines related to a particular investment mechanism. However, they differ in the characteristics of the offered token.

STO offers are supported by assets and are fully in line with the legal order. On the other hand, ICO are tool tokens that offer access to a native platform and decentralized applications. ICO tokens are primarily intended for use, not investment. In practice, this means that the entry barrier for ICO is much lower. It is therefore much more likely that they will be offered to the general public. It is much more difficult to start a STO because their ethos is to provide an investment contract while ensuring investment security. This requires much more preparatory work and compliance.

Pros and cons of STO

Here are some of the pros and cons related to STO:

Pros

  • STO are generally seen as less risky investments than ICO and IPO, as they are protected by securities laws. They are also supported by real assets, which means that it is easier for the user to assess whether the token is accurately priced.
  • Initial offers of security tokens are also cheaper because their structure allows for the removal of intermediaries such as banks and brokerage houses.
  • Smart contracts, which are a part of the STO package, also reduce the need for lawyers, making STO a more affordable option.
  • STO are available for trade 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, providing additional flexibility

Cons related to STO

A huge disadvantage of STO is that non-accredited investors cannot possess them. In the United States, to become an accredited investor, you must earn at least $200 000 per year or have at least $1 million in your bank account. This makes tokens much less available than traditional Blockchain offers.

STO are more expensive than utility tokens due to their regulatory requirements. In addition, unlike similar coins, they are also subject to restrictions on second hand markets.
Moreover, security tokens have a time interlock mechanism. You can only trade STO tokens between qualified investors for a pre-determined period after the STO process is initiated.

ICO VS STO

Both ICO and STO are offers that allow for quick and substantial raising of capital for new blokchain related start-ups. However, both ICO and STO have some advantages and disadvantages which can help you decide which technology you prefer to use. With ICO, access to investments is much easier and simpler than with STO. Unfortunately, STO imposes an obligation to only allow accredited investors to invest in it, which may make raising funds much more complicated. At the same time, STO ensures greater security of the collected funds. Which method is better? It depends on what is more important for us. However, both methods are very popular.

Most viewed


Never miss a story

Stay updated about Nextrope news as it happens.

You are subscribed

Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Kajetan Olas

22 Nov 2024
Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Authors of the contents are not affiliated to the reviewed project in any way and none of the information presented should be taken as financial advice.

In this article we analyze tokenomics of Aethir - a project providing on-demand cloud compute resources for the AI, Gaming, and virtualized compute sectors.
Aethir aims to aggregate enterprise-grade GPUs from multiple providers into a DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network). Its competitive edge comes from utlizing the GPUs for very specific use-cases, such as low-latency rendering for online games.
Due to decentralized nature of its infrastructure Aethir can meet the demands of online-gaming in any region. This is especially important for some gamer-abundant regions in Asia with underdeveloped cloud infrastructure that causes high latency ("lags").
We will analyze Aethir's tokenomics, give our opinion on what was done well, and provide specific recommendations on how to improve it.

Evaluation Summary

Aethir Tokenomics Structure

The total supply of ATH tokens is capped at 42 billion ATH. This fixed cap provides a predictable supply environment, and the complete emissions schedule is listed here. As of November 2024 there are approximately 5.2 Billion ATH in circulation. In a year from now (November 2025), the circulating supply will almost triple, and will amount to approximately 15 Billion ATH. By November 2028, today's circulating supply will be diluted by around 86%.

From an investor standpoint the rational decision would be to stake their tokens and hope for rewards that will balance the inflation. Currently the estimated APR for 3-year staking is 195% and for 4-year staking APR is 261%. The rewards are paid out weekly. Furthermore, stakers can expect to get additional rewards from partnered AI projects.

Staking Incentives

Rewards are calculated based on the staking duration and staked amount. These factors are equally important and they linearly influence weekly rewards. This means that someone who stakes 100 ATH for 2 weeks will have the same weekly rewards as someone who stakes 200 ATH for 1 week. This mechanism greatly emphasizes long-term holding. That's because holding a token makes sense only if you go for long-term staking. E.g. a whale staking $200k with 1 week lockup. will have the same weekly rewards as person staking $1k with 4 year lockup. Furthermore the ATH staking rewards are fixed and divided among stakers. Therefore Increase of user base is likely to come with decrease in rewards.
We believe the main weak-point of Aethirs staking is the lack of equivalency between rewards paid out to the users and value generated for the protocol as a result of staking.

Token Distribution

The token distribution of $ATH is well designed and comes with long vesting time-frames. 18-month cliff and 36-moths subsequent linear vesting is applied to team's allocation. This is higher than industry standard and is a sign of long-term commitment.

  • Checkers and Compute Providers: 50%
  • Ecosystem: 15%
  • Team: 12.5%
  • Investors: 11.5%
  • Airdrop: 6%
  • Advisors: 5%

Aethir's airdrop is divided into 3 phases to ensure that only loyal users get rewarded. This mechanism is very-well thought and we rate it highly. It fosters high community engagement within the first months of the project and sets the ground for potentially giving more-control to the DAO.

Governance and Community-Led Development

Aethir’s governance model promotes community-led decision-making in a very practical way. Instead of rushing with creation of a DAO for PR and marketing purposes Aethir is trying to make it the right way. They support projects building on their infrastructure and regularly share updates with their community in the most professional manner.

We believe Aethir would benefit from implementing reputation boosted voting. An example of such system is described here. The core assumption is to abandon the simplistic: 1 token = 1 vote and go towards: Votes = tokens * reputation_based_multiplication_factor.

In the attached example, reputation_based_multiplication_factor rises exponentially with the number of standard deviations above norm, with regard to user's rating. For compute compute providers at Aethir, user's rating could be replaced by provider's uptime.

Perspectives for the future

While it's important to analyze aspects such as supply-side tokenomics, or governance, we must keep in mind that 95% of project's success depends on demand-side. In this regard the outlook for Aethir may be very bright. The project declares $36M annual reccuring revenue. Revenue like this is very rare in the web3 space. Many projects are not able to generate any revenue after succesfull ICO event, due to lack fo product-market-fit.

If you're looking to create a robust tokenomics model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure your project’s resilience in the long term.

Quadratic Voting in Web3

Kajetan Olas

04 Dec 2024
Quadratic Voting in Web3

Decentralized systems are reshaping how we interact, conduct transactions, and govern online communities. As Web3 continues to advance, the necessity for effective and fair voting mechanisms becomes apparent. Traditional voting systems, such as the one-token-one-vote model, often fall short in capturing the intensity of individual preferences, which can result in centralization. Quadratic Voting (QV) addresses this challenge by enabling individuals to express not only their choices but also the strength of their preferences.

In QV, voters are allocated a budget of credits that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The cost of casting multiple votes on a single issue increases quadratically, meaning that each additional vote costs more than the last. This system allows for a more precise expression of preferences, as individuals can invest more heavily in issues they care deeply about while conserving credits on matters of lesser importance.

Understanding Quadratic Voting

Quadratic Voting (QV) is a voting system designed to capture not only the choices of individuals but also the strength of their preferences. In most DAO voting mechanisms, each person typically has one vote per token, which limits the ability to express how strongly they feel about a particular matter. Furthermore, QV limits the power of whales and founding team who typically have large token allocations. These problems are adressed by making the cost of each additional vote increase quadratically.

In QV, each voter is given a budget of credits or tokens that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The key principle is that the cost to cast n votes on a single issue is proportional to the square of n. This quadratic cost function ensures that while voters can express stronger preferences, doing so requires a disproportionately higher expenditure of their voting credits. This mechanism discourages voters from concentrating all their influence on a single issue unless they feel very strongly about it. In the context of DAOs, it means that large holders will have a hard-time pushing through with a proposal if they'll try to do it on their own.

Practical Example

Consider a voter who has been allocated 25 voting credits to spend on several proposals. The voter has varying degrees of interest in three proposals: Proposal A, Proposal B, and Proposal C.

  • Proposal A: High interest.
  • Proposal B: Moderate interest.
  • Proposal C: Low interest.

The voter might allocate their credits as follows:

Proposal A:

  • Votes cast: 3
  • Cost: 9 delegated tokens

Proposal B:

  • Votes cast: 2
  • Cost: 4 delegated tokens

Proposal C:

  • Votes cast: 1
  • Cost: 1 delegated token

Total delegated tokens: 14
Remaining tokens: 11

With the remaining tokens, the voter can choose to allocate additional votes to the proposals based on their preferences or save for future proposals. If they feel particularly strong about Proposal A, they might decide to cast one more vote:

Additional vote on Proposal A:

  • New total votes: 4
  • New cost: 16 delegated tokens
  • Additional cost: 16−9 = 7 delegated tokens

Updated total delegated tokens: 14+7 = 21

Updated remaining tokens: 25−21 = 425 - 21 = 4

This additional vote on Proposal A costs 7 credits, significantly more than the previous vote, illustrating how the quadratic cost discourages excessive influence on a single issue without strong conviction.

Benefits of Implementing Quadratic Voting

Key Characteristics of the Quadratic Cost Function

  • Marginal Cost Increases Linearly: The marginal cost of each additional vote increases linearly. The cost difference between casting n and n−1 votes is 2n−1.
  • Total Cost Increases Quadratically: The total cost to cast multiple votes rises steeply, discouraging voters from concentrating too many votes on a single issue without significant reason.
  • Promotes Egalitarian Voting: Small voters are encouraged to participate, because relatively they have a much higher impact.

Advantages Over Traditional Voting Systems

Quadratic Voting offers several benefits compared to traditional one-person-one-vote systems:

  • Captures Preference Intensity: By allowing voters to express how strongly they feel about an issue, QV leads to outcomes that better reflect the collective welfare.
  • Reduces Majority Domination: The quadratic cost makes it costly for majority groups to overpower minority interests on every issue.
  • Encourages Honest Voting: Voters are incentivized to allocate votes in proportion to their true preferences, reducing manipulation.

By understanding the foundation of Quadratic Voting, stakeholders in Web3 communities can appreciate how this system supports more representative governance.

Conclusion

Quadratic voting is a novel voting system that may be used within DAOs to foster decentralization. The key idea is to make the cost of voting on a certain issue increase quadratically. The leading player that makes use of this mechanism is Optimism. If you're pondering about the design of your DAO, we highly recommend taking a look at their research on quadratic funding.

If you're looking to create a robust governance model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure that your DAO will stand out as a beacon of innovation and resilience in the long term.