# Etesia Research documentation, in full

Etesia Research runs systematic quantitative strategies onchain. This file
contains every page of https://docs.etesiar.com in reading order, for assistants and agents that
prefer a single document. A shorter index with descriptions is at https://docs.etesiar.com/llms.txt.

Generated from the published documentation.


==============================================================================
# Introduction
https://docs.etesiar.com/
==============================================================================

Etesia Research is a systematic asset management firm. We run institutional
quantitative strategies onchain, in non-custodial vaults, so that the strategy is
executed by software and your shares stay in your own wallet.

The flagship strategy is a systematic CTA: a trend-following program that goes
long what is rising and short what is falling, across crypto perpetuals and
tokenized real-world assets. The signal is derived from price. No human approves a
trade.

### Where to start

**Depositing.** [Etesia Multistrat](multistrat.md) is the flagship vault. It runs
on HyperEVM, executes on Hyperliquid, and takes USDC. Deposit at
[app.etesiar.com](https://app.etesiar.com).

**Understanding the mechanics.** [How They Work](how-they-work.md) covers deposits,
redemptions and what happens to your capital in between.

**Sizing a position.** [Our Thesis](thesis.md), then
[Risk Overview](risk.md).

**Allocating institutionally.** [Separately Managed Accounts](sma.md).

### Live figures

Current NAV, share price, TVL and open positions are on
[app.etesiar.com](https://app.etesiar.com) and readable onchain. We do not
reproduce them here: the documentation describes mechanics, the app carries the
state.

Fee rates and vault parameters are the exception: they are set in the contract and
listed under [Fees + Redemption Period](fees.md), with the address to verify them
against.

==============================================================================
# Our Thesis
https://docs.etesiar.com/thesis
==============================================================================

Traditional finance solved risk management decades ago. Systematic
trend-following, risk parity and volatility targeting are well understood and
evidence-backed. None of them existed in digital-asset markets in a serious,
accessible form. Etesia was founded to close that gap.

### What crypto investors are usually offered

An index is a long-only bet on the market. It falls when the market falls, which
is the exposure most crypto holders already have.

A yield strategy generates a rate. The rate compresses as capital arrives, and
there is no directional upside.

Etesia is neither. It is a systematic CTA: it can be long or short, it targets a
level of volatility rather than a level of return, and its position in any market
depends on that market's own trend rather than on a view about the asset class.

### Why uncorrelated matters more than another token

A typical crypto portfolio holds assets whose daily returns correlate at 0.7 to
0.9 with each other. Adding another token to that portfolio barely reduces its
risk, because the new position moves with everything already in it.

An uncorrelated return stream lowers portfolio variance without lowering expected
return. That is the argument for holding a CTA sleeve next to a directional crypto
book.

### Why trends persist

Four mechanisms, documented across more than 100 markets and 50 years of data
(Moskowitz, Ooi and Pedersen, 2012):

- **Information diffuses slowly.** Not every participant reprices at once, so a
  repricing plays out over days and weeks.
- **Investors herd.** Participants chase moves that have already started, which
  extends them.
- **Risk is transferred.** Hedgers pay speculators to take the other side, and
  that payment shows up as a persistent drift.
- **Anchoring.** Participants adjust from a previous price rather than to a new
  fair value, so adjustment is gradual.

These effects are stronger in young, retail-driven, fragmented markets than in
mature ones. Crypto adds a fifth: forced flows from liquidations, token unlocks
and index rebalances move price in a direction predictable from price and calendar
alone.

The strategy does not forecast. It harvests the moves that happen and pays for
them with many small losses on the trends that fail.

### Why onchain

**Custody.** Assets sit in a vault contract rather than on our balance sheet.
See [Vault Protections](vault-protections.md).

**Verifiability.** Holdings, share price and history are readable by anyone with
an RPC endpoint. There is no monthly letter to wait for.

**Access.** A fund wrapper has minimums, subscription windows and a jurisdictional
perimeter. A vault contract has a deposit function.

### What we do not claim

Trend-following has bad decades. The 2010s were largely range-bound and the
strategy family did poorly through them. A single year lands far from the long-run
average in both directions.

The strategy went live on 27 May 2026. Everything before that date is simulated.
[Risk Warnings and Disclaimers](disclaimers.md) sets out the rest.

==============================================================================
# Etesia Multistrat
https://docs.etesiar.com/multistrat
==============================================================================

Systematic trend-following across ten sectors of crypto perpetuals and tokenized
real-world assets, executed on Hyperliquid. Deposit USDC, receive `etesiaUSDC`
shares.

| | |
|---|---|
| Curator | Etesia Research |
| Chain | HyperEVM, chain 999 |
| Execution venue | Hyperliquid, perpetuals and spot |
| Deposit asset | USDC |
| Vault standard | Lagoon ERC-7540 |
| Fees | 1% management, 20% performance above high-water mark |
| Redemption cooldown | 7 days |
| Live since | 27 May 2026 |
| Deposit | [app.etesiar.com](https://app.etesiar.com) |

Full fee mechanics are on [Fees + Redemption Period](fees.md). Live NAV, share
price and TVL cap are in the app and onchain.

### Return profile

Return comes from directional positions in perpetual futures, long and short,
sized to a volatility target. There is no rate and no yield source.

The payoff shape is many small losses funded by a few large gains. The losing
periods come in choppy, trendless markets; that is the cost of the shape, not a
malfunction.

### What it trades

Ten sectors. Seven crypto-native, three tokenized real-world assets whose drivers
are macro rather than crypto.

| Sector | Type |
|---|---|
| DeFi | Crypto |
| Layer-1 | Crypto |
| Infrastructure | Crypto |
| Meme | Crypto |
| Payment | Crypto |
| Store of value | Crypto |
| AI | Crypto |
| Energy | Tokenized RWA |
| Equity indices | Tokenized RWA |
| Metals | Tokenized RWA |

The RWA sleeves are why correlation to crypto is low rather than merely moderate.

### How the strategy works

**Signal.** Fast and slow moving averages of price are compared. When the fast
average sits above the slow one the target position is long, below it short.
Several comparisons run at different speeds, so the program captures both
multi-day and multi-month moves.

**Sizing.** Position size scales with signal strength, not just its sign. Every
instrument is scaled to a common risk unit first, so dollar size follows risk.

**Portfolio construction.** Weights are set by Equal Risk Contribution: each asset
contributes the same share of total portfolio variance. This is the framework
behind Bridgewater's All Weather and RPAR. A volatile meme sleeve therefore
carries a smaller dollar position than a metals sleeve, sized so both can hurt the
portfolio by the same amount.

**Volatility targeting.** The portfolio targets a fixed annualised volatility.
Positions scale down as realised volatility rises and back up as it falls, so the
risk profile stays stable across regimes. The program targets roughly 25%
annualised, with a variant scaled to 20%.

**Reversal and exit.** The target position is a continuous function of the signal,
so a trend that turns produces a reversal automatically. There is no separate exit
rule and no discretionary override.

**Cost control.** Spread, market impact and funding are modelled per trade.
Signals whose expected value sits below their expected cost are trimmed.

We do not publish lookback windows, the number of horizons, the smoothing method
or the weights applied to each signal.

### How the vault operates

A curator service runs a cycle every 5 minutes: compute NAV from Hyperliquid and
HyperEVM state, run sanity guards, and settle if a deposit or redemption is
pending or if the daily settlement is due. See
[How They Work](how-they-work.md).

The curator reads canonical venue and chain state only. It does not read the
trading bot, so a bug in the bot cannot corrupt the vault's NAV.

### Performance

Live figures are in the app. Published statistics, with their windows:

| Window | Net return | Sharpe | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2025 to Apr 2026, simulated | 35.3% | 1.26 | 25% annualised volatility |
| Apr 2025 to Jun 2026, simulated | 35.3% | 1.41 | 9.3% max drawdown over 92 days |

Correlation to BTC is approximately -0.22 and to the S&P 500 approximately -0.39
to -0.40 over those windows.

> ⚠️ **The two Sharpe figures cover different windows.** A Sharpe quoted without
> its window should not be used.

Sector attribution over the Apr 2025 to Apr 2026 simulated window: Metals 37% of
PnL at 1.10 Sharpe, Layer-1 25% at 0.90, DeFi 17% at 0.76. Energy detracted. Some
sleeves losing while the portfolio gains is the construction working.

> ⚠️ **Everything before 27 May 2026 is a backtest**, run on historical execution
> data net of modelled commission, slippage and funding. Modelled frictions are
> not real frictions. Live execution has tracked the backtest within
> approximately 7 basis points per day since inception, on a sample of weeks.

### Risk factors

Trend-following loses in choppy, mean-reverting markets: the signal flips, the
program pays the spread each time, and no position runs long enough to pay for the
ones that did not. Extended flat-to-negative periods are the normal cost of the
strategy.

Execution is concentrated on one venue. A halt, exploit, socialised loss event or
insolvency at Hyperliquid would affect the portfolio directly.

Full breakdown: [Market & Strategy Risk](risk-market.md) and
[Venue, Counterparty & Curator Risk](risk-venue.md).

### Trust and security

Assets sit in a Gnosis Safe and a Lagoon ERC-7540 vault, not on our servers. The
vault framework is audited by Nethermind Security and Trail of Bits; our own
curator code is not audited.

See [Vault Protections](vault-protections.md) and [Security](security.md).
Addresses are on [Contract Addresses](addresses.md).

==============================================================================
# Risk Overview
https://docs.etesiar.com/risk
==============================================================================

Risk sits upstream of every strategy decision we make. The first number we look
at is not what the strategy made, but what it could have lost.

### The categories

| Category | What it is | Covered in |
|---|---|---|
| Market and strategy | The strategy loses money because trends fail or reverse | [Market & Strategy Risk](risk-market.md) |
| Venue and counterparty | An exchange the strategy trades on fails, halts or becomes insolvent | [Venue, Counterparty & Curator Risk](risk-venue.md) |
| Liquidity and redemption | You cannot exit at the price or on the timeline you expected | [Venue, Counterparty & Curator Risk](risk-venue.md) |
| Platform and smart contract | A bug in the vault, or a compromised operational key | [Security](security.md), [Vault Protections](vault-protections.md) |
| Regulatory and external | Law, sanctions or jurisdictional access changes | [Regional Availability](regional-availability.md) |

### What the controls do

| Control | Addresses | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|
| Volatility targeting | Market | Positions scale down as realised volatility rises |
| Equal risk contribution | Market | No sector can dominate portfolio variance |
| Sector and instrument caps | Market | Hard limits on idiosyncratic exposure |
| Gross notional cap | Market, venue | Total exposure bounded as a fraction of NAV |
| Separated signing keys | Platform | Valuation and settlement are different permissions |
| NAV sanity guards | Platform | A valuation that fails a check is never settled |
| Reduce-only closes, per-cycle locks | Venue | Bounds the damage from a malfunctioning cycle |
| Signal staleness rule | Venue | Stale signal means hold the book, never flatten it |

### What the controls do not do

They cannot make a losing strategy profitable, keep an external venue solvent,
guarantee liquidity when the portfolio needs to exit, or protect against a bug in
code that has not been audited.

Specifically:

- The strategy is expected to have losing years. Trend-following is a multi-year
  proposition.
- Our own curator and executor code has not been through a third-party audit.
  Only the Lagoon vault framework has.
- Settlement depends on our backend. Redemption is onchain, but pricing shares
  requires a NAV push, so an extended outage queues redemptions.
- The strategy went live on 27 May 2026. There is not yet a long live track record.

### Sizing

A CTA sleeve is a diversifier. Its value comes from being uncorrelated with the
rest of a portfolio, which is an argument for holding some and against holding a
lot. We do not publish a recommended allocation and do not give investment
advice.

The formal statement is at [Risk Warnings and Disclaimers](disclaimers.md).

==============================================================================
# Market & Strategy Risk
https://docs.etesiar.com/risk-market
==============================================================================

### The main failure mode

Trend-following loses in choppy, mean-reverting markets. When price oscillates
around a level rather than moving in a direction, the signal flips repeatedly. The
program buys after each move up and sells after each move down, paying the spread
and the impact each time, and none of the positions run long enough to pay for the
ones that did not.

This is the ordinary cost of the strategy, not an edge case. The payoff shape is
many small losses funded by a few large gains. The 2010s were largely range-bound
and the CTA category performed poorly across the decade.

Expect extended flat-to-negative periods. They are not evidence that something has
broken.

### Drawdown

The deepest drawdown in the simulated period from April 2025 to June 2026 was
9.3%, over 92 days.

> ⚠️ **That is one simulated window, not a limit.** A strategy targeting 25%
> annualised volatility can draw down well beyond 9.3% without anything having
> gone wrong.

### Model risk

The strategy is calibrated on historical data. Trend persistence is documented
over 50 years and 100+ markets, but crypto microstructure is young and evolving.
The effects being harvested could weaken as these markets mature and as more
capital chases them.

### Simulated performance flatters

All performance before 27 May 2026 is simulated on historical execution data, net
of modelled commission, slippage and funding. Modelled frictions are not real
frictions. Live trading reveals costs a backtest does not contain: queue position,
adverse selection, and the price impact of being the marginal participant in a
thin market.

Live execution has tracked the backtest within approximately 7 basis points per
day since inception. That is a sample of weeks.

### Concentration of outcome

The portfolio is diversified by risk contribution, not by outcome. In the
simulated window one sector, Metals, produced 37% of the return while Energy
detracted.

That is the construction working as designed. It also means a given year's result
may be dominated by a small number of sleeves, so twelve months of data is not
evidence that the diversification is delivering, in either direction.

### Volatility targeting cuts both ways

Scaling positions down as volatility rises bounds the risk profile. It also means
the program is smallest exactly when a violent move is underway, so in a sharp
sustained rally it participates less than a static-weight portfolio would.

### Leverage

The public vault is fully collateralised. The strategy does not gear the portfolio
to manufacture return. Perpetual positions still carry margin mechanics, covered
in [Venue, Counterparty & Curator Risk](risk-venue.md).

### What would make the thesis wrong

- Trends stop persisting in crypto as the market matures and the flow that created
  them is arbitraged away.
- Correlations between sectors rise toward the levels seen inside crypto-only
  portfolios, removing the diversification the construction depends on.
- Tokenized RWA markets stay too thin to carry a meaningful risk allocation,
  removing the three sleeves that supply most of the low correlation.
- Live execution costs come in materially above modelled costs.

==============================================================================
# Venue, Counterparty & Curator Risk
https://docs.etesiar.com/risk-venue
==============================================================================

The strategy trades on venues we do not control, prices itself from data we do
not produce, and settles through infrastructure we operate. Each is a dependency.

### Venue risk

Execution happens on Hyperliquid. A failure, exploit, halt or insolvency there
affects the strategy's ability to trade or withdraw.

Concretely, a venue can halt trading or withdrawals, socialise losses across users
after a large liquidation event, suffer an exploit that removes collateral, or
change margin and funding rules in a way that forces a position change at a bad
moment.

> ⚠️ **Execution is concentrated on one venue.** The live strategy trades
> overwhelmingly on Hyperliquid, and there is currently little venue
> diversification to absorb an event there.

### Liquidation

Perpetual positions are margined. If margin requirements are breached the venue
can liquidate at a price the strategy does not choose.

The gross notional cap, full collateralisation and volatility targeting keep the
portfolio well inside its margin requirement in normal conditions. A large gap
move against a concentrated position is where they are not enough.

### Liquidity

Large positions can be difficult to exit at modelled prices in thin conditions.
The strategy models impact per trade, but conditions change faster than a model
recalibrates.

Meme markets are liquid in normal conditions and can become one-sided quickly.
Tokenized RWA markets are structurally thinner than the major crypto perpetuals,
which is the trade-off that comes with the low correlation they supply.

### Redemption

Redemption is onchain and does not require our permission. Two things still
delay it: the 7 day cooldown, and settlement, which needs a NAV push from the
valuation manager.

If our backend is down, requests queue. The position is not lost and the assets
stay in the vault, but the exit is not immediate.

> ⚠️ **If you need same-day liquidity, this is not the product.**

### Oracle and pricing

NAV is computed off-chain from venue state and pushed onchain. If that computation
is wrong, shares are minted or burned at the wrong price, transferring value
between whoever transacts in that window and everyone else.

The guards on [Vault Protections](vault-protections.md) bound the size of that
error. They do not eliminate it.

### Curator and operational risk

The signal engine, orchestrator, data pipelines and curator service can fail.
We run monitoring with SMS escalation for a small set of critical conditions.

That monitoring exists because of a real incident: in June 2026 a signing key ran
out of gas and settlements froze for 34.7 hours while a single muted alert was
deduplicated silently.

A backend outage results in a missed rebalance and delayed settlement. A process
that is dead sends no alerts.

Custody configurations differ between deployments and determine what a compromised
operational key can reach. See [Security](security.md), and read the Safe
configuration onchain rather than relying on a documentation page.

==============================================================================
# Other Deployments
https://docs.etesiar.com/other-deployments
==============================================================================

The flagship vault is [Etesia Multistrat](multistrat.md). The deployment below is
listed for status and address verification.

### Hyperliquid Native Vault

The strategy running on Hyperliquid's own vault primitive rather than through an
ERC-7540 contract on HyperEVM.

| | |
|---|---|
| Venue | Hyperliquid L1 |
| Collateral | USDC |
| Page | [app.hyperliquid.xyz vault `0x4b8916…d7a6`](https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/vaults/0x4b891614af47c62fe740c72811893b0a5ae6d7a6) |

Share price updates from the venue's own accounting rather than at one of our
settlements.

> ⚠️ **Terms for this vault are set by Hyperliquid's vault mechanics**, not by
> the schedule on [Fees + Redemption Period](fees.md). Read them on the vault
> page before depositing.

==============================================================================
# How They Work
https://docs.etesiar.com/how-they-work
==============================================================================

Etesia Strategy Vaults are the layer that connects your deposit to the strategy.
This page explains how deposits and redemptions work, and what happens to your
capital between the two.

### What the curator can and cannot do

You deposit on HyperEVM. Behind the vault, capital is deployed to Hyperliquid,
where the strategy trades perpetuals and spot.

The trading key is registered as an agent of the Safe. It can place and cancel
orders on the Safe's venue account. It cannot withdraw from the venue.

Proposing a valuation and acting on it are two separate permissions held by two
separate keys: the valuation manager proposes a NAV and cannot settle, the curator
settles a NAV that was already proposed. For the full breakdown, see
[Vault Protections](vault-protections.md).

### Depositing

**1. Connect your wallet** Connect a wallet holding USDC on HyperEVM, plus a small
balance of the chain's gas token. Use the canonical USDC contract listed on
[Contract Addresses](addresses.md); bridged USDC from another contract is not
accepted.

**2. Submit a deposit request** Your USDC leaves your wallet and is held by the
vault's silo contract until the next settlement.

> ⚠️ **Between the request and settlement your capital is not in the strategy.**
> It is not earning and it is not exposed to the strategy's positions.

There is no minimum deposit and no allowlist on the public vault.

**3. Shares are issued at settlement** At settlement the vault fixes a share price
from the NAV computed for that moment and mints your shares against it. You then
claim them; some interfaces do this for you on your next interaction. Your share
price moves with the strategy from that point forward.

### Why settlement is not instant

The vault holds open perpetual positions. Its net asset value cannot be read in a
single contract call the way an AMM pool balance can: it has to be computed from
spot balances, unrealised PnL across every venue the strategy touches, and idle
stablecoins on two layers.

Minting or burning shares against a stale valuation would transfer value between
the person transacting and everyone already in the vault. So the vault prices
shares only at a settlement, from a NAV computed and checked for that moment.

### While your capital is deployed

The curator service runs a cycle every 5 minutes. It computes NAV as spot balances
plus unrealised PnL across every dex plus Safe and vault USDC on HyperEVM, runs the
sanity guards, and bridges USDC between HyperEVM and HyperCore as the book
requires.

It settles when a deposit or redemption is pending, and otherwise once per UTC
day. Settling more often would cost holders money: each settlement takes
management and performance fees and ratchets the high-water mark upward.

The vault is configured so that a proposed NAV never applies on its own. It only
takes effect through an explicit settlement.

### Withdrawing

**1. Submit a redemption request** For some or all of your shares.

> ⚠️ **The Multistrat vault applies a 7 day redemption cooldown** before your
> request can settle.

**2. Redemption period** After the cooldown, the request waits for the next
settlement, because shares are priced at settlement. In normal operation that is
same-day.

**3. Funds return to your wallet** You claim USDC and your shares are burned.

Terms are in the vault's details in the app and on
[Fees + Redemption Period](fees.md).

### If our backend is offline

Your assets stay in the vault and nothing moves. Settlement stops, because pricing
shares requires a NAV push, so redemption requests queue until service resumes.

The redemption path is onchain. The pricing that makes it executable is not.

==============================================================================
# Vault Protections
https://docs.etesiar.com/vault-protections
==============================================================================

The mechanisms that bound what can go wrong operationally, independent of whether
the strategy makes money.

### Valuation and settlement are separate permissions

The valuation manager can propose a NAV and nothing else. The curator can settle a
NAV the valuation manager already proposed. Neither key can do the other's job,
so a single compromised operational key cannot both invent a valuation and act on
it.

The vault is configured so a proposed NAV never applies by timeout. It applies only
through an explicit settlement.

### A valuation that fails its checks is never used

Every computed NAV passes a set of guards before it can be pushed or settled:

- **First NAV zero.** On a fresh vault the first NAV must be zero, so the first
  depositor anchors the share price at par.
- **Divergence cap.** A NAV moving more than a configured number of basis points
  against the previous one is rejected. The HyperEVM deployment has run this at
  1000 bps.
- **Negative NAV is fatal.** A negative computed value halts the cycle rather than
  being clamped.
- **Per-cycle locks.** One cycle at a time, so a slow cycle cannot overlap the
  next.

A NAV that fails a guard produces a missed settlement, not a mispriced one.

The first-NAV-zero rule exists because of a real failure. On a test vault a
curator pushed an inflated first valuation, and the resulting share price of
roughly 27 times par was permanent: the framework has no in-band way to unwind it.

### The trading key cannot withdraw

On Hyperliquid the trading key is registered as an agent of the Safe. It can
trade the account and cannot move funds out of it.

### Venues and assets are allowlisted

Every asset and venue adapter sits on an admin-maintained allowlist. An unlisted
venue cannot be used by the execution layer.

### Execution bounds are enforced, not requested

Slippage bounds are computed from onchain TWAP prices rather than supplied by the
backend. A minimum cooldown enforces spacing between rebalances. Aggregate
notional per rebalance is capped as a fraction of NAV. A proposal that violates any
of these is rejected atomically; there is no partial execution.

### Stale signal means hold, never flatten

If the signal is stale the strategy holds its current book rather than closing it.
Flattening on stale data would turn an information outage into a realised loss, at
the moment the system knows least about the market.

### Fee changes are delayed onchain

Fee rates sit behind a 24 hour cooldown. A change is visible as pending before it
takes effect.

### Emergency procedures

The curator has an eject subsystem: an operator-triggered evacuation of the
vault's Hyperliquid footprint back into the Safe.

It is not a user-facing pause, and there is no Guardian role in the deployed
contracts.

### Monitoring

The curator pages a human on a signing key running low on gas, three consecutive
failed cycles, and no successful NAV push within a watchdog window. Critical
conditions escalate by SMS rather than chat alone.

That design followed an incident: in June 2026 a signing key ran out of gas and
settlements froze for 34.7 hours while a single muted chat alert was deduplicated
silently.

==============================================================================
# Security
https://docs.etesiar.com/security
==============================================================================

### Smart contract audits

Our EVM vaults are built on [Lagoon](https://lagoon.finance)'s ERC-7540 vault
infrastructure. Lagoon, built by Hopper Labs, is our vault infrastructure
partner.

Lagoon publishes eleven reviews on
[its audits page](https://docs.lagoon.finance/resources/audits), running from
v0.1.0 in September 2024 to v0.6.0 in May 2026:

| Firm | Coverage |
|---|---|
| Nethermind Security | Eight reports across the release history, plus the January 2026 bug disclosure |
| Trail of Bits | Two reports, covering v0.5.0 and v0.6.0, the versions our vaults run |

The audited source is public at
[github.com/hopperlabsxyz/lagoon-v0](https://github.com/hopperlabsxyz/lagoon-v0)
under the Business Source License 1.1, with `src/v0.5.1/` and `src/v0.6.0/`
matching those versions. Nethermind has written up the engagement at
[Securing Lagoon's Asynchronous ERC-7540 Vaults](https://www.nethermind.io/blog/securing-lagoons-asynchronous-erc-7540-vaults-as-the-protocol-scaled-from-v1-to-v5).

### Custody

Working capital sits in a Gnosis Safe with three owners. Shares and accounting
sit in the Lagoon vault contract. Neither is on our balance sheet or our servers.
Settlement and bridging are signed by the curator as Safe transactions.

The [Hyperliquid Native Vault](other-deployments.md) is custodied by the venue's
own vault mechanics and does not use this structure.

### Verify it yourself

Owner sets, thresholds and enabled modules are public. Verify directly:

```bash
RPC=https://rpc.hyperliquid.xyz/evm
SAFE=0x33b7C2cE82784d79E7d658961fC74E0838b23a93
cast call --rpc-url $RPC $SAFE 'getOwners()(address[])'
cast call --rpc-url $RPC $SAFE 'getThreshold()(uint256)'
cast call --rpc-url $RPC $SAFE 'getModulesPaginated(address,uint256)(address[],address)' \
  0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 10
```

### Scoped signing keys

Zodiac Roles Modifier v2 is the mechanism we use to restrict a curator key to a
fixed set of calls. Under that configuration the key becomes the sole member of
a role permitted to make exactly these calls:

| Call | Constraint |
|---|---|
| `USDC.approve(spender, amount)` | Spender pinned to the canonical core deposit wallet |
| `CoreDepositWallet.deposit(amount, dex)` | Target pinned, destination dex pinned to spot |
| `CoreWriter.sendRawAction(spotSend(...))` | Destination pinned to the Safe, token pinned to USDC |
| `CoreWriter.sendRawAction(addApiWallet(...))` | API wallet address pinned |
| `settleDeposit` / `settleRedeem` | On the vault |

The pinning uses bitmask conditions on the raw action bytes, which are the
security boundary: five conditions pin the version byte, the action id, the
destination address and the token id. Before a role is applied onchain, a sample
payload is decoded byte by byte and each masked region compared against the
definition, and a ten-case suite then exercises the deployed role, including cases
that must revert.

A flaw in Zodiac Roles Modifier v2.1.0 was disclosed in June 2026 and patched in
the audited v2.1.1.

### Operational security

Admin authority, meaning role reassignment and fee changes, is held on a Ledger
and is not used day to day. Fee changes are additionally delayed 24 hours onchain.

Vault-level protections are covered separately on
[Vault Protections](vault-protections.md).

### Reporting a vulnerability

Write to [contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com). Please do not open a
public issue. There is no bug bounty and no published disclosure policy or
response-time commitment.

==============================================================================
# Separately Managed Accounts
https://docs.etesiar.com/sma
==============================================================================

For allocators who need a mandate rather than a public vault: foundations,
treasuries, funds of funds, family offices.

**Contact: [contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com).**

### Why not the public vault

[Etesia Multistrat](multistrat.md) is permissionless. Anyone can deposit. That
carries consequences an institutional allocator usually cannot accept:

- No mandate. You get the strategy as run for everyone, with no ability to
  restrict the universe, cap leverage, exclude a venue or set your own volatility
  target.
- No segregation. Your capital is commingled with every other depositor's.
- No side letter, no reporting agreement, no MFN. Terms are whatever the contract
  says on the day.
- Fees are the contract's: 1% management and 20% performance, as published on
  [Fees + Redemption Period](fees.md).
- Onboarding is a wallet. There is no counterparty relationship and no KYB.

### What is negotiated

| | |
|---|---|
| Trading universe | Which sectors and instruments are in scope, and which are excluded |
| Volatility target | The public program runs near 25% annualised. An SMA sets its own. |
| Leverage | Available under a defined mandate. Not applied to the public vault. |
| Fees | Negotiated on size and complexity. Not the schedule on [Fees](fees.md). |
| Reporting | Format, frequency and content |
| Custody | Connection via an exchange account or an institutional custodian you already use |

We can connect through OKX, Binance, Hyperliquid, or institutional custody
providers such as Copper and Hidden Road. Confirm the current list when we talk.

### What we can show you today

The mechanical description of the strategy in this documentation. Onchain
verifiability of the live vault, down to its fee rates and custody configuration.
The vault framework's audits by Nethermind Security and Trail of Bits. A live
track record from 27 May 2026, and a simulated one before it, with every figure
carrying its window.

Some of what a full due diligence process asks for does not exist yet, and we
would rather say so here than in week three of a process:

| Item | Status |
|---|---|
| Administrator-verified or audited performance | None. Figures are our own. |
| Third-party audit of our own curator and executor code | None |
| Fund administrator, auditor, independent valuation agent | None appointed |
| Regulatory status | Etesia Research Inc. is not a regulated asset manager |

We are early. Ask for dates rather than assuming, in either direction.

### Questions worth putting in the first email

1. What is the legal entity, where is it domiciled, and what is its regulatory
   status in your jurisdiction and ours?
2. Who are the principals, what did they run before, and how much of their own
   capital is in the strategy?
3. What is current AUM, and what is the stated capacity of the program?
4. What is the custody configuration of the account you would run for us, who
   holds each key, and where?
5. Is the 1% management fee the long-term schedule, and if it changes, what
   happens to fees already accrued?
6. Which Sharpe figure is the reference one, and may we see the underlying return
   series rather than summary statistics?
7. Who else has allocated, and may we speak to them?
8. What does a monthly report contain, and may we see a sample?

### Process

There is no published onboarding flow, no minimum and no standard timeline. Write
to [contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com) and expect a conversation
rather than a data room. A mutual NDA is available.

==============================================================================
# Distributors
https://docs.etesiar.com/distributors
==============================================================================

For platforms, wallets and aggregators listing an Etesia vault in front of their
own users.

### What you are listing

A Lagoon ERC-7540 vault. If your platform already supports ERC-4626 and can handle
an asynchronous request-and-claim flow, you already support these. See
[API & SDK](api-sdk.md) for the call surface.

### What must be carried across

These are the terms a user cannot discover from a share price, and a listing that
omits them misleads:

- The **7 day redemption cooldown** on the Multistrat vault, and that redemption
  additionally waits for the next settlement.
- The **1% management fee and 20% performance fee**, read live from `feeRates()`
  rather than hardcoded.
- That deposits and redemptions **settle asynchronously**, so a deposit is not
  immediately in the strategy.
- That the strategy is **directional and can lose money**. This is not the profile
  of a lending or basis vault your users may be used to.
- A link to [Risk Warnings and Disclaimers](disclaimers.md).

### Displaying returns

Compute return from the change in share price over a stated period. There is no
published rate and the vault has no fixed yield.

Do not annualise a short window. See [APY and APR](apy.md).

### Assets

We have not published a brand kit. Ask at
[contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com).

### Getting in touch

[contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com). There is no self-serve
listing process.

==============================================================================
# API & SDK
https://docs.etesiar.com/api-sdk
==============================================================================

### What exists

We publish no API, no SDK, no subgraph and no price feed. Read the vault
contract directly with viem, ethers or your existing ERC-4626 tooling.

Lagoon publishes a TypeScript SDK (`sdk-v0`) and a `vault-computation-cli` at
[github.com/hopperlabsxyz](https://github.com/hopperlabsxyz), which may save you
writing the accounting.

If you need something that does not exist, ask at
[contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com). It is a question of demand, not
policy.

### The async flow

```mermaid
sequenceDiagram
    participant U as User
    participant V as Vault
    participant S as Silo
    participant C as Curator

    U->>V: requestDeposit(assets, controller, owner)
    V->>S: assets held pending
    C->>V: settleDeposit(...)
    Note over U,S: claimable
    U->>V: deposit(assets, receiver)
    V->>U: shares
```

Redemption mirrors this with `requestRedeem`, then `settleRedeem`, then `redeem`
or `withdraw`, with the cooldown applying before the request can be settled.

### Calls

**Requesting**

| Call | Notes |
|---|---|
| `requestDeposit(uint256 assets, address controller, address owner)` | Pulls assets to the silo. Requires prior ERC-20 approval. |
| `requestRedeem(uint256 shares, address controller, address owner)` | Shares are escrowed, not yet burned. |

**Checking state**

| Call | Notes |
|---|---|
| `pendingDepositRequest(uint256 requestId, address controller)` | Assets awaiting settlement |
| `claimableDepositRequest(uint256 requestId, address controller)` | Settled, awaiting claim |
| `pendingRedeemRequest(...)` / `claimableRedeemRequest(...)` | Redemption equivalents |

**Claiming**

| Call | Notes |
|---|---|
| `deposit(uint256 assets, address receiver)` | Claims settled shares |
| `redeem(uint256 shares, address receiver, address owner)` | Claims settled assets |

**Reading**

| Call | Notes |
|---|---|
| `totalAssets()` | Asset decimals, 6 for USDC |
| `totalSupply()` | Share decimals, 18 |
| `asset()` | The underlying token |
| `feeRates()` | `(managementRate, performanceRate)` in bps |
| `safe()` | The address holding working capital |

### Gotchas

**Decimals.** Shares are 18 decimals, USDC is 6. Share price is
`totalAssets * 1e18 / totalSupply`, interpreted in asset decimals. Getting this
wrong by a factor of 10^12 is the most common integration bug on these vaults.

**`convertToShares` and `convertToAssets` are indicative.** They use the last
settled `totalAssets`. Between settlements they do not reflect the live portfolio.

**`previewDeposit` may revert.** ERC-7540 vaults are permitted to revert on the
ERC-4626 preview functions, because a synchronous preview would be a lie. Handle
it.

**No fresh price between settlements.** A proposed NAV never auto-applies, so
polling for one outside a settlement will not find it.

**Requests are per controller.** The `controller` and `owner` parameters let a
contract request on a user's behalf. Read the ERC-7540 spec on operator approval
before assuming your address can claim.

### ABI

Take it from
[github.com/hopperlabsxyz/lagoon-v0](https://github.com/hopperlabsxyz/lagoon-v0)
(`src/v0.6.0/` for Multistrat), from
[Lagoon's documentation](https://docs.lagoon.finance), or from a verified contract
on the explorer.

### Machine-readable documentation

| File | Contents |
|---|---|
| [`/llms.txt`](https://docs.etesiar.com/llms.txt) | Curated index, per the llmstxt.org convention |
| [`/llms-full.txt`](https://docs.etesiar.com/llms-full.txt) | Every page concatenated in sidebar order |
| `/md/<page>.md` | Any page as raw markdown |

==============================================================================
# Fees + Redemption Period
https://docs.etesiar.com/fees
==============================================================================

Rates below are read from the vault contract, which is authoritative. Last
verified 2026-08-12.

| | Rate |
|---|---|
| Management fee | 1.00%, 100 bps annual |
| Performance fee | 20%, 2000 bps, above the high-water mark |
| Deposit fee | None |
| Withdrawal fee | None |
| Redemption cooldown | 7 days |
| Fee-change cooldown, onchain | 24 hours |

Verify:

```bash
cast call --rpc-url https://rpc.hyperliquid.xyz/evm \
  0xe6b30da13c2c97aacd8ba3df4e97977725847fca "feeRates()(uint16,uint16)"
# 100 2000
```

A rate change requires an owner transaction and takes effect after the 24 hour
onchain cooldown, so a pending change is visible before it applies.

### How fees are taken

Fees are not deducted from a balance. They are minted as new shares to the fee
receiver at settlement, which dilutes every existing holder in proportion.

**Management fee.** Accrues on assets under management, pro-rated by the time
since the last settlement. A vault settling once a day takes it once a day.

**Performance fee.** Charged on gains above the high-water mark, so the same gain
is never charged twice. If the share price falls and recovers, no performance fee
is taken until it passes its previous peak.

Lagoon takes a protocol cut of 1000 bps on the performance fee. That comes out of
our 20%, not on top of it.

Because each settlement takes fees and ratchets the high-water mark upward, the
curator settles once per UTC day rather than on every cycle. See
[How They Work](how-they-work.md).

### Redemption period

> ⚠️ **Redemptions carry a 7 day cooldown.**

After the cooldown, the redemption waits for the next settlement before it can be
claimed, because shares are priced at settlement. In normal operation that is
same-day.

The 7 day redemption cooldown and the 24 hour fee-change cooldown are unrelated
parameters.

### Separately managed accounts

SMA fee terms are negotiated per mandate and are not the schedule above. See
[Separately Managed Accounts](sma.md).

==============================================================================
# APY and APR Calculations
https://docs.etesiar.com/apy
==============================================================================

We do not quote an APY.

APY is meaningful for a product with a rate: a lending market, a basis trade, a
staking position. Those earn a spread that is roughly stable over short windows,
so annualising a recent window estimates the next one.

A trend-following program has no rate. Its return is directional and its
distribution is wide: many small losses funded by a few large gains. A strong
month annualises to a figure the strategy will not repeat; a flat month annualises
to zero. Either would mislead.

### What to compute instead

Return over a stated period, from the change in share price:

```
return = (sharePrice_end / sharePrice_start) - 1

sharePrice = totalAssets / totalSupply
```

adjusted for the difference between the 6-decimal asset and the 18-decimal share
token. Always show the period next to the number.

### If you must annualise

Use a window of at least a year and label it a realised return over that window,
not a forward-looking yield. For anything shorter, show the raw period return.

The formula relating a simple rate to a compounded one:

```
APY = (1 + APR/365)^365 - 1
```

It does not turn a two-week return into a yield.

### Fees are already in the number

Both the management and performance fee are minted as shares at settlement, which
dilutes the share price. A return computed from share price is therefore net.

Do not subtract fees again on top of a share-price return.

==============================================================================
# Contract Addresses
https://docs.etesiar.com/addresses
==============================================================================

Verify anything on this page against the chain before you rely on it. Addresses
change when a vault is redeployed, and a documentation page is not a source of
truth.

## HyperEVM, chain 999

Etesia Multistrat, the current production vault. Read onchain 2026-08-09.

| Role | Address |
|---|---|
| Vault | `0xe6b30da13c2c97aacd8ba3df4e97977725847fca` |
| Silo | `0xc1A7c99bff40314Fa1CD046eCa14872743b2E287` |
| Safe, also `vault.owner()` | `0x33b7C2cE82784d79E7d658961fC74E0838b23a93` |
| Curator EOA, a Safe owner | `0x678820c67B7a98F72C21b38c53217C23b13fb454` |
| Ledger admin, a Safe owner | `0x9F2F3f48aE7563096452a0573DD6e774321f3D11` |
| Third Safe owner | `0x145706E76746a2A5752860ABc2322e505bF92782` |
| API wallet, Hyperliquid agent | `0xbeaF8bC9d08Af2232e1E249e964d42cFFfD6d3c9` |
| USDC | `0xb88339CB7199b77E23DB6E890353E22632Ba630f` |
| Core deposit wallet, USDC bridge | `0x6b9e773128f453f5c2c60935ee2de2cbc5390a24` |
| CoreWriter | `0x3333333333333333333333333333333333333333` |

See [Security](security.md) for the authority model and the commands to
read the Safe's current configuration.

### Retired: the v0.5 HyperEVM deployment

Kept here so the address is identifiable rather than mysterious. **Do not
deposit.**

| Role | Address |
|---|---|
| Vault | `0xb718bdaa857d5ab82c09c7f0c75bfba2f831090a` |
| Safe | `0xF99aC94E1630a28D4Cb8d340efE16303933db63b` |
| Silo | `0x07FD359821013BD48EEF7EF46475A90e0f429B2f` |
| Roles modifier | `0x1b62fc543e0F391ff25B271909939635D4f45a1e` |
| Valuation oracle | `0x27C65382243F5eB63AFb10808A6130b9Df362eDc` |
| API wallet | `0xf4948c13746b508ca1143d8FD25B0A4c460117f9` |

## Hyperliquid L1

The native vault is addressed by its Hyperliquid vault page rather than by an EVM
contract. See [Other Deployments](other-deployments.md).

## Verifying

```bash
RPC=https://rpc.hyperliquid.xyz/evm
V=0xe6b30da13c2c97aacd8ba3df4e97977725847fca

cast call --rpc-url $RPC $V "name()(string)"
cast call --rpc-url $RPC $V "asset()(address)"
cast call --rpc-url $RPC $V "feeRates()(uint16,uint16)"
cast call --rpc-url $RPC $V "safe()(address)"
```

Explorer: [hyperscan.com](https://www.hyperscan.com) for HyperEVM.

==============================================================================
# Glossary
https://docs.etesiar.com/glossary
==============================================================================

Terms as this documentation uses them.

### Strategy

**Systematic CTA.** A manager running trend-following and related strategies on a
mechanical, price-derived signal, with no discretionary override. The
managed-futures model institutional funds have run since the 1970s.

**Trend following.** Long what is rising, short what is falling. The payoff is
many small losses funded by a few large gains. See
[Etesia Multistrat](multistrat.md).

**Equal risk contribution.** Portfolio weights chosen so every asset contributes
the same share of total portfolio variance, rather than weighting by market
capitalisation.

**Volatility targeting.** Scaling positions so realised portfolio volatility
stays near a fixed level across market regimes.

**Sharpe ratio.** Return per unit of volatility. Meaningless without the window
it was measured over, which is why every Sharpe on this site carries one.

**Drawdown.** The fall from a peak in the equity curve to the subsequent trough.

**High-water mark.** The highest share price at which a performance fee has been
charged. Gains below it are never charged twice.

**Perpetual.** A futures contract with no expiry, held in line with spot by a
periodic funding payment between longs and shorts.

**Funding.** That periodic payment. A cost or a revenue depending on the side of
the position.

**Tokenized RWA.** A real-world asset represented onchain. In our universe: the
metals, energy and equity-index sectors.

### Vault mechanics

**ERC-4626.** The standard interface for a tokenized vault with synchronous
deposits and redemptions.

**ERC-7540.** An asynchronous extension of ERC-4626: you request, the vault
settles at a valuation computed for that moment, then you claim. Necessary when a
vault's value cannot be read in one call. See [How They Work](how-they-work.md).

**Lagoon.** The vault framework our EVM vaults are built on, by Hopper Labs.
Audited; see [Security](security.md).

**Silo.** The contract holding assets between a deposit request and its
settlement.

**Settlement.** The moment the vault fixes a share price from a proposed NAV and
mints or burns shares against it. We settle when a deposit or redemption is
pending, otherwise once per UTC day.

**NAV.** Net asset value: what the vault's portfolio is worth, computed from
venue and chain state.

**Share price.** `totalAssets / totalSupply`, restated at each settlement. Mind
the decimals: shares carry 18, USDC carries 6.

**Redemption cooldown.** The 7 day wait between a redemption request and its
settlement on the Multistrat vault.

### Roles and infrastructure

**Curator.** On this site, our own settlement role: the authority that settles
deposits and redemptions and bridges between layers. Elsewhere in DeFi the word
can mean a third-party risk manager selecting markets for a vault.

**Valuation manager.** The key permitted to propose a NAV, and nothing else.
Proposing and applying are separate permissions.

**Safe.** A Gnosis Safe multisig holding the vault's working capital.

**Zodiac Roles Modifier.** A Safe module that restricts a key to specific calls
with specific parameters, so it can act without holding full Safe authority.

**API wallet, agent.** On Hyperliquid, a delegated key registered to trade an
account without being able to withdraw from it.

**Eject.** Our operator-triggered evacuation of the vault's Hyperliquid footprint
back into the Safe.

### Venue

**Hyperliquid.** The perpetuals exchange the strategy executes on, with its own
L1 and an EVM layer.

**HyperEVM.** Hyperliquid's EVM chain, id 999, where the Multistrat vault lives.

**HyperCore.** Hyperliquid's trading layer, as distinct from HyperEVM. USDC is
bridged between the two by the curator.

==============================================================================
# Frequently Asked Questions
https://docs.etesiar.com/faq
==============================================================================

### What am I depositing into?

[Etesia Multistrat](multistrat.md), a Lagoon ERC-7540 vault on HyperEVM running a
systematic trend-following program on Hyperliquid. You deposit USDC and receive
`etesiaUSDC` shares that track the strategy's NAV.

### Is there a minimum deposit?

No. There is no minimum and no allowlist on the public vault.

### What are the fees?

1% management and 20% performance above the high-water mark. No deposit fee, no
withdrawal fee. Read them from the contract yourself:

```bash
cast call --rpc-url https://rpc.hyperliquid.xyz/evm \
  0xe6b30da13c2c97aacd8ba3df4e97977725847fca "feeRates()(uint16,uint16)"
```

[Fees + Redemption Period](fees.md) has the mechanics.

### Is there a lock-up?

Redemptions carry a 7 day cooldown, then settle at the next settlement. In normal
operation that settlement is same-day.

### Why is my deposit still pending?

Deposits settle when the curator next settles: when a deposit or redemption is
pending, or otherwise once per UTC day. Between your request and settlement your
USDC sits in the silo, not in the strategy. If it has been longer than a day,
write to [contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com).

### Can I lose money?

Yes. The strategy is directional, long and short, and it has extended losing
periods by construction, particularly in choppy markets. This is not a yield
product. Read [Risk Overview](risk.md) before depositing.

### Is the track record live or simulated?

The strategy went live on 27 May 2026. Everything before that date is a backtest
with modelled costs. Published figures carry their windows on
[Etesia Multistrat](multistrat.md).

### Who holds custody?

A Gnosis Safe and the Lagoon vault contract, not our servers. Owner sets,
thresholds and modules are public; [Security](security.md) gives you the commands
to read them.

### What happens if Etesia's backend goes down?

Your assets stay in the vault and nothing moves. Settlement stops, because
pricing shares requires a NAV push, so redemption requests queue until service
resumes.

### Is the code audited?

The Lagoon vault framework is, by Nethermind Security and Trail of Bits. Our own
curator and executor code is not, and there is no public bug bounty.
[Security](security.md) has the reports and the scope.

### How is this different from a crypto index or a yield vault?

An index is long-only: it falls when the market falls. A yield vault earns a rate
with no directional upside. We can be long or short, target a level of volatility
rather than a rate, and are structurally uncorrelated to both crypto and
equities. [Our Thesis](thesis.md) is the full argument.

### Is there an API?

No. Read the vault contract directly; [API & SDK](api-sdk.md) covers the call
surface and the gotchas.

### Can I get a separately managed account?

Yes, for allocators who need a mandate: own universe, own volatility target,
negotiated fees, agreed reporting.
[Separately Managed Accounts](sma.md), then
[contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com).

### How do I start?

[app.etesiar.com](https://app.etesiar.com). Connect a wallet holding USDC on
HyperEVM and submit a deposit request. [How They Work](how-they-work.md) walks
through the flow.

==============================================================================
# Risk Warnings and Disclaimers Statement
https://docs.etesiar.com/disclaimers
==============================================================================

Nothing on this site is an offer to sell, a solicitation to buy, or investment
advice. This statement is provided for information and is not legal advice. Read
it before depositing.

### You can lose money

The strategy is directional. It takes long and short positions in perpetual
futures and it can lose. Trend-following has extended losing periods by
construction, particularly in choppy markets.

The deepest drawdown in the simulated period was 9.3% over 92 days. That is one
window's outcome, not a limit.

### Most of the track record is simulated

The strategy went live on 27 May 2026. Everything before that is a backtest with
modelled costs. Simulated results routinely overstate what follows. The live
sample is weeks long.

### Audit scope

Lagoon's vault framework has been reviewed by Nethermind Security across its
release history and by Trail of Bits on the two versions our vaults run. Those
reports are public. Our own curator services, NAV computation, executors and
permission configuration have not been audited, and there is no public bug
bounty.

Lagoon published a low-level bug disclosure in January 2026, after those reviews.
An audit is evidence of effort, not a guarantee.

### Redemption is not immediate

A 7 day cooldown, then a wait for the next settlement, which depends on our
backend being alive to push a NAV. An extended outage queues redemptions for as
long as it lasts.

### Operational keys are a live risk surface

The strategy is driven by hot keys that sign continuously: a valuation manager
pushing NAV, a curator settling, a trading key sending orders. Custody models
differ between deployments and the authority each key holds differs with them.

Do not rely on a documentation page for this. Read the Safe's owner set,
threshold and modules onchain before you deposit, and re-read them if you hold a
position for any length of time. Commands are on [Security](security.md).

### Venue risk is concentrated

The live strategy executes overwhelmingly on Hyperliquid. A halt, exploit,
socialised loss event or insolvency there would affect the portfolio directly.

### Other risks

**Oracle and pricing.** NAV is computed off-chain. An error inside the guard
bounds still prices shares wrongly and transfers value between whoever transacts
in that window and everyone else.

**Liquidity.** Large positions can be hard to exit at modelled prices in thin
conditions, particularly in the tokenized RWA sleeves.

**Model risk.** The strategy is calibrated on history and the effects it harvests
could weaken as these markets mature.

**Regulatory.** See [Regional Availability](regional-availability.md).

**Operational.** Off-chain infrastructure can fail. Redundancy and monitoring are
in place; outages remain possible.

==============================================================================
# Regional Availability
https://docs.etesiar.com/regional-availability
==============================================================================

**Etesia Research Inc.** is the operating entity. It is not a regulated asset
manager, and depositing into the vaults gives you none of the protections that
come with investing in a regulated fund.

The public vault is a permissionless smart contract. There is no geographic
gating and no KYC at the point of deposit. Whether you may lawfully use it is
your own determination, and nothing on this site is an invitation directed at any
particular jurisdiction.

The regulatory position of digital assets and onchain asset management is
evolving. Changes in law or regulatory action could affect the availability or
operation of these products in some jurisdictions.

### Sanctions screening

We operate our vaults with Lagoon's Access Manager in blacklist mode, wired to an
onchain sanctions list. Screening is enforced by the vault contract, so it
applies to every deposit regardless of the interface used to submit it, and we
cannot waive it for an individual address.

Lagoon documents the mechanism as follows: the Access Manager can "block specific
addresses from interacting with the vault", can "integrate with a third-party
on-chain sanctions list for automated compliance checks", and sanctioned addresses
"are blocked regardless of the active access mode". Blacklist mode is set at vault
creation rather than toggled afterwards. See
[Access Manager](https://docs.lagoon.finance/vault/roles-and-capacities/whitelist-manager).

This addresses sanctions screening at the point of deposit. It is not a KYC
programme and not a restricted-jurisdictions policy.

### Policies

Terms of use, a privacy policy and a formal jurisdictional policy have not yet
been published. For a question about availability in your jurisdiction, write to
[contact@etesiar.com](mailto:contact@etesiar.com).