Every change to the scoring methodology, on the record.

·The per-token value we use for the 97 Ondo Global Markets tokens we track (tokenized US stocks and ETFs such as TLTon, SPYon and NVDAon) is Ondo's published market price for each token. It is a market price. It is not a net asset value.

·Ondo does not publish a net asset value per token. Each token is a security token linked to one underlying stock or ETF. Its value is the number of underlying shares each token represents, which rises as dividends are reinvested, multiplied by the underlying's market price. Ondo's price follows the underlying through regular, pre-market, after-hours and overnight trading, so it moves during the day.

·Capital for these tokens is circulating supply multiplied by that price, as before.

·No published value changes, and earlier figures are unchanged. Figures published before this date were computed from the same price and remain an accurate record of what we published.

·No dimension weights, formulas, band cutoffs, or tier values changed.

·USDY is not SEC-registered, it has no named financial-statement auditor, and no audit of the issuing entity is on record. Our "SEC-registered, with a named auditor" regulatory tier requires all three.

·Ondo states the position plainly in its own documentation: USDY is offered in reliance on Regulation S, "which exempts USDY from the securities registration requirements", and may be sold only to non-US persons outside the United States. The issuing entity, Ondo USDY LLC, is a Delaware special-purpose vehicle that borrows funds and issues USDY as evidence of that debt. Its only registration is as a money services business with FinCEN — an anti-money-laundering registration, not a securities or fund authorization.

·Ankura Trust is USDY's Verification and Collateral Agent, and its daily reserve reports are real, independent, and publicly available. But confirming that reserves exist and match supply is not an audit of financial statements, so it does not satisfy the auditor requirement, the same line drawn for oracle-based proof-of-reserve attestations. Those reports count in disclosure quality.

·Custody verification moves for a related reason. USDY files no periodic reports, so there is no SEC schedule of investments, and Ankura's reports are published in aggregate rather than as a line-item holdings schedule. That is the tier below the top.

·USDY now sits on the "claims regulation, but documentation is thin" tier — the same tier, for the same reason, as other funds we score that are genuinely structured but hold no fund-level authorization anywhere. Real structure exists here: a bankruptcy-remote Delaware vehicle, a perfected first-priority security interest, and daily independent reserve attestation. That is why USDY does not fall to the bottom of the scale.

·Effect: exactly one instrument moves — USDY, from 84 to 70. It remains in the Rated band and remains a constituent of the OCB RWA Treasury index, whose constituent weights are set by supply and fixed at each reconstitution. No index level, no index history, and no constituent weight changes as a result.

·Because this is a re-rating rather than a market move, USDY's rating history restarts at the corrected figure. The scores published before this date are left exactly as they were — they are an accurate record of what we published, and we do not rewrite them.

·No dimension weights, formulas, band cutoffs, or tier values changed. This is a correction to one instrument's inputs, not a change to the scale.

·BlackRock's BUIDL is not an SEC-registered fund. Its only SEC filings are Form D and Form D/A, a private-placement exemption notice, and its own most recent filing states that it is not registered under the Investment Company Act. It is a British Virgin Islands fund offered to qualified purchasers.

·BUIDL now sits on the "claims regulation, but documentation is thin" tier. The British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission does list the fund on its public register as a Professional Fund, and PricewaterhouseCoopers is named as its auditor in BUIDL's own launch materials — both real, and both reasons it does not fall to the bottom of our scale. But that audit covers the year ending December 2024, it has never been published, and no more recent one is on record. Our next tier up requires an audit within twelve months, so the fund does not reach it. We score what we can verify, not what a jurisdiction's rules imply should exist.

·If a current, dated audit is produced, BUIDL moves up a tier.

·Three related classifications changed at the same time. Its redemption path is now scored as institutional-only rather than a regulated NAV facility — the facility is real and daily, but that higher tier is reserved for registered funds. Its disclosure cadence now reads on the daily third-party attestation it publishes, which scores higher on that sub-signal, so that one moved up.

·Effect: exactly one instrument moves — BUIDL, from 72 to 61. It leaves the Rated band and falls below the 70 threshold for index eligibility. BUIDL has never been a constituent of any published OCB index, and no index level or history changes as a result.

·Because this is a re-rating rather than a market move, BUIDL's rating history restarts at the corrected figure: the published series begins again on the correction date, the way it would after any genuine re-rating. The scores published before this date are left exactly as they were — they are an accurate record of what we published, and we do not rewrite them.

·No dimension weights, formulas, band cutoffs, or tier values changed. This is a correction to one instrument's inputs, not a change to the scale.

·A tokenized bank deposit (a direct claim on a bank's balance sheet) is now scored on the trust basis that actually applies to it: the issuing bank's charter and prudential supervision. Previously our regulatory-standing scale topped out at an SEC-registered fund with a filed PCAOB audit — a disclosure surface a bank deposit does not produce — so a deposit issued by a globally systemically important bank defaulted to the bottom "weak documentation" tier.

·v1.4 adds a "prudentially-supervised bank" regulatory-standing tier, used only for tokenized bank deposits. It is earned by a bank deposit liability inside the banking perimeter (a G-SIB or federally-chartered, FDIC-eligible issuer) — not by any issuer's name: a weakly-chartered deposit token would not qualify for it. Its value sits just below the top fund-audit tier, because a bank charter is a different trust basis than a filed securities-fund audit.

·We also recognize a bank's regulated, periodic liability reporting as a valid disclosure basis (previously scored as if no disclosure existed). This is deliberately conservative: it credits the regulated-reporting status only. Attestation freshness and consistency stay at zero until the issuer publishes a machine-readable attestation feed — we do not credit disclosure we cannot independently observe. A deposit token's score rises further, toward the Rated band, once such a feed exists.

·Effect: exactly one instrument moves — JPMorgan's deposit token (JPMD), from 43 (Unverifiable) to 53 (Limited). No other instrument's score changes. Custody verification is unchanged: a bank deposit still has no independently filed per-token holdings schedule, so it stays at the same "described" tier as its peers.

·The four dimensions, their formulas, and the composite weights are all unchanged. Only the regulatory-standing tier table for bank deposit tokens, and their disclosure basis, changed.

·The stablecoin band ladder is unified with the rest of OCB's rating system. "Healthy ≥ 80" is retired; bands are now Verified (≥ 85), Institutional Grade (≥ 70), Monitored (60–69), Elevated Risk (40–59), and Flagged (below 40) — the same cutoffs the RWA rating uses. Institutional-Grade Capital (≥ 70) is the headline quality marker; Verified Capital (≥ 85) is the strict top tier within it.

·The transparency voluntary-attestation cap is now tiered by attestation strength. A fresh (≤ 30 days) PCAOB attestation from a top-tier US trust issuer caps transparency at 23 rather than the default 19; weaker or stale voluntary attestations remain capped at 19. This lets a top-tier US-chartered stablecoin with strong independent attestation reach the Verified tier, which the flat 19 cap made unreachable, while preserving the anti-gaming rationale for the general voluntary case.

·Effect: USDC and USDP move from ~83 into the Verified band (≥ 85); RLUSD and PYUSD rise but stay below it; other stablecoins are unaffected. Each index now publishes both an Institutional-Grade Capital (≥ 70) figure and a Verified Capital (≥ 85) figure.

·No dimension weights or dimension formulas changed. Only the band cutoffs and the voluntary-cap tiering changed.

·Holder concentration for a fund deployed on multiple chains is now measured across ALL of those chains together, not only its primary chain.

·Previously a fund's concentration was read from a single primary chain. For a fund whose holders mostly sit on a non-primary chain, that could report a concentration figure built from an unrepresentative slice.

·Today one fund is affected: Spiko EU T-Bills (EUTBL), whose distribution is mostly on Stellar. Its concentration reads 40.6% across chains (was measured off its Ethereum slice), moving its rating band from Limited to Rated. No other fund's band changes.

·Disclosed limitation: chains are combined by wallet address; a single holder using different addresses on different chains is counted as separate holders, so a cross-chain aggregate can read slightly LESS concentrated than reality. Chains where holder coverage is incomplete are dropped from the aggregate rather than guessed.

·The four dimensions and the composite formula are unchanged; only the concentration input for opted-in multi-chain funds changed.

·Added two descriptive fields published alongside the rating, NOT folded into the numeric grade or its four dimensions.

·Custody-disclosure class: how completely an issuer discloses where reserves are custodied (named custodians + independence of verification). Not a bank-concentration number — issuers do not publish per-custodian weights, a source-disclosure gap we surface rather than estimate.

·Backing-mechanism class: the collateral mechanism (exogenous-fiat, crypto-overcollateralized, delta-neutral-synthetic, RWA-backed, aggregate-only-opaque, endogenous-reflexive) — the categorical design fact the reserve-quality tier collapses.

·Published alongside these fields: a failure-vector coverage map stating what the two measures do and do not see (custody disclosure and reflexivity are covered; true bank concentration is not measurable; oracle, governance and legal-seizure risk are out of scope).

·The grade, its four dimensions, and all prior scores are unchanged.

·Equities are measured (holders and transfers) from inception. The equities rubric has always scored holder concentration (§3.4).

·Published an explicit GRADUATION BAR: a tokenized-equity instrument is surfaced as an 'emerging' instrument until it clears ≥ $5M outstanding onchain supply AND ≥ 50 distinct onchain holders (post-exclusion), sustained over 30 consecutive days — then it counts toward headline equities coverage. Below the bar, concentration/liquidity are not statistically meaningful, so the instrument is measured and visible but not headline-counted.

·This is a transparency threshold (the same logic that gates every asset class), not a quality judgment or a scoring-constant change. PROPOSED thresholds ($5M / 50 holders) — subject to confirmation before launch.

·The Claim Verifiability oracle remains the one genuine v2.1 deferral, independent of this bar.

·The RWA index is renamed from "RWA Verified Capital Index" to "RWA Quality Index" to match the positioning the product already leads with: institutional-grade (≥70) is the primary quality marker; Verified Capital (≥85) is the strict top tier within it.

·The quality tiers are simplified to two labels: Institutional-grade (≥70) and Verified Capital (≥85). "Verified Capital" names both the top tier and the dollar value clearing the ≥85 bar. Only the index's NAME changed; no scores moved.

·Public URL changed from /index/rwa-verified-capital to /index/rwa-quality (301 redirect from the old slug).

·This is a NAMING change only. No scoring constant, weight, threshold, band, or classifier changed.

·The RWA quality composite changes from an equal-weight sum of four dimensions to a weighted sum, where each dimension is weighted by how well it can be measured onchain.

·Weights (multipliers summing to 4.0, so the /100 scale and band thresholds are unchanged): Structural Trust ×1.4, Holder Concentration ×1.3, Redemption Liquidity ×0.9, Disclosure Quality ×0.4.

·Rationale: measured coverage showed disclosure has real data for only 18% of instruments while structural (94%) and behavioral/concentration (88%) are well-covered. Equal weighting let our thinnest-signal dimension drag scores down for the majority of instruments. Weighting by measurability makes the grade reflect measurable quality rather than coverage gaps.

·Applies to treasury, commodity, and private credit. Equities retains equal weighting (its coverage profile differs).

·Band thresholds unchanged (Verified ≥85). The change re-sorts instruments by measurable quality — some rise (e.g. strong structural/behavioral profiles previously dragged by thin disclosure data), some fall (e.g. instruments whose only strength was disclosure).

·New index: OCB Liquidity Depth Index. Measures onchain DEX exit capacity at 1% slippage as a fraction of covered supply, in basis points.

·Formula: raw reading = (Σ depth / Σ supply) × 10,000 (basis points), where depth is the sum of 1%-slippage DEX depth across each instrument's configured pools.

·v1.0 population: USDY (treasury RWA, Curve), USDT (Uniswap V3), PYUSD (Curve + Uniswap V3), USDe (Curve + Uniswap V3), USD0 (Uniswap V3) — 5 instruments, 7 pools, Ethereum.

·Excluded: OUSG, BUIDL, BENJI, USYC (no material DEX pools); USDC (direct 1:1 redemption; DEX depth not the relevant metric).

·Freshness SLA: 36 hours. Minimum 3 fresh constituents to publish. Calibration window: 30 days.

·Sanity gate: 1–1000 bps alert range; >50 bps day-over-day change triggers a volatility alert.

·Rebased to inception level = 100.

·Depth approximation notes: Curve StableSwap coefficient ±20%; Uniswap V3 uses in-tick L — overstates depth if trade crosses ticks.

·Graduated 36 Dinari dShare instruments on Arbitrum.

·Claim Verifiability oracle deferred to v2.1 — all instruments score 0 on sub-signal A until oracle ships.

·Expected composite: 45–67 (Limited / Rated).

·Index aggregation widened from primary-deployment-only to all NATIVE deployments across seven chains.

·USDC adds Base / Arbitrum / Polygon / Solana / Avalanche native mints; USDT adds Tron / Solana / Avalanche; PYUSD adds Solana.

·Bridged variants (USDC.e, USDbC, etc.) intentionally excluded to avoid double-counting Ethereum-locked supply.

·Per-instrument scoring methodology unchanged; per-instrument scores remain tagged v1.0-stablecoin.

·Result: coverage $156B → $269B, Healthy Capital $52B → $70B.

·Locked rubric: Reserve Quality (single tier table), Redemption Depth (direct + onchain + joint-path bonus), Holder Concentration (Track 1), Transparency (freshness / consistency / regulatory standing at 35/30/35).

·Healthy ≥ 80.

·Four dimensions established: Disclosure Quality (3 sub-signals + voluntary cap 19 + aggregate cap), Redemption Liquidity (direct + onchain + joint-path bonus), Structural Trust (Regulatory Standing + Governance + NEW Custody Verification), Holder Concentration (two-track: retail-facing vs institutional-direct).

·Band thresholds: Verified ≥ 85, Rated 65–84, Limited 45–64, Unverifiable < 45.

·Verified Capital aggregation threshold: 85. Documented as a separate parameter from the Verified band threshold; they may evolve independently through this change-control process.

·Per-instrument classifications (regulatory standing, governance structure and upgrade path, timelock, custody verification, disclosure basis, attestation kind, concentration track, direct redemption) declared with evidence-backed citations.

·The governance sub-signal measures the issuer-structural governance, not just the onchain admin pattern. Single-EOA admins controlled by regulated institutional issuers are classified by their issuer-level structure.