Skip to main content

Roadmap

Rarity is designed to be built incrementally, with each phase establishing a solid foundation before adding complexity. The roadmap prioritizes simplicity, security, and market validation at each stage, ensuring that the protocol evolves based on real usage and community feedback rather than theoretical assumptions.

Phase 1: Foundation (Initial release)​

Collection model: Asset-backed tokens only​

The initial release focuses exclusively on the asset-backed token model:

  • Fixed issuance per asset: Each asset mints a predetermined number of tokens
  • Transparent supply math: Supply scales linearly with acquisitions
  • Lower trust requirements: Minimizes reliance on issuer valuations
  • Easier verification: Anyone can count assets and verify supply math on-chain

Why this choice: The asset-backed model provides the simplest foundation for the protocol, enabling the team to focus on core infrastructure without the additional complexity of NAV-based minting.

Core products​

Bootstrapping (Raredrop):

  • Collection creation with authentication and whitelisting
  • Initial token offering at acquisition value
  • Transition to permissionless trading
  • Issuer liquidity reserves (10% assets, 10% funds)

Minting:

  • Two-path minting: Issuer-acquired assets (with 80/20 distribution requirements) and custodian-verified assets (for existing owners to tokenize holdings)
  • Supply management mechanisms (prevents disorderly market impact when acquisition price < pool price):
    • Hold period (creates cooling-off buffer before supply entry)
    • Release curve (convex schedule spreads supply over time)
    • Open interest orderbook (limit orders provide demand signals and committed capital)
    • Floor enforcement (protocol-level guarantee preventing sales below acquisition price)
  • Surplus distribution: When assets are acquired below pool price, minting surplus flows to LPs (40%), collection cost pot (40%), and protocol performance fee (20%)
  • Coordinated mechanism design: All mechanisms work together—hold period creates time for open interest accumulation, release curve matches supply with demand, surplus distribution incentivizes proper execution

Spot Trading (CL AMM):

  • Concentrated liquidity automated market maker
  • Depth-aware pricing (TWAP, RWAP)
  • Limit orders via order book
  • Dynamic fee schedules

Mark-to-Truth auctions:

  • Price convergence mechanism when market deviates from fundamentals
  • Backstop for mispriced pools
  • Transparent, on-chain execution
  • Kernel-weighted rebates: Incentivizes tight, informative order books by rewarding filled bids near clearing price (only on successful recentering)
  • Statistical confidence gates: Standard error, concentration checks, and dispersion metrics ensure only credible price discovery triggers mark updates

Fees & Economic Model:

  • Transparent cost structure: Custody (0.40–0.70%/yr), insurance (0.25–0.50%/yr), admin margin (0.10–0.25%/yr)
  • Revenue sources: Bootstrapping fee (0.5–2.0% one-time), minting surplus performance fee (20%), AMM swap fees (0.30–0.80%), lending spread, futures fees
  • Waterfall + dilution: Collection-specific revenue pays costs first; shortfalls covered by token dilution to socialize burden fairly
  • Fee routing: Swap fees split between LPs (70–80%), collection cost pot (10–20%), protocol treasury (10–15%)
  • djinUSD yield: Base yield (4–5% from treasuries/DeFi) distributed via merit-based pots, with 10–15% protocol take for basket management

Bootstrapping configuration​

Modular Raredrop parameters: Collections can customize transition conditions, access rules, and participation constraints—all encoded in smart contracts with no governance discretion.

Auto-LP participation constraints: Collections can require participants to immediately provide LP (tokens + stablecoins) upon purchase, transforming early buyers into market makers and ensuring initial capital supports liquidity depth.

Issuer liquidity reserves: Default 10% of assets and 10% of raised funds reserved for active market-making post-launch, ensuring tight spreads and composability with DeFi primitives.

Transparent transition: When distribution and time thresholds are met, the same pool becomes the live trading venue—no migration, no fragmentation, no governance votes.

Explicitly deferred mechanisms​

Several minting mechanisms documented in research will not be implemented in Phase 1:

Bonded minting: Requires significant collateral capital (tokens minted against deposited stablecoin collateral). The asset-backed model with fixed issuance doesn't face the "runaway dilution" problems that bonded minting solves. May be explored if the platform expands to fund-like structures with continuous minting.

Privacy-preserving minting: Commit-and-reveal schemes for gradual acquisition price disclosure. Other mechanisms (hold periods, release curves, open interest) have been determined sufficient for handling information-driven panic selling. Privacy becomes especially interesting when combined with Dutch auctions to prevent strategic gaming—may be explored in Phase 3 during minting mechanism experimentation.

Why defer: Phase 1 prioritizes simpler, proven mechanisms that handle Case B scenarios (acquisition below pool price) effectively. Adding complexity without clear necessity increases surface area for bugs and obscures core protocol behavior.

Success criteria​

Phase 1 is considered successful when:

  • Multiple collections are live and trading
  • Minting mechanisms have been tested with real acquisitions
  • Mark-to-Truth auctions have successfully converged prices
  • Community feedback validates the core mechanisms
  • Security audits confirm the infrastructure is production-ready

Phase 2: DeFi composability​

Lending​

Enable tokenized assets to be used as collateral:

  • Permissionless pair-based lending: Each spot pair automatically exposes a lending market
  • Depth-aware borrowing power: LTV ratios based on spot trading windows, not fixed tables
  • Soft liquidations: Time-sliced, depth-aware liquidations that minimize market impact
  • Snapshot LTV: Ratios taken at position open/adjust, preventing rule changes on live positions
  • Cross-collateral pools: Permissioned pools for verified entities requiring more complex collateral baskets
  • Liquidity reuse: Deposits can simultaneously earn base yield, secure loans, and back limit orders

Futures​

Perpetual futures using internal trading as the oracle:

  • Oracleless design: Leverage limits and funding derived from spot trading windows
  • Depth-aware leverage: Maximum leverage based on executable liquidity
  • Funding linked to borrowing costs: Actual lending market rates, not synthetic funding
  • Settlement in stablecoin: Clean separation between trading and settlement

Success criteria​

Phase 2 is considered successful when:

  • Lending markets are active with healthy utilization
  • Futures markets demonstrate stable funding and leverage limits
  • Cross-product composability works seamlessly (spot → lend → futures)
  • Risk management proves effective across market conditions

Phase 3: Advanced mechanisms​

Minting mechanism experimentation​

Test alternative minting mechanisms based on Phase 1 learnings:

Primary candidates (highest priority for experimentation):

  • Dutch auction release: Descending-price auctions for transparent price discovery—especially powerful when combined with privacy-preserving price commitments to prevent strategic gaming
  • TWAP-based release: Time-weighted average pricing for price-stable entry
  • RWAP-based release: Reserve-weighted average pricing for depth-aware entry
  • Staking-based priority: Priority access for token holders who stake, aligning long-term holder interests

Secondary exploration (lower priority, more complex):

  • Yield-bearing hold periods: Tokens deposited into yield-bearing positions during hold period
  • Floor check (guarded pool): Prevents minting below guarded market price, blocking attempts to claim artificially low acquisition prices
  • Per-collection supply caps: Limits total supply per collection to prevent market flooding
  • Bonded minting: Collateral-backed minting with redemption mechanisms (requires significant capital, mainly relevant for variable issuance models)
  • Privacy-preserving mechanisms: Commit-and-reveal schemes for gradual price disclosure (especially interesting with Dutch auctions)

Approach: Run controlled experiments with specific collections to gather data on mechanism performance before broader deployment. Phase 1 learnings will guide prioritization—market conditions and community feedback determine which mechanisms advance to production.

Auctions module​

Sealed-bid second-price auctions for rare assets:

  • Privacy-preserving bids: Zero-knowledge proofs or trusted execution
  • Fair price discovery: Second-price mechanism prevents winner's curse
  • Integration with collections: Auction winners receive tokenized assets
  • Settlement options: Direct ownership or fractional tokenization

Success criteria​

Phase 3 is considered successful when:

  • Alternative mechanisms have been tested and evaluated
  • Data-driven decisions guide which mechanisms to adopt broadly
  • Auctions module demonstrates fair price discovery
  • Community consensus on preferred mechanisms emerges

Phase 4: Expansion​

Collection model: Fund with variable issuance​

Expand to support heterogeneous asset portfolios:

  • NAV-based minting: Tokens minted proportional to acquisition value
  • Dynamic supply management: Supply grows with contributed value, not item count
  • Enhanced trust framework: Additional verification and attestation mechanisms
  • Adapted minting mechanisms: Hold periods, release curves, and open interest adjusted for variable issuance

Why later: Variable issuance requires more complex trust assumptions and infrastructure. By this phase, the protocol has established market confidence and can introduce additional complexity safely.

Broader asset classes​

Expand beyond rare collectibles to:

  • Real estate: Tokenized property portfolios with rental yields
  • Loan portfolios: Diversified lending pools with credit risk
  • Mixed treasuries: Heterogeneous fixed-income instruments
  • Alternative assets: Art, wine, classic cars, and other collectibles

Success criteria​

Phase 4 is considered successful when:

  • Variable issuance is proven in production with multiple collections
  • Diverse asset classes are represented on the platform
  • Market depth supports meaningful trading volumes across asset types
  • Institutional participation validates the platform's maturity

Phase 5: Ecosystem maturity​

Advanced DeFi primitives​

Build on the established foundation:

  • Yield optimizers: Automated strategies across spot, lending, and futures
  • Index funds: Curated baskets of tokenized assets
  • Options markets: European-style options on tokenized assets
  • Insurance products: Hedging and protection mechanisms

Governance and decentralization​

Transition to community governance:

  • Protocol governance: Community-driven parameter adjustments
  • Collection curation: Decentralized whitelisting and verification
  • Fee distribution: Transparent revenue sharing mechanisms
  • Upgrade paths: Community-approved protocol improvements

Success criteria​

Phase 5 is considered successful when:

  • Ecosystem participants build on top of Rarity's infrastructure
  • Community governance operates effectively
  • Protocol sustainability is demonstrated through revenue and usage
  • Network effects create self-reinforcing growth

Guiding principles​

Throughout all phases, the roadmap adheres to core principles:

  1. Incremental complexity: Add features only when foundations are solid
  2. Market validation: Let real usage guide development priorities
  3. Security first: Thorough audits and testing before each phase
  4. Community feedback: Listen to users and adapt based on learnings
  5. Transparent communication: Clear updates on progress and challenges
  6. Pragmatic complexity: Add mechanisms only when simpler alternatives fail. Document explicitly what's NOT being built and why. Phase 1 defers bonded minting and privacy-preserving techniques because hold periods + release curves + open interest are sufficient. Complexity has costs—bugs, obscured behavior, reduced auditability—so every mechanism must justify its existence through real-world necessity, not theoretical elegance.

The roadmap is not fixed—it will evolve based on market conditions, community feedback, and technological developments. The goal is to build a sustainable protocol that serves real user needs, not to rush through a predetermined feature list.

Timeline considerations​

No fixed dates: The roadmap prioritizes quality over speed. Each phase completes when success criteria are met, not when a calendar date arrives.

Parallel development: Some phases may overlap. For example, Phase 2 (lending) may begin before Phase 1 is fully complete if core infrastructure is ready.

Flexibility: The team reserves the right to adjust priorities based on market conditions, security considerations, or community feedback.

Transparency: Regular updates will communicate progress, challenges, and any roadmap adjustments to the community.

Get involved​

The roadmap represents the team's current vision, but community input shapes priorities:

  • Feedback: Share thoughts on which features matter most
  • Testing: Participate in testnet deployments and provide feedback
  • Governance: As the protocol matures, community governance will guide development
  • Building: Developers can build on top of Rarity's infrastructure

Rarity is designed to be a community-driven protocol. The roadmap evolves based on what users need, not just what the team envisions.