TimeRepublik
Time Banking Network·Active·Switzerland (HQ) / Global
Global peer-to-peer timebanking platform (founded 2012) where members earn TimeCoins by providing services to others, with 1 hour of any service equaling 1 TimeCoin. Operates across 110+ countries with 100,000+ members.
M69 Score
Methodology →3.0
Partially aligned
Monetary Sovereignty
3.4
Civilizational Durability
1.8
Universal Adoption
3.4
Framework v0.2-alphaRated 1mo ago
M69 Verdict
TimeRepublik is a global peer-to-peer timebanking platform founded in 2012 in Lugano, Switzerland by Gabriele Donati and Karim Varini. Operating under the for-profit Swiss entity TimeRepublik SA, the platform markets itself as the world's largest timebank, with over 100,000 members across more than 100 countries. The platform uses a digital currency called TimeCoin, where 1 TimeCoin equals 15 minutes of time (so 4 TimeCoins = 1 hour) regardless of the skill or service provided. New members receive up to 20 TimeCoins as a welcome gift. The company has offices in New York, Italy, Switzerland, Brazil, Taiwan, and Spain, and has built B2B products (TimeRepublik Enterprise), an Android app (TimeRepublik Messenger developed with Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions), and a sub-community ("communities") feature relaunched in 2021 that allows members to spin up their own sub-timebanks. From an M69 alignment perspective, TimeRepublik's strongest attributes are its fully sovereign unit of account (time, with no fiat peg), debt-free issuance, equal-treatment principle (one unit of time equals one unit of anyone else's time), zero-cost access, global reach across 100+ countries, and a 13+ year operational track record. Partnerships with Banca Intesa Sanpaolo's Digital Campus, the municipality of Messina, local governments in Sarre (Italy), and UBI pilots in Colombia demonstrate meaningful institutional traction for a community currency. However, TimeRepublik is structurally a for-profit Swiss corporation with centralized, proprietary infrastructure. The platform is custodial (all balances live on company servers), governance is corporate (not democratic or community-based), source code is closed, there is no technological enforcement of monetary rules, and the entire system depends on the continued operation of the parent company. Unlike hOurworld (which at least operates as a nonprofit with local coordinator autonomy), TimeRepublik concentrates both custody and governance in a single private entity. The company is actively assessing blockchain integration via its Mangrovia partnership but has not yet deployed on-chain enforcement. These structural gaps materially limit its Civilizational Durability pillar score.
Key Findings
Strongest categories: Fiat Independence (3.7), Inclusivity (3.6), Issuance Model (3.4), and Universal Adoption pillar (3.4).
TimeRepublik's monetary design is genuinely fiat-independent — the TimeCoin unit is time itself, with zero fiat peg, zero fiat reserves, and zero fiat oracles. Its "one hour equals one hour" principle delivers radical equality at the monetary layer, and zero-cost access across 100+ countries is meaningful global inclusivity.
Weakest categories: Governance (1.6) and Sovereignty (1.5).
TimeRepublik SA is a for-profit Swiss corporation that concentrates both custody and governance in a single private entity. There is no distributed governance, no on-chain enforcement, no self-custody, no open source code, and no constitutional protection for the monetary rule. The company can change the 15-minute-per-TimeCoin ratio, suspend accounts, or shut the platform down unilaterally — no technological or governance constraints exist.
The "for-profit corporate timebank" paradox is the defining tension.
Unlike hOurworld (which operates as a nonprofit with distributed local coordinators), TimeRepublik is a VC-funded corporation monetizing timebanking via B2B enterprise contracts. This funding model provides sustainability and professional execution (mobile app, banking partnerships, UBI pilots) that hOurworld lacks — but it also creates shareholder-vs-member incentive misalignment that community-owned timebanks avoid. The platform's egalitarian monetary principle sits inside an economically inequal corporate structure.
Institutional partnerships are a standout strength.
The Banca Intesa Sanpaolo Digital Campus pilot (targeting 120K employees), Messina municipality cooperation, Sarre adoption, Colombia UBI pilot, and corporate enterprise deployments show that timebanking as a concept has moved beyond community mutual-aid into institutional adoption — a traction dimension hOurworld and most other timebanks have not achieved.
Blockchain exposure is a dormant opportunity.
The partnership with Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions and ongoing assessment of blockchain integration signals that TimeRepublik is at least aware of the civilizational-durability gap in its current architecture. However, after 13 years and a visible Mangrovia partnership, no on-chain deployment has materialized — suggesting the gap between aspiration and execution on decentralization is wide.
Big takeaway: TimeRepublik proves that debt-free, labor-backed, fiat-independent money can scale to 100,000+ members across 100+ countries with institutional partners — but its centralized, corporate, proprietary architecture means every M69 alignment strength sits atop a single private company whose shutdown would erase the entire network.
An open-source, blockchain-enforced version of the TimeCoin design — preserving the 1-TimeCoin-equals-15-minutes rule and sub-community feature while adding cryptographic enforcement, self-custody, and distributed governance — would be among the most M69-aligned projects possible.
M69 Score
M69 Alignment3.0
Partially aligned
1.02.03.04.05.0
Monetary Sovereignty3.4
Issuance (3x) + Stability (2x) + Fiat Indep. (2x)Civilizational Durability1.8
Sovereignty + Governance + ResilienceUniversal Adoption3.4
Traction (2x) + InclusivityIss Mod3x
3.4
Stability2x
3.1
Fia Ind & Int2x
3.7
Traction2x
3.3
Sovereignty
1.5
Governance
1.6
Resilience
2.2
Inclusivity
3.6
Scored against the Money2069 Manifesto — see methodology. Higher = more aligned.
Detailed Rating Breakdown
Issuance Model3x3.4
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| IM-01 | Is issuance permissionless?Semi-open and rule-based. Any member worldwide can earn TimeCoins by providing a service; issuance is automatic upon service completion and does not require per-transaction approval. However, onboarding requires creating an account on the proprietary TimeRepublik platform and accepting company terms, and the welcome grant of 20 TimeCoins is controlled by the operator. Permissioned set of issuers (members) under rule-based issuance. | 3 |
| IM-02 | Is new supply created through debt?No debt mechanism. TimeCoins are created when one member provides a service to another — the provider is credited and the receiver is debited. There is no borrowing, no interest, no collateral, and no lending. New-member welcome grants are issued by the platform, not borrowed. | 5 |
| IM-03 | Is issuance tied to measurable real-world economic activity?Directly tied to labor. Each TimeCoin represents 15 minutes of actual service delivered — tutoring, translation, therapy, photography, programming, childcare, etc. Issuance is a direct function of real productive activity. The 20-TimeCoin welcome grant is a small exception tied to platform onboarding rather than output. | 4 |
| IM-04 | Does the issuance model have a supply cap or hard ceiling?Elastic supply with no hard cap. Supply expands naturally as members perform services for each other. At the peer-to-peer level, exchanges are zero-sum transfers; net new creation comes from welcome grants and, in sub-communities, from community pool allocations. No formal ceiling is defined, but growth is bounded by labor output. | 3 |
| IM-05 | Can supply contract (burn/redemption) as well as expand?Partial. When a member spends TimeCoins on another member's service, their balance decreases — a transfer, not a burn. There is no systematic burn or demurrage mechanism, no expiry on TimeCoins, and no protocol-level supply contraction. Contraction is not a designed feature. | 2 |
Spending Power Stability2x3.1
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| SPS-01 | What mechanism does the protocol use to target spending power stability?2× Structural, not algorithmic. 1 TimeCoin is defined as 15 minutes of any member's time, and this ratio is fixed by policy. There is no rebase, no oracle, no rate adjustment, and no algorithmic feedback. Stability is a consequence of the definitional anchor (time itself). | 2 |
| SPS-02 | What benchmark is used to measure spending power?2× Human time (15-minute unit) — a real-economy anchor tied to productive capacity. The benchmark is invariant ("an hour of my life equals an hour of your life") and structurally anchors the unit to labor output with egalitarian weighting. Not a CPI or commodity basket; a self-referential labor unit. | 4 |
| SPS-03 | How transparent and verifiable is the stability measurement?1× The 1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes rule is publicly stated and conceptually transparent, but it is enforced by the operator on a centralized, closed-source database. Participants can verify the rule conceptually but cannot independently audit the underlying system or balances. | 2 |
| SPS-04 | What is the protocol's historical deviation from its stability target?2× The 15-minute-per-TimeCoin ratio has been maintained since 2012 — 13+ years. By definition, the unit cannot deviate from its target because the unit IS time. Members report exchanging TimeCoins at the stated ratio consistently across a decade-plus of operation. | 4 |
| SPS-05 | Does the protocol distinguish between short-term volatility and long-term purchasing power drift?1.5× Neither dimension is explicitly addressed. The time anchor trivially avoids both because there is no market price and an hour is always an hour. The platform does not engineer separate mechanisms for daily or multi-year purchasing-power drift — stability is a side effect of the unit's definition, not a designed feature. | 2 |
| SPS-06 | Is the stability mechanism accessible globally?1× The 1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes rule applies identically to every member worldwide. Members in 100+ countries participate on the same terms. Practical access requires internet connectivity and account creation, but the stability mechanism itself functions identically across regions. | 4 |
Fiat Independence & Interoperability2x3.7
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| FI-01 | What is the protocol's unit of account?2× Fully sovereign unit of account. The TimeCoin (15 minutes of time) is defined independently of any fiat currency. Services are priced in TimeCoins (or equivalently, in hours), not in CHF, USD, or EUR. The unit is self-referential: 1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes of any member's time. | 5 |
| FI-02 | What is the fiat composition of the protocol's collateral or reserves?2× Zero fiat reserves. TimeCoins have no collateral or backing of any kind — they are backed by the reciprocal obligation of members to provide services. No fiat, no crypto, no commodities. | 5 |
| FI-03 | Does the protocol depend on fiat banking infrastructure to function?1× The time-exchange mechanism itself does not require banking — members exchange services with TimeCoins recorded on the platform. However, TimeRepublik SA is a for-profit Swiss corporation funded via angel rounds and B2B contracts (Banca Intesa Sanpaolo, corporate clients), so the operator runs on fiat. The monetary mechanism is bank-independent; the organization is not. | 3 |
| FI-04 | Are the protocol's price feeds and oracles fiat-denominated?1× No external price feeds or oracles exist. The 15-minute-per-TimeCoin ratio is a fixed definitional rule, not a dynamically maintained peg. There is no oracle infrastructure, no fiat-denominated feed, and no cross-reference to any external market. | 4 |
| FI-05 | What happens to the protocol if the primary fiat currency it references collapses or depegs?1× The protocol references no fiat currency. A CHF, USD, or EUR collapse would not affect the time-exchange mechanism at all — members would continue exchanging TimeCoins for services. Organizational funding would be disrupted, but the monetary mechanism is structurally immune to fiat failure. | 5 |
| FI-06 | Does the project have a credible transition path from fiat-dominated adoption to fiat-independent operation?1× The monetary layer is already fiat-independent. The organizational/operational layer runs on fiat (venture funding, corporate B2B revenue). No explicit plan exists to make the corporate entity fiat-independent. The monetary mechanism needs no transition; the corporate side has no transition plan. | 3 |
| FI-07 | Can local or sectoral currencies be denominated in or settle against this currency?2× The 2021 "communities" feature lets any group (companies, municipalities, NGOs, neighborhoods) create a sub-timebank within TimeRepublik, effectively letting local or sectoral communities operate their own denomination under the shared 1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes standard. Multiple pilots exist: municipality of Messina, Sarre (Italy), Banca Intesa's "Digital Campus," and Colombia UBI pilots. All settle in the same base unit. No support for external local currencies to settle against TimeCoin, however. | 3 |
| FI-08 | Does the protocol define open standards for interoperability with other monetary systems?1.5× No open interoperability standards. TimeRepublik is a closed proprietary platform with no public API spec for cross-system settlement, no interoperability protocol with other timebanks (hOurworld, TimeBanks.org, Community Weaver), and no published standard for bridging TimeCoins to external systems. Blockchain integration is being "assessed" via Mangrovia but has not produced an open standard. | 1 |
Traction2x3.3
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| TR-01 | Is the project still active?2× Active. The platform continues to operate at timerepublik.com, mobile app is live on Google Play (developed with Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions), and the company signals an ongoing redesign ("under (re)construction"). Recent search results from 2023-2025 confirm continued operation, though public news flow is less frequent than in the 2017-2021 peak. | 4 |
| TR-02 | How long has the project been in existence?1× Founded 2012, 13+ years of continuous operation. Multiple platform versions released (first version 2012, final version October 2015, US launch 2021, ongoing redesign). | 5 |
| TR-03 | How many active users does the project have?2× 100,000+ registered members across 100+ countries per company disclosures. As with most timebanks, registered does not equal active — actual active participation is almost certainly lower. Reported figures have remained roughly "100K+" since 2021, suggesting modest net growth. Still in the 10K–100K active range. | 3 |
| TR-04 | How many businesses or organizations accept the project's currency?2× Timebanking is primarily peer-to-peer. Institutional integrations include Banca Intesa Sanpaolo's Digital Campus (aimed at 120,000 employees), the municipalities of Messina and Sarre, Colombia's Corporación Contigo Colombia UBI pilot, and corporate clients using TimeRepublik Enterprise. Formal business "merchants" remain limited — likely in the 10–100 range of organizations. | 2 |
| TR-05 | Is the currency used as a unit of account?3× Within TimeRepublik communities, services are priced and negotiated in TimeCoins (not in fiat). Members post requests and offers in TimeCoins, with the 4 TimeCoins = 1 hour convention used consistently. Usage as a unit of account is confined to the platform context; no external pricing or wage denomination. | 4 |
| TR-06 | Is the founder or core team still actively working on the project?1× Both co-founders remain active: Gabriele Donati as CEO, Karim Varini as co-founder. Both are public figures giving interviews and representing the platform (most recent interviews 2021-2023). Active leadership with continuity. | 5 |
| TR-07 | What partner organizations or institutions support or integrate the project?1× Multiple institutional partners: Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions (technology), Banca Intesa Sanpaolo (B2B pilot, 120K employees targeted), municipality of Messina (2014), municipality of Sarre (Italy), Corporación Contigo Colombia (UBI pilot), corporate clients via TimeRepublik Enterprise. Five or more meaningful partners across multiple sectors. | 4 |
| TR-08 | Is the project covered or recognized by credible external sources?1× Coverage includes PRNewswire, MarketScreener, TechRound, Slashdot, Medium's editorial channel, StartupTicker, and industry press. Niche/specialist coverage with occasional mainstream tech media; less academic or peer-reviewed coverage than hOurworld. | 3 |
| TR-09 | Is adoption organic — not dependent on subsidies, incentives, or mandates?1× Largely organic. TimeCoins have no fiat market value and cannot be traded for money. The 20-TimeCoin welcome grant is a small onboarding incentive but not ongoing. Members participate out of genuine desire for mutual aid. B2B corporate deployments have some employer-driven participation, but consumer side is voluntary. | 4 |
| TR-10 | What is the growth trend over the past 12 months?1× Membership figures have remained roughly "100K+ across 100 countries" for multiple years, with limited recent PR flow (main wave 2017-2021). The platform is currently under reconstruction/redesign, which suggests continued investment but also stagnation in the interim. Stable rather than growing. | 3 |
| TR-11 | Does the project have a coherent narrative and cultural identity that drives long-term commitment?1.5× Clear mission narrative: "time instead of money," "an hour of my life equals an hour of yours," "reciprocity and abundance rather than hoarding and scarcity." The co-founders articulate a Buckminster Fuller-inspired complementary-system philosophy. Community engagement exists but is primarily transactional (service exchange) rather than mission-driven ritual. No manifesto, no cultural rituals; strong tagline but developing cultural identity. | 3 |
Sovereignty1.5
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| SO-01 | Can any single entity shut down the project?2× Yes. TimeRepublik SA, a private Swiss corporation, operates the entire platform on centralized infrastructure. If the company ceases operations, goes bankrupt, or is acquired and pivoted, the entire network of 100K+ members loses access. A single corporate decision could shut the system down. | 2 |
| SO-02 | Is the project's core infrastructure permissionless and self-hostable?1× Fully proprietary. The platform source code is closed, and no self-hosting option exists. Sub-communities created via the "communities" feature still run inside TimeRepublik's infrastructure. No one can fork, audit, or independently host the system. | 1 |
| SO-03 | Is the project subject to the jurisdiction of a single nation-state?1× TimeRepublik SA is registered in Lugano, Switzerland. The company has operations in NYC, Italy, Brazil, Taiwan, and Spain, spreading some operational footprint across jurisdictions. However, the legal entity is Swiss-concentrated, and Swiss regulatory action (or US action against the NYC office) could materially impair operations. Some jurisdictional diversification but a primary anchor exists. | 3 |
| SO-04 | Does the project control or custody user funds?2× Fully custodial. All TimeCoin balances, transaction histories, and member data are stored on TimeRepublik's centralized servers. Members have no self-custody option. If the platform goes offline, members lose access to their balances. | 1 |
| SO-05 | Is the project resilient to key-person risk?1× Heavy dependence on the founding duo. Gabriele Donati (CEO) and Karim Varini (co-founder) remain the public faces and operational leadership. Limited visibility into a broader contributor base beyond the Mangrovia partnership team. If either founder exits, materially impaired. | 2 |
| SO-06 | Does the project depend on any third-party service that could be revoked?1× Critical dependencies on cloud hosting, the Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions partnership (for mobile app/technology), Google Play and Apple App Store for mobile distribution, and payment processors for B2B clients. No documented fallback, though infrastructure can theoretically be migrated to alternative cloud providers. | 2 |
| SO-07 | Can the project be censored — can specific users or transactions be blocked?1.5× Platform operator has full administrative control. TimeRepublik can suspend accounts, remove members, or block transactions at will. Sub-community admins can also censor within their community. No censorship resistance by design; censorship is technically trivial and operationally routine. | 1 |
| SO-08 | Does the protocol protect transaction privacy as a monetary right?1.5× Limited privacy. TimeRepublik operates a standard centralized database where the operator has full access to every transaction, service description, and member communication. Member profiles are visible to other members within the platform. No privacy-preserving design, no shielded transactions, no cryptographic privacy. | 2 |
| SO-09 | Does the technology enforce the project's monetary rules such that governance cannot silently override them?2× No technological enforcement. The 1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes rule and all balances are enforced by the operator's software on closed-source servers. The company could silently modify balances, change the issuance rule, or alter transaction records. Blockchain integration is being "assessed" but not deployed — no cryptographic guarantees exist today. | 1 |
Governance1.6
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| GO-01 | How are decisions about the project made?2× Standard corporate decision-making. TimeRepublik SA is a for-profit Swiss company; decisions about features, rules, and monetary policy are made by the executive team (Donati as CEO) and company shareholders. No public governance process, no community voting, no documented escalation path for community input. | 2 |
| GO-02 | Who has voting or decision-making power, and how is that power distributed?1× Power held by the founders and corporate shareholders. No voting mechanism exists for the 100K+ member community. Sub-community admins have local authority inside their sub-timebank, but no platform-level governance power. | 1 |
| GO-03 | Is the governance process — and the monetary mechanism itself — transparent and publicly auditable?2× The monetary rule (1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes) is publicly stated but not independently auditable. Codebase is proprietary, balances are private, no public governance records exist, and there is no way for external parties to verify that the system operates as described. Monetary mechanism is a black box. | 2 |
| GO-04 | Can governance be captured by a small group or hostile actor?1.5× Structurally already captured — the founding team and corporate shareholders control every aspect of the platform. There is no distributed governance to capture because none exists. In an acquisition, a hostile actor could take control unilaterally. | 1 |
| GO-05 | How are upgrades and changes to the protocol or project proposed and executed?1× Changes are executed unilaterally by the company based on internal roadmap and feedback from partners/B2B clients. No formal proposal process, no community vote, no time-lock. The ongoing platform redesign is a company-driven decision. Members can comment but have no binding power. | 2 |
| GO-06 | Is there a separation between governance over monetary policy and governance over operational decisions?1× No distinction. The same corporate team makes all decisions — monetary rules, software features, B2B contracts, etc. No structural protection for the 1-TimeCoin-equals-15-minutes rule as distinct from UI changes. | 1 |
| GO-07 | Does the project have a constitution, charter, or set of immutable principles?1.5× Stated values ("time instead of money," "an hour of my life equals an hour of yours," "reciprocity and abundance") and a clear philosophical framing, but no formal constitutional document, no charter, and no binding protection from override. Principles are brand statements, not constitutional commitments. | 2 |
| GO-08 | Can the project's issuance rules be changed, and are monetary policy changes subject to stronger constraints than operational changes?2× Issuance rules (the 15-minute unit, the 20-TimeCoin welcome grant, community pool allocations) can be changed unilaterally by the company at any time via software update. No time-locks, no community votes, no constitutional constraints. Monetary changes are governed identically to operational changes. | 2 |
Resilience2.2
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| RE-01 | Has the project survived a major crisis or adversarial event?2× The platform has operated through 13+ years including the COVID-19 pandemic (which drove interest in mutual aid), the 2015 platform rewrite, and the 2021 US relaunch. No severe adversarial events (regulatory actions, exploits, serious infrastructure failures) are documented. Moderate stress survived; no major crisis tested. | 3 |
| RE-02 | Does the project have redundancy in its critical infrastructure?1× Standard cloud hosting redundancy likely exists but is not publicly documented. All infrastructure runs on a single operator's cloud setup; no multi-region or multi-provider deployment has been disclosed. Mobile app depends on Google Play / Apple App Store distribution — single points of failure. | 2 |
| RE-03 | Can the project recover from a catastrophic failure?1× Proprietary codebase with no public backups. Recovery would depend entirely on the company and its technology partner (Mangrovia). No disaster-recovery plan is publicly documented. If both were lost, recovery would be impossible — no external party could rebuild the system. | 1 |
| RE-04 | Is the project's design simple enough to be maintained and understood long-term?1× The core concept (1 TimeCoin = 15 minutes, exchange services via the platform) is extremely simple and instantly graspable. However, the technical implementation includes a modern web platform, mobile app, messenger, community features, B2B products, and blockchain integration assessments — adding complexity beyond the conceptual core. Elegant concept, moderate software complexity. | 4 |
| RE-05 | Is the project dependent on a specific technology that could become obsolete?1× Built on standard web and mobile technology stacks (not publicly disclosed in detail). The Android app is developed by Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions under their namespace (net.mangrovia.timerepublik), creating lock-in with that partner. Core stack likely portable, but migration requires the proprietary team. | 3 |
| RE-06 | How does the project handle economic stress (bank runs, liquidity crises, collateral crashes, inflation/deflation shocks)?2× The time-based unit is structurally immune to inflation/deflation since 1 TimeCoin is always 15 minutes. There is no collateral, no liquidity pool, and no peg. The main internal risk is imbalanced service supply/demand (e.g., too many people earning, too few spending), which the protocol does not address programmatically. Passive resilience, not engineered stress-test mechanisms. | 3 |
| RE-07 | Does the project have sustainable funding for long-term maintenance?1.5× TimeRepublik SA is a for-profit company funded via angel round(s) and B2B revenue (corporate enterprise clients, banking pilots, UBI pilots). Revenue figures in third-party databases vary widely. Funding model depends on continued B2B sales and investor support — not self-sustaining endowment, but also not purely grant-dependent. Likely 1-3 years of runway at any given time. | 2 |
| RE-08 | Can the system operate across extreme latency, disconnected networks, and multi-century timescales?1× Requires always-on internet connectivity. No offline mode, no asynchronous settlement, no disconnected network support. Centralized cloud architecture makes it tightly coupled to current internet infrastructure. Multi-century operation depends entirely on corporate continuity. | 1 |
| RE-09 | Is the system designed for a world where AI agents are primary economic actors?1× Designed for human-to-human service exchange. No public API for programmatic participation, no smart contract interface, and services are physical/social in nature (tutoring, childcare, therapy). Machine participation is neither restricted nor supported — the platform assumes human actors. | 1 |
Inclusivity3.6
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| IN-01 | Can anyone in the world participate regardless of nationality, wealth, or status?2× Open in principle to anyone with internet access. No wealth requirement, no credit check, no nationality restriction. Operates across 100+ countries. New members receive up to 20 TimeCoins (5 hours) as a welcome gift to bootstrap participation. Practical barrier is internet access and account approval under company terms. | 4 |
| IN-02 | What is the minimum cost to start using the project?1× Zero cost to join and participate at the consumer level. No fees, no minimum balance, no transaction charges. Platform is free for individual members. TimeRepublik Enterprise has corporate pricing but this is a separate B2B product. | 5 |
| IN-03 | Does the project actively serve underbanked or financially excluded populations?1× Accessible to underbanked populations (no money required), and pilots such as the Colombia UBI program (Corporación Contigo Colombia) and Messina municipality engagement explicitly target underserved communities. However, the primary user base is global internet-connected urban/middle-class populations; underbanked outreach is pilot-based rather than core mission. | 3 |
| IN-04 | Does the project distribute economic benefits — including seigniorage — broadly, or concentrate them among insiders?1.5× Mixed model. All members earn and spend TimeCoins on equal terms (no insider TimeCoin allocation). However, TimeRepublik SA is a for-profit Swiss corporation; B2B revenue, equity upside, and any future monetization flows to shareholders and founders, not to members. Seigniorage (welcome grants) is distributed broadly to members, but the platform's economic upside is captured by insiders. | 3 |
| IN-05 | Does the project treat all participants equally under the same rules?2× Strong egalitarian principle at the monetary layer — one hour of any member's time equals one hour of any other's, regardless of skill, profession, or wealth. No tiered access for retail members. B2B enterprise clients use the same 1-TimeCoin-equals-15-minutes rule internally. Governance rights are unequal (members have none, founders have all), but monetary treatment is uniform. | 4 |
| IN-06 | Does the project require identity documentation or surveillance to participate?1.5× Light identity requirement. Users create an account with name, profile, skills, and contact information. No government ID or KYC required for the consumer platform. Members' profiles are visible to other members, and the operator has full access to all data. Centralized surveillance by the operator is structural, even without state-grade KYC. | 3 |
| IN-07 | Does the project have mechanisms to prevent wealth concentration over time?1× The equal-time principle is a strong structural anti-concentration mechanism at the monetary-unit level — no member can earn at a premium rate. The system is designed for spending (receiving services), not accumulation. However, there is no demurrage, no expiry, and no active redistribution; members can passively accumulate TimeCoins. | 3 |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is TimeRepublik and what problem does it solve?
TimeRepublik is a global peer-to-peer timebanking platform founded in 2012 in Lugano, Switzerland by Gabriele Donati and Karim Varini. Operating under the for-profit Swiss entity TimeRepublik SA, the platform markets itself as the world's largest timebank, with over 100,000 members across more than 100 countries.
How is money created in TimeRepublik?
Semi-open and rule-based. Any member worldwide can earn TimeCoins by providing a service; issuance is automatic upon service completion and does not require per-transaction approval. However, onboarding requires creating an account on the proprietary TimeRepublik platform and accepting company terms, and the welcome grant of 20 TimeCoins is controlled by the operator.
How does TimeRepublik maintain stable spending power?
2× Structural, not algorithmic. 1 TimeCoin is defined as 15 minutes of any member's time, and this ratio is fixed by policy. There is no rebase, no oracle, no rate adjustment, and no algorithmic feedback.
Is TimeRepublik independent from fiat currencies?
2× Fully sovereign unit of account. The TimeCoin (15 minutes of time) is defined independently of any fiat currency. Services are priced in TimeCoins (or equivalently, in hours), not in CHF, USD, or EUR.
Who controls TimeRepublik and can it be shut down?
2× Yes. TimeRepublik SA, a private Swiss corporation, operates the entire platform on centralized infrastructure. If the company ceases operations, goes bankrupt, or is acquired and pivoted, the entire network of 100K+ members loses access.
How widely adopted is TimeRepublik today?
2× 100,000+ registered members across 100+ countries per company disclosures. As with most timebanks, registered does not equal active — actual active participation is almost certainly lower. Reported figures have remained roughly "100K+" since 2021, suggesting modest net growth.
Is TimeRepublik still active and growing?
2× Active. The platform continues to operate at timerepublik.com, mobile app is live on Google Play (developed with Mangrovia Blockchain Solutions), and the company signals an ongoing redesign ("under (re)construction"). Recent search results from 2023-2025 confirm continued operation, though public news flow is less frequent than in the 2017-2021 peak.
What are the main risks or weaknesses of TimeRepublik?
Weakest categories: Governance (1.6) and Sovereignty (1.5).: TimeRepublik SA is a for-profit Swiss corporation that concentrates both custody and governance in a single private entity. There is no distributed governance, no on-chain enforcement, no self-custody, no open source code, and no constitutional protection for the monetary rule. The company can change the 15-minute-per-TimeCoin ratio, suspend accounts, or shut the platform down unilaterally — no technological or governance constraints exist.
What makes TimeRepublik unique from an M69 perspective?
Strongest categories: Fiat Independence (3.7), Inclusivity (3.6), Issuance Model (3.4), and Universal Adoption pillar (3.4).: TimeRepublik's monetary design is genuinely fiat-independent — the TimeCoin unit is time itself, with zero fiat peg, zero fiat reserves, and zero fiat oracles. Its "one hour equals one hour" principle delivers radical equality at the monetary layer, and zero-cost access across 100+ countries is meaningful global inclusivity.
How is TimeRepublik's M69 Score calculated?
TimeRepublik scores 3.0/5.0 overall. Pillar scores: Monetary Sovereignty 3.4, Civilizational Durability 1.8, Universal Adoption 3.4. Strongest: Fiat Independence (3.7). Weakest: Sovereignty (1.5).