USDi
Decentralized Stablecoin·Active·United States / Global
Inflation-linked stablecoin tracking the US Consumer Price Index, co-founded by inflation-trading veterans. Reserves invested in TIPS, US Treasuries, FX and commodity futures via the Enduring US Inflation Tracking Fund.
M69 Score
Methodology →2.6
Weakly aligned
Monetary Sovereignty
2.9
Civilizational Durability
2.0
Universal Adoption
2.2
Framework v0.2-alphaRated 1mo ago
M69 Verdict
USDi is an inflation-linked stablecoin launched in April 2026, designed to preserve purchasing power by tracking the US Consumer Price Index (CPI). Co-founded by Michael Ashton (Enduring Investments, a long-time inflation-derivatives specialist previously at Deutsche Bank, J.P. Morgan, Barclays), Andrew Fately (40-year FX markets career, Lehman/RBC), and Roger Ramia as blockchain/technical lead, USDi is the second production CPI-tracking stablecoin in the market (alongside Frax Price Index / FPI). At the time of coverage the token trades at ~$1.00863, reflecting accumulated CPI since its launch reference baseline. The project has raised ~$1.5M in seed capital and is positioned as an institutional inflation hedge alongside FPI in the wake of the Iran-war oil-price shock that revived macro inflation concerns. Mechanically, USDi is an Ethereum ERC-20 token whose minting and burning flow into the USDi Coin Fund, which in turn invests in the Enduring U.S. Inflation Tracking Fund -- a private fund using TIPS, US Treasury debt, FX, and commodity futures to track the Not-Seasonally-Adjusted CPI via the same interpolation methodology as TIPS bonds. Contracts use a whitelist (KYC/AML) with time delays, deposit/withdrawal fee tiers, and oracle-driven price-peg checks; BitGo is the custodian, Trident Fund Services is independent administrator, and Cherry Bekaert is annual auditor. Direct institutional mint/redeem requires >$1M per transaction. A Consensys Diligence audit was published in April 2025. From an M69 alignment perspective, USDi's greatest strength is its conceptual fit with Commandment 2 (Value-Preserving): it is purpose-built for purchasing-power stability with an established multi-component real-economy benchmark (CPI), an explicit smart-contract mechanism, and a roadmap to sub-indices (healthcare, tuition, energy, shelter). Its greatest weaknesses are fiat-denomination (CPI = USD-referenced, reserves = Treasuries/TIPS/USDC), an accredited-investor / whitelist access model that excludes most of humanity at the protocol layer, and -- most importantly -- zero operating history and effectively no traction as of April 2026 (less than six months old, institutional-only, single-digit-figure seed raise). Under v0.2-alpha's TR-02 eliminatory anchor, Traction is capped near 2.0. USDi is an intellectually important second data point in the CPI-stablecoin category but is structurally a permissioned institutional hedge product, not a sovereign monetary substrate.
Key Findings
Strongest category: Spending Power Stability (3.7/5.0)
USDi is purpose-built for purchasing-power preservation with an established multi-component real-economy benchmark (CPI-U), an on-chain TIPS-style interpolation mechanism, independent fund accounting by Trident, and annual audit by Cherry Bekaert. Conceptually this is a direct realization of Commandment 2. The underlying fund has 3-year (backtested) CPI correlation of 58-86% and ~2.05% annualized volatility, which is strong relative to any nominal-USD stablecoin as a purchasing-power proxy -- but <6 months of live data caps the track-record score at 3.
Weakest categories: Traction (2.3/5.0), Governance (1.8/5.0), Inclusivity (2.1/5.0)
USDi is a <6-month-old institutional product with no merchant acceptance, no unit-of-account usage, no DAO, and accredited-investor gating. Access is KYC-whitelisted with a $1M+ direct-mint minimum; the opposite of M69's Commandment 1 (Humanity First). Governance is traditional corporate (private LLC), with the founding team holding full unilateral authority over the whitelist, oracle source, and fee parameters.
Core tension: M69-aligned intent, fiat-native pipes
USDi's intent (preserve purchasing power on-chain) is among the most M69-aligned designs in production; its implementation (US CPI-U + TIPS + Treasuries + USDC collateral + US-regulated LLC + BitGo custody + accredited-investor whitelist) is near-maximal fiat dependency. A USD collapse would invalidate both the peg target and the collateral simultaneously. This mirrors the FPI pattern but with tighter regulatory gating.
Second production CPI-stablecoin, completing a two-data-point category
Alongside FPI, USDi makes CPI-tracked stablecoins a two-implementation category rather than a single data point. USDi differs from FPI in being institutional/accredited-only rather than permissionless, using a TradFi fund structure rather than a DeFi AMO, and targeting insurers/reinsurers rather than DeFi yield seekers. Both suggest the CPI-stablecoin design space has a structural ceiling on adoption breadth as long as CPI remains US-centric.
Noteworthy roadmap: sub-indices as sectoral composability
The planned split into Shelter-CPI, Energy-CPI, Food-CPI, Education-CPI, Medical-CPI, and Other-Core sub-coins is a rare real-world realization of the M69 vision of sectoral/local currency expression (Commandment 8). Even if these remain USD-denominated, the decomposition of a general price index into sectoral baskets is a structurally novel primitive worth watching.
Big takeaway: USDi is a useful second data point for CPI-stablecoin mechanism design, but as a monetary system it is a permissioned institutional hedge product rather than an M69-aligned public good.
For partners/investors, USDi is interesting as a reference implementation of TIPS-on-chain and sub-index composability; as a medium of exchange or sovereign monetary substrate it scores Weakly aligned (2.6/5.0). TR-02 eliminatory anchor caps Universal Adoption near 2.2 until the project has >6 months of live operation and broader access than accredited-investor-only.
M69 Score
M69 Alignment2.6
Weakly aligned
1.02.03.04.05.0
Monetary Sovereignty2.9
Issuance (3x) + Stability (2x) + Fiat Indep. (2x)Civilizational Durability2.0
Sovereignty + Governance + ResilienceUniversal Adoption2.2
Traction (2x) + InclusivityIss Mod3x
3.0
Stability2x
3.7
Fia Ind & Int2x
2.1
Traction2x
2.3
Sovereignty
2.1
Governance
1.8
Resilience
2.0
Inclusivity
2.1
Scored against the Money2069 Manifesto — see methodology. Higher = more aligned.
Detailed Rating Breakdown
Issuance Model3x3.0
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| IM-01 | Is issuance permissionless?Minting is restricted: addresses must pass KYC/AML and be whitelisted, and institutional direct minting requires >$1M per transaction. This is a permissioned, approved-issuer model, rule-based but not open. | 2 |
| IM-02 | Is new supply created through debt?USDi is a fully reserve-backed swap: users deposit USDC (or fiat via institutional channels) and receive USDi of equivalent value; the proceeds are invested in the USDi Coin Fund. There is no debt, borrowing, or leverage in the issuance. | 5 |
| IM-03 | Is issuance tied to measurable real-world economic activity?USDi's redemption price is algorithmically tied to the US CPI-U (Not Seasonally Adjusted) via the same interpolation formula as TIPS bonds. The CPI is a BLS-produced real-economy index; issuance responds to mint/redeem demand rather than directly to economic output, so the link is partial (real-world data -> peg target, not supply). | 3 |
| IM-04 | Does the issuance model have a supply cap or hard ceiling?No hard cap; supply expands/contracts with whitelisted user mint/redeem actions, bounded only by the 100%-backed collateral invariant and administrator fee/whitelist controls. No published automatic circuit breaker. | 3 |
| IM-05 | Can supply contract (burn/redemption) as well as expand?Burning/redemption is supported: whitelisted holders can redeem USDi for the inflation-adjusted USDC/fiat equivalent. Contraction is user-initiated (permissioned rather than permissionless) and subject to withdrawal fee tiers and custodian processing. | 2 |
Spending Power Stability2x3.7
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| SPS-01 | What mechanism does the protocol use to target spending power stability?USDi uses an algorithmic on-chain mechanism tied to a real-economy index (CPI-U). The smart contract applies a TIPS-style CPI interpolation to mint/burn at the inflation-adjusted price, and reserves are actively managed by the Enduring U.S. Inflation Tracking Fund (TIPS, Treasuries, FX, commodity futures) to track monthly CPI changes. Monthly CPI oracle updates rather than continuous adjustment cap this at algorithmic-with-oracle-input. | 4 |
| SPS-02 | What benchmark is used to measure spending power?USDi targets the US CPI-U (Not Seasonally Adjusted) -- an established multi-component BLS index with published methodology tracking a broad basket of consumer goods and services. Per rubric, "established multi-component index (e.g. CPI, commodity basket) with published methodology... represents genuine multi-factor spending power measurement" = 4. Single-country US bias prevents 5. | 4 |
| SPS-03 | How transparent and verifiable is the stability measurement?The inflation-adjusted price calculation is implemented in the smart contract and is auditable on-chain; CPI source data is publicly released by BLS. Fund NAV is computed monthly by an independent administrator (Trident Fund Services) and audited annually by Cherry Bekaert. Mix of on-chain enforcement and off-chain fund accounting with published methodology and third-party attestation. | 4 |
| SPS-04 | What is the protocol's historical deviation from its stability target?USDi is less than six months live as of April 2026 with no multi-year deviation record. Market price (~$1.00863) tracks closely to the CPI-derived target, and the underlying fund has reported historical annualized volatility of ~2.05%, with CPI correlation of 58-86% over the three years through December 2025 (fund backtest, not live USDi). Per rubric "<1 year of live data available" = 3. | 3 |
| SPS-05 | Does the protocol distinguish between short-term volatility and long-term purchasing power drift?USDi primarily targets long-term purchasing-power drift through monthly CPI revaluation and TIPS-style per-day interpolation between CPI releases. Short-term dampening is implicit via 100% NAV-backing plus oracle-driven peg checks, but not a separately designed mechanism. Per rubric, "primarily targets long-term purchasing power; short-term dampening is a secondary feature" = 4. | 4 |
| SPS-06 | Is the stability mechanism accessible globally?The stability mechanism (CPI-tracked NAV + smart contract interpolation) functions identically for any holder; however, participation requires passing KYC/AML and being whitelisted, which imposes jurisdictional barriers (accredited-investor restrictions, sanctioned-country exclusions). The economic benefits of stability only accrue to users who can pass gatekeeping. Per rubric, "globally accessible in principle but with practical barriers in some regions... stability still functions for those who can access it" = 3. | 3 |
Fiat Independence & Interoperability2x2.1
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| FI-01 | What is the protocol's unit of account?USDi's unit is defined as "USD inflation-adjusted since reference date" -- a CPI-adjusted US dollar. It is architecturally anchored to the USD through the BLS CPI-U index and its reserves are USD-denominated. Its own unit, but bootstrapped with and continuously defined by fiat. | 3 |
| FI-02 | What is the fiat composition of the protocol's collateral or reserves?Reserves sit in the Enduring U.S. Inflation Tracking Fund, which holds "US Treasuries, inflation-linked bonds (TIPS), foreign exchange, commodities futures and options, and cash." The majority is US Treasury debt / TIPS / cash (fiat-backed), with minor commodity-futures exposure. Approximately 90-100% fiat-backed. | 1 |
| FI-03 | Does the protocol depend on fiat banking infrastructure to function?The token layer is on-chain Ethereum, but the underlying fund (TIPS, Treasury bonds, FX/commodity derivatives) trades in TradFi markets via brokers, custodian banks and the US Treasury system. Fiat redemption, NAV calculation, and reserve management all require active banking relationships. Banking is required for routine operation. | 2 |
| FI-04 | Are the protocol's price feeds and oracles fiat-denominated?Price feeds include USDC/USD oracles for peg checks and the CPI-U index (USD-referenced). All price feeds are fiat-denominated; Chainlink CCIP is used for cross-chain infrastructure (decentralized source, but values are fiat). | 2 |
| FI-05 | What happens to the protocol if the primary fiat currency it references collapses or depegs?USDi's peg target (CPI-U) and its collateral (Treasuries, TIPS, USDC) are all USD-denominated. A USD collapse would invalidate both the numerator and denominator of the peg. There is no documented migration path to a non-USD inflation index or alternative collateral. | 1 |
| FI-06 | Does the project have a credible transition path from fiat-dominated adoption to fiat-independent operation?Roadmap emphasizes adding customizable inflation exposure (healthcare-CPI, tuition-CPI, energy-CPI sub-indices) -- still USD-denominated. No documented plan to transition away from USD CPI or fiat collateral. Fiat integration appears treated as permanent. | 1 |
| FI-07 | Can local or sectoral currencies be denominated in or settle against this currency?The published roadmap describes sub-indices (Shelter, Energy, Food, Education, Medical, Other Core) that can "trade separately and reassemble" -- this is sectoral composability within a single currency family, partially matching the M69 vision of local expression. No external local-currency deployments exist as of April 2026. Technical architecture supports sectoral composability, though only conceptually demonstrated so far. | 3 |
| FI-08 | Does the protocol define open standards for interoperability with other monetary systems?USDi integrates Chainlink CCIP for cross-chain transfers and uses standard ERC-20 interfaces. No protocol-specific monetary interoperability standard for CPI-peg mutual recognition or cross-system settlement is defined. Interoperability is generic DeFi-level. | 3 |
Traction2x2.3
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| TR-01 | Is the project still active?USDi is live, minting/redeeming, and actively being marketed as of April 2026. Freshly launched and growing. | 5 |
| TR-02 | How long has the project been in existence?USDi launched in April 2026; at the rating date it is less than six months old. Eliminatory anchor applies: <6 months = 1. | 1 |
| TR-03 | How many active users does the project have?No published user count. Access is restricted to whitelisted/accredited investors with $1M institutional minimum, and the project is <6 months old. Active users are likely in the low tens to low hundreds. | 1 |
| TR-04 | How many businesses or organizations accept the project's currency?No evidence of merchant or business acceptance. USDi is positioned as an institutional inflation hedge, not a medium of exchange; Ashton identifies insurers/reinsurers as the next wave of institutional adopters, but no acceptance network exists. | 1 |
| TR-05 | Is the currency used as a unit of account?No evidence of any independent party pricing wages, contracts or goods in USDi. The token is quoted as a USD-equivalent inflation hedge. | 1 |
| TR-06 | Is the founder or core team still actively working on the project?Co-founders Michael Ashton, Andrew Fately, and Roger Ramia are publicly listed and active; Ashton is the public face in media coverage. Vanessa Pestritto is listed as operating partner. Small but engaged founding team. | 5 |
| TR-07 | What partner organizations or institutions support or integrate the project?Named ecosystem partners: BitGo (custody), Trident Fund Services (administrator), Cherry Bekaert (auditor), Chainlink CCIP (cross-chain), Consensys Diligence (audit), Uniswap (trading venue), Enduring Investments (fund manager). 5+ meaningful partners documented. | 4 |
| TR-08 | Is the project covered or recognized by credible external sources?Covered by CoinDesk, BeInCrypto, Ainvest, CoinSpaidMedia, ChainCatcher, and others. No peer-reviewed academic coverage and no policy-document citations. Niche/specialist crypto-media coverage. | 3 |
| TR-09 | Is adoption organic -- not dependent on subsidies, incentives, or mandates?USDi has no known token emissions or liquidity mining program; any initial demand is from institutions seeking an inflation hedge. Adoption is limited enough that "organic vs incentive" cannot yet be meaningfully distinguished; no subsidies visible. Awarding 3 as there is no evidence of incentive-driven bootstrapping but also no demonstrated organic retention. | 3 |
| TR-10 | What is the growth trend over the past 12 months?Project only launched in April 2026; no 12-month trend exists. Media coverage and seed funding suggest early upward momentum from a near-zero base. Not rateable on 12-month horizon; scoring 3 (stable) rather than 1 to avoid double-penalizing for newness (already captured in TR-02). | 3 |
| TR-11 | Does the project have a coherent narrative and cultural identity that drives long-term commitment?USDi has a coherent narrative ("the enduring inflation-tracking stablecoin", purchasing power preservation, CPI-tracked money) and strong founder identity centered on Michael Ashton as an inflation-economics thought leader. Community engagement is transactional-institutional rather than mission-cultural, and there are no cultural artifacts (manifesto, rituals, symbols) driving century-scale commitment. | 3 |
Sovereignty2.1
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| SO-01 | Can any single entity shut down the project?The contract implements whitelisting and oracle-controlled peg checks, with the issuer controlling the whitelist and the underlying fund controlled by Enduring Investments / USDi Partners LLC. A regulatory action against USDi Partners or the fund, or removal from the whitelist, would halt mint/redeem and impair the token. Substantial single-entity shutdown vector. | 2 |
| SO-02 | Is the project's core infrastructure permissionless and self-hostable?The ERC-20 lives on Ethereum (permissionless L1), but the issuer contract enforces whitelisting and an admin can modify parameters. Smart-contract source was audited by Consensys Diligence but full public open-source availability and self-hostability of the issuance flow is not documented. Code is partially verifiable. | 2 |
| SO-03 | Is the project subject to the jurisdiction of a single nation-state?USDi Partners LLC, Enduring Investments, BitGo, Trident Fund Services, and Cherry Bekaert are all US entities. Reserves are US Treasuries/TIPS. The project is effectively operating inside the US regulatory perimeter and would require SEC/FinCEN permission to continue. | 1 |
| SO-04 | Does the project control or custody user funds?USDi tokens are held in user wallets (self-custody at the token layer). However, the underlying reserves are custodied by BitGo and managed by Enduring Investments; redemption requires trusting the custodian/administrator to honor NAV. Hybrid: token self-custody + custodial reserves. | 3 |
| SO-05 | Is the project resilient to key-person risk?The project is a 3-founder operation (Ashton, Fately, Ramia) with Ashton as dominant public face; Enduring Investments is a small firm. Departure of Ashton would materially impair the project's credibility and operational continuity. | 2 |
| SO-06 | Does the project depend on any third-party service that could be revoked?Critical dependencies: BitGo (custody), Chainlink (oracle + CCIP), Uniswap (trading), US Treasury/BLS (CPI data), Enduring Investments (fund mgmt), Trident (admin), Cherry Bekaert (audit). Multiple meaningful single points of failure; alternatives theoretically exist but migration would be disruptive. | 2 |
| SO-07 | Can the project be censored -- can specific users or transactions be blocked?Censorship is explicit by design: whitelisting with time delays, KYC/AML gating, and issuer control over mint/redeem. Specific addresses can be blocked; the whitelist is the censorship mechanism. Criteria are disclosed (accredited-investor / KYC). | 2 |
| SO-08 | Does the protocol protect transaction privacy as a monetary right?Standard Ethereum pseudonymity at the token layer, but whitelisting links every participant's real-world identity to their on-chain address via KYC. Operator (USDi Partners + BitGo) has full identity-to-address mapping. Surveillance is structurally embedded. | 2 |
| SO-09 | Does the technology enforce the project's monetary rules such that governance cannot silently override them?Core CPI-interpolation math is on-chain and auditable (Consensys Diligence audit confirms), but admin roles for whitelisting, oracle source changes, and fee parameters exist. Monthly NAV is computed off-chain by Trident. On-chain enforcement of the price formula + admin override possible for parameters + third-party attestation = partially enforced. | 3 |
Governance1.8
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| GO-01 | How are decisions about the project made?Decisions appear to be made by USDi Partners LLC and Enduring Investments management (traditional corporate governance). No DAO, no community vote, no published formal governance procedures for the token protocol itself. Core team makes decisions with occasional disclosure. | 2 |
| GO-02 | Who has voting or decision-making power, and how is that power distributed?Power sits with the founding team and fund manager (Enduring Investments / USDi Partners LLC -- a small private company). Token holders have no protocol governance rights. | 1 |
| GO-03 | Is the governance process -- and the monetary mechanism itself -- transparent and publicly auditable?Monetary mechanism: smart contract is audited by Consensys Diligence, CPI-interpolation math is public, monthly valuations are posted, and fund is audited annually by Cherry Bekaert. Governance of the issuer: internal corporate; no public proposal/vote records. Partially verifiable monetary mechanism + opaque corporate governance. | 3 |
| GO-04 | Can governance be captured by a small group or hostile actor?Governance is already centralized within a small private company; "capture" is effectively the default state. A hostile acquisition of USDi Partners LLC or Enduring Investments would seize full control. | 1 |
| GO-05 | How are upgrades and changes to the protocol or project proposed and executed?Smart contract appears to have admin upgrade authority held by the issuer; Consensys audit notes admin roles. No published community proposal process or time-lock. Upgrades are announced at issuer discretion. | 2 |
| GO-06 | Is there a separation between governance over monetary policy and governance over operational decisions?No published structural separation; the issuer makes both monetary-policy (CPI source, peg formula, fees) and operational decisions through the same corporate process. | 1 |
| GO-07 | Does the project have a constitution, charter, or set of immutable principles?A whitepaper and marketing page articulate principles (CPI-tracked, purchasing power preservation, sub-indices roadmap), but there is no on-chain or legally binding immutable constitution. Mission statement without binding force. | 2 |
| GO-08 | Can the project's issuance rules be changed, and are monetary policy changes subject to stronger constraints than operational changes?Issuance rules (whitelist, fee tiers, CPI oracle source, admin controls) are changeable by the issuer. No published supermajority, time-lock, or veto mechanism for monetary-policy changes. Founding team can change issuance parameters unilaterally. | 2 |
Resilience2.0
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| RE-01 | Has the project survived a major crisis or adversarial event?USDi is <6 months old as of April 2026 with no adversarial event survived. Per rubric, "never faced any adversarial conditions" = 1. | 1 |
| RE-02 | Does the project have redundancy in its critical infrastructure?Critical infrastructure includes a single custodian (BitGo), a single fund administrator (Trident), a single fund manager (Enduring Investments), a single CPI oracle feed, and a single auditor. Multiple single points of failure. | 2 |
| RE-03 | Can the project recover from a catastrophic failure?Smart-contract source is audited and partially public; monthly valuations are published. Recovery depends heavily on proprietary fund accounting, custodian cooperation, and legal entity survival. No formal disaster-recovery plan disclosed. | 2 |
| RE-04 | Is the project's design simple enough to be maintained and understood long-term?Core concept (CPI-interpolated ERC-20 backed by a private inflation-tracking fund) is simple. Implementation includes whitelist, fee tiers, oracle peg checks, fund accounting, multi-party custody/admin/auditor -- moderate complexity that mixes on-chain and off-chain domains. | 3 |
| RE-05 | Is the project dependent on a specific technology that could become obsolete?Built on Ethereum/EVM with Chainlink CCIP; could be redeployed on any EVM chain. ERC-20 + oracle pattern is portable. No demonstrated migration. | 3 |
| RE-06 | How does the project handle economic stress (bank runs, liquidity crises, collateral crashes, inflation/deflation shocks)?Inflation shocks are the target use case: high CPI = higher USDi redemption value (structural feature). Underlying fund has ~2.05% historical annualized volatility and 58-86% 3-year CPI correlation (backtested). Bank-run handling relies on 100% NAV backing + fund liquidity; Treasury-market stress or USDC collateral issues would strain the system. Mechanisms designed but not yet tested live under stress. | 3 |
| RE-07 | Does the project have sustainable funding for long-term maintenance?USDi has raised ~$1.5M in seed capital and earns deposit/withdrawal fees on small volumes. With an institutional-only user base at launch, fee revenue is negligible; current funding is <1 year of runway for a private company of this size. | 2 |
| RE-08 | Can the system operate across extreme latency, disconnected networks, and multi-century timescales?Requires continuous Ethereum block production, monthly CPI oracle updates, fund-admin NAV cycle, and TradFi settlement. Cannot operate disconnected. Multi-century viability depends on US government + BLS + dollar continuity. | 2 |
| RE-09 | Is the system designed for a world where AI agents are primary economic actors?Core mint/redeem is gated by KYC/whitelisting -- AI agents would need to be whitelisted with legal identity. Protocol assumes human/institutional participants; machine participation is practically restricted. | 2 |
Inclusivity2.1
| Code | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|
| IN-01 | Can anyone in the world participate regardless of nationality, wealth, or status?Participation requires KYC/AML, whitelisting, and (for direct institutional mint) $1M+ per transaction. Accredited-investor restrictions exclude most retail users and most non-US jurisdictions. Restricted to specific participant classes by design. | 2 |
| IN-02 | What is the minimum cost to start using the project?Institutional direct minimum $1M+; secondary-market acquisition via Uniswap is possible at any dollar amount for whitelisted addresses but subject to KYC onboarding. Effective minimum cost for meaningful participation is high. | 2 |
| IN-03 | Does the project actively serve underbanked or financially excluded populations?USDi is designed for and marketed to accredited investors, insurers, reinsurers, and institutional inflation hedgers -- the opposite demographic. | 1 |
| IN-04 | Does the project distribute economic benefits -- including seigniorage -- broadly, or concentrate them among insiders?Seigniorage (fund returns above CPI drift) and fee revenue flow to USDi Partners LLC / Enduring Investments. Holders receive the CPI-tracked NAV (fair to holders) but any excess accrues to the issuer. Seed raise of ~$1.5M means insider equity allocations dominate upside. Meaningful insider concentration. | 2 |
| IN-05 | Does the project treat all participants equally under the same rules?Peg formula applies identically to all holders. However, fee tiers differ by size ("tiered deposit/withdrawal fees"), and institutional direct mint (>$1M) operates on different access terms than retail/secondary access. Meaningful tiered treatment. | 3 |
| IN-06 | Does the project require identity documentation or surveillance to participate?KYC/AML, accreditation verification, and whitelisting are mandatory for mint/redeem. The operator maintains identity-to-address mappings and must comply with US regulatory disclosure. Creates an explicit surveillance relationship. | 2 |
| IN-07 | Does the project have mechanisms to prevent wealth concentration over time?No anti-concentration mechanisms. CPI-tracking applies proportionally to all holders, and fee tiers structurally favor large holders. No demurrage, progressive fees, or redistribution. | 2 |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is USDi and what problem does it solve?
USDi is an inflation-linked stablecoin launched in April 2026, designed to preserve purchasing power by tracking the US Consumer Price Index (CPI). Co-founded by Michael Ashton (Enduring Investments, a long-time inflation-derivatives specialist previously at Deutsche Bank, J.P.
How is money created in USDi?
Minting is restricted: addresses must pass KYC/AML and be whitelisted, and institutional direct minting requires >$1M per transaction. This is a permissioned, approved-issuer model, rule-based but not open.
How does USDi maintain stable spending power?
USDi uses an algorithmic on-chain mechanism tied to a real-economy index (CPI-U). The smart contract applies a TIPS-style CPI interpolation to mint/burn at the inflation-adjusted price, and reserves are actively managed by the Enduring U.S. Inflation Tracking Fund (TIPS, Treasuries, FX, commodity futures) to track monthly CPI changes.
Is USDi independent from fiat currencies?
USDi's unit is defined as "USD inflation-adjusted since reference date" -- a CPI-adjusted US dollar. It is architecturally anchored to the USD through the BLS CPI-U index and its reserves are USD-denominated. Its own unit, but bootstrapped with and continuously defined by fiat.
Who controls USDi and can it be shut down?
The contract implements whitelisting and oracle-controlled peg checks, with the issuer controlling the whitelist and the underlying fund controlled by Enduring Investments / USDi Partners LLC. A regulatory action against USDi Partners or the fund, or removal from the whitelist, would halt mint/redeem and impair the token. Substantial single-entity shutdown vector.
How widely adopted is USDi today?
No published user count. Access is restricted to whitelisted/accredited investors with $1M institutional minimum, and the project is <6 months old. Active users are likely in the low tens to low hundreds.
Is USDi still active and growing?
USDi is live, minting/redeeming, and actively being marketed as of April 2026. Freshly launched and growing.
What are the main risks or weaknesses of USDi?
Weakest categories: Traction (2.3/5.0), Governance (1.8/5.0), Inclusivity (2.1/5.0): USDi is a <6-month-old institutional product with no merchant acceptance, no unit-of-account usage, no DAO, and accredited-investor gating. Access is KYC-whitelisted with a $1M+ direct-mint minimum; the opposite of M69's Commandment 1 (Humanity First). Governance is traditional corporate (private LLC), with the founding team holding full unilateral authority over the whitelist, oracle source, and fee parameters.
What makes USDi unique from an M69 perspective?
Strongest category: Spending Power Stability (3.7/5.0): USDi is purpose-built for purchasing-power preservation with an established multi-component real-economy benchmark (CPI-U), an on-chain TIPS-style interpolation mechanism, independent fund accounting by Trident, and annual audit by Cherry Bekaert. Conceptually this is a direct realization of Commandment 2. The underlying fund has 3-year (backtested) CPI correlation of 58-86% and ~2.05% annualized volatility, which is strong relative to any nominal-USD stablecoin as a purchasing-power proxy -- but <6 months of live data caps the track-record score at 3.
How is USDi's M69 Score calculated?
USDi scores 2.6/5.0 overall. Pillar scores: Monetary Sovereignty 2.9, Civilizational Durability 2.0, Universal Adoption 2.2. Strongest: Spending Power Stability (3.7). Weakest: Governance (1.8).