Recommendation
Pass with conditions
Commitment US$750,000 · US$12.0m post-money company valuation cap
Go to verification decisionInvestment Verification
Memorandum
Project Aster · Source-linked verification of a proposed US$750,000 SAFT+T investment, company conversion economics and companion future-token rights.
Confidential report simulation. Project Aster is fully fictional; every entity, person, source and figure is synthetic. The analytical form, evidence treatment and decision language match the intended client deliverable. Informational only — not an offer or solicitation. The commissioning investor retains the final decision.
Verification decision
The operating-company case and synthetic underwriting bridge support a conditional pass; four residual controls remain open.
Primary commercial and financial claims reconcile to contracts, processor records, accounting data and bank evidence. DR10 ties a bottom-up Year-5 revenue scenario to the US$120m base equity value; legal perimeter, security retest, custody and closing-date refresh remain conditions.
Valuation posture
| Economic object | Observed basis | Desk treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Company future-equity right | US$750,000 at US$12,000,000 post-money cap | 6.2500% initial ownership; modeled 4.0625% at exit after 35% dilution. |
| Operating company | US$612,000 LTM net revenue; US$855,360 annualized Q2 revenue | US$12m entry equals 19.61× LTM and 14.03× annualized Q2 revenue. Scenario-tested, not presented as intrinsic value. |
| Future AQY token | 1bn genesis supply; 43.75m investor entitlement | Contractual optionality only. No live market or cash-flow claim; US$0 in all return cases. |
| Treasury / staking / liquidity | Policy design only | Excluded to avoid double counting and false liquidity precision. |
Scope and evidence
The review tested the claims that can change an investment decision: demand, revenue quality, cash, rights, token exposure, security, regulatory perimeter and conflicts.
| Workstream | Procedure | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial | Reconciled contract, processor, invoice, ledger, bank and customer-reference evidence. | Supported with customer concentration risk. |
| Financial | Re-performed revenue, margin, burn, cash bridge and 20-month funded plan. | Supported. |
| Ownership / rights | Tied cap table, board authority, IP and near-final transaction schedule. | Supported subject to execution. |
| Token | Re-performed allocation, investor entitlement, release schedule and governance draft. | Arithmetic supported; deployment/value unproven. |
| Security / custody | Reviewed audit, remediation, permissions, multisig and incident procedures. | Pass subject to retest and production activation. |
| Fraud / conflicts | Tested related parties, revenue existence, bank receipts, duplicate counterparties and management override indicators. | No material exception in scope. |
Underwriting bridge
A synthetic underwriting record connects the observed US$612,000 LTM base to a bottom-up Year-5 scenario and makes the conditional-pass assumptions explicit. Business judgment rests on paying usage, retention and partner-sourced customer acquisition; transaction judgment remains conditional on CP1–CP4, OP1 and enforceable rights. Social following is not a demand proxy for this B2B settlement case.
| Workstream | Synthetic evidence in room | Conditional-pass treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Market | DR10 defines four launch corridors and a focused wedge before expansion. | Bounded bottom-up scenario; no top-down TAM claim; quarterly corridor refresh. |
| Competition | DR10 maps incumbent processor, treasury middleware and corridor specialist archetypes. | Qualitative differentiation only; named win/loss benchmark remains follow-on. |
| Distribution | DR10 models 80 / 140 / 205 / 264 / 400 ending accounts in Years 1–5, approximately 75% annual retention, and 48 / 80 / 100 / 110 / 202 new accounts. The Year-5 jump to 202 new accounts is an unproven execution stretch. | Scenario only; test the Year-5 202-account acquisition step, CAC, retention and OP1 quarterly. |
| Team | Two-founder product/operations base plus Year-1 sales/compliance and Year-3 finance hires. | Hiring and key-person milestones remain monitored. |
| Exit bridge | 400 accounts × US$30,000 annual revenue/account = US$12m Year-5 revenue; 10.0× direct equity/revenue scenario multiple = US$120m equity value. | Scenario input; no probability weighting or token value. |
Material claim register
| ID | Claim | Status | Evidence | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C01 | Company owns the product IP. | Verified | DR05 | IP assignments and repository ownership reconcile. |
| C02 | Product is non-custodial. | Verified | PS02 · DR07 | Architecture, permissions and processor confirmations show no control of customer funds. |
| C03 | 51 businesses are contracted. | Verified | DR01 | Executed contracts inspected; 42 transacted at cutoff. |
| C04 | Q2 volume was US$26.4m. | Verified | DR02 | Processor population independently totaled and sampled to settlements. |
| C05 | Q2 net revenue was US$213,840. | Verified | DR01–DR03 | 0.81% realized take rate ties to ledger and bank samples. |
| C06 | LTM net revenue was US$612,000. | Verified | DR03 | Monthly management accounts re-performed. |
| C07 | Gross margin was 67%. | Verified | DR03 | Direct processor and infrastructure costs classified consistently. |
| C08 | Six-month logo retention was 83.33%. | Verified | DR04 | 25 of 30 January cohort accounts active in June. |
| C09 | Six-month NRR was 118%. | Verified | DR04 | Cohort revenue schedule re-performed. |
| C10 | Top five represented 38% of Q2 volume. | Verified | DR01 · DR02 | Customer-level ledger reconciles. |
| C11 | Cash was US$610,000; liabilities US$160,000. | Verified | DR03 | Bank and balance-sheet bridge reconciles. |
| C12 | Current burn was US$92,000 monthly. | Verified | DR03 | Three-month normalized cash operating burn. |
| C13 | Financing supports 20.00 months planned coverage. | Verified calculation | DR03 · DR08 | US$2.76m available ÷ US$138k monthly planned burn. |
| C14 | Investor initial ownership is 6.25%. | Verified calculation | DR05 · DR06 | US$750k ÷ US$12m post-money cap. |
| C15 | Investor token entitlement is 43.75m / 4.375%. | Verified calculation | DR06 | 31.25% round participation × 14% investor pool. |
| C16 | No open critical/high security finding remains. | Condition open | DR07 | High-severity fix observed; independent retest letter outstanding. |
| C17 | AQY genesis supply is 1bn. | Instrument-defined | DR06 | Final covenant and deployed enforcement remain conditions. |
| C18 | Token has current investment value. | Not established | PS06 · DR06 | No live token, principal market, enforceable cash-flow claim or observable liquidity. |
| C19 | Largest processor represented 64.00% of Q2 volume. | Verified calculation | DR02 | US$16.896m divided by US$26.4m; corridor diversification remains OP1. |
| C20 | Largest customer represented 9.47% of Q2 net revenue. | Verified calculation | DR01 | US$20,250 divided by US$213,840; below the 25.00% IC escalation threshold. |
| C21 | No material vendor, wallet or management related-party overlap was identified. | Verified in scope | DR09 | Twelve-record population screened; scoped test, not exhaustive. |
Commercial evidence
Retention
The January cohort retained 25 of 30 accounts at month six, or 83.33%. Cohort revenue increased from US$100,000 to US$118,000, producing 118.00% six-month NRR. Definitions exclude pilots, test accounts and zero-value internal traffic.
References
Five of six customers confirmed active production use and satisfactory settlement reporting. One gave a neutral reference because a second corridor integration was delayed.
Concentration
The top five customers generated 38.00% of Q2 volume. The largest customer generated 9.47% of Q2 net revenue, below the 25.00% IC escalation threshold.
Alternative explanation
Some volume growth reflects customer rollout timing rather than durable same-account expansion. The base case therefore uses verified annualized Q2 revenue without adding pipeline revenue.
Financial integrity and valuation
| Check | Inputs | Independent result | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| LTM gross profit | US$612,000 × 67% | US$410,040 | Verified historical contribution before operating costs. |
| Annualized Q2 revenue | US$213,840 × 4 | US$855,360 | Current-rate reference; not a forecast. |
| Available funds | US$610,000 cash − US$160,000 liabilities + US$2,400,000 raise − US$90,000 costs | US$2,760,000 | Net capital available after identified liabilities and closing costs. |
| Planned coverage | US$2,760,000 ÷ US$138,000 | 20.00 months | Budget coverage; monitored monthly. |
| Initial ownership | US$750,000 ÷ US$12,000,000 | 6.2500% | Post-money-cap mechanics before future dilution. |
| Exit ownership | 6.2500% × 81.25% × 80.00% | 4.0625% | 35.00% cumulative modeled dilution, derived in the bridge below. |
Dilution bridge
| Event | Dilution at event | Investor ownership after | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| At close — SAFT+T conversion | — | 6.2500% | US$750,000 ÷ US$12,000,000 post-money cap. |
| Series A, including option-pool refresh | 18.75% | 5.0781% | 6.2500% × 81.25% retained. |
| Series B, including option-pool refresh | 20.00% | 4.0625% | 5.0781% × 80.00% retained. |
| Cumulative to Year 5 | 35.00% | 4.0625% | 81.25% × 80.00% = 65.00% retained. |
Scenario construction
| Case | Year-5 ending accounts | Net revenue / account | Year-5 net revenue | Equity / revenue multiple | Year-5 equity value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Downside | 180 | US$25,000 | US$4,500,000 | 2.0× | US$9,000,000 |
| Base | 400 | US$30,000 | US$12,000,000 | 10.0× | US$120,000,000 |
| Upside | 600 | US$40,000 | US$24,000,000 | 15.0× | US$360,000,000 |
Outcomes
| Case | Year-5 equity value | Proceeds at 4.0625% | MOIC | IRR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Downside | US$9,000,000 | US$365,625 | 0.4875× | −13.38% |
| Base | US$120,000,000 | US$4,875,000 | 6.5000× | 45.41% |
| Upside | US$360,000,000 | US$14,625,000 | 19.5000× | 81.14% |
Ownership and transaction rights
| Right | Exact reviewed term | Closure state |
|---|---|---|
| Company conversion | US$750,000 at US$12,000,000 post-money cap; 6.2500% initial ownership | Near-final; execute at closing. |
| Token entitlement | 43,750,000 AQY = 4.3750% of 1bn genesis supply | Defined; final covenant required. |
| Token release | 12-month lock, then monthly vesting over 24 months | Defined; smart-contract enforcement pending. |
| Information | Quarterly financial, KPI, cap-table and token-supply reporting for 24 months | Side letter drafted. |
| New issuance | Investor consent for change to 1bn genesis supply before TGE | Side letter drafted. |
| Follow-on | Pro rata participation right in next priced company round | Near-final. |
| Governance | No board seat; observer right while investor holds at least 3% company ownership | Near-final. |
Token, custody and digital-asset controls
| Allocation | Tokens | Share | Release control |
|---|---|---|---|
| Community / merchants | 280,000,000 | 28% | Governance program; no more than 5% of supply in first 12 months. |
| Treasury | 200,000,000 | 20% | 24-month lock; 2-of-3 multisig and board-approved policy. |
| Team | 180,000,000 | 18% | 12-month cliff; monthly vesting through month 48. |
| Investors | 140,000,000 | 14% | 12-month lock; monthly vesting over next 24 months. |
| Ecosystem | 100,000,000 | 10% | Milestone release with quarterly reporting. |
| Liquidity | 60,000,000 | 6% | TGE budget; no assumed market or valuation. |
| Advisors | 40,000,000 | 4% | 12-month cliff; monthly vesting through month 36. |
| Total | 1,000,000,000 | 100% | Genesis cap; final covenant and deployment pending. |
Utility
Draft utility is limited to operator bonding, network-fee rebates and governance of defined protocol parameters. The token confers no claim on company cash flows.
Custody
No customer funds are held. Treasury and administrative rights require separate hardware-backed keys, 2-of-3 multisig, a pause function and logged key rotation.
Liquidity
No TGE, exchange listing, market maker, reliable float or exit liquidity is assumed. “Circulating” supply cannot be treated as realizable investor liquidity.
Regulatory perimeter
Token classification, offering restrictions, AML responsibilities and corridor-specific permissions remain counsel conditions before closing and launch.
Risk register and targeted integrity tests
| Risk / test | Evidence result | Treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue existence and cutoff | Sampled invoices tie to processor records, ledger and bank receipts; no duplicate invoice found. | Pass within sample. |
| Related parties | Vendor and wallet lists screened against directors, employees and declared affiliates. | No undisclosed match in scope. |
| Customer concentration | Top five = 38% Q2 volume. | High; covenant and quarterly reporting. |
| Processor dependency | Largest processor = 64.00% of Q2 volume. | High; OP1 requires Processor-B live in each new corridor before funded expansion. |
| Security remediation | One high finding marked fixed in repository. | Retest letter is CP2. |
| Token issuance / override | Draft 1bn cap and multisig authority reviewed. | Final covenant and deployed controls are CP1/CP3. |
| Management forecast bias | Pipeline and token value excluded from base returns. | Mitigated analytically; continue budget-to-actual monitoring. |
Conditions, monitoring and recommendation
| Gate | Required evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|
| CP1 · Instrument and authority | Executed SAFT+T, board approvals and side letter preserving company/token economics. | Open before funding |
| CP2 · Security closure | Independent retest letter; deployment hash matches reviewed code. | Open before funding |
| CP3 · Production controls | Multisig, qualified treasury custody, pause and key rotation active. | Open before TGE and before release of token-specific funds |
| CP4 · Closing refresh | Cash, liabilities, cap table, revenue bridge and concentration within 5% of reviewed record. | Open before funding |
Post-close monitoring
| Cadence | Metric / evidence | Escalation trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly | Cash, net burn, runway and budget variance | Runway below 12 months or spend variance above 10%. |
| Quarterly | Revenue, take rate, cohorts and customer/processor concentration | Single customer above 25% of revenue or processor above 70% of volume. |
| Pre-expansion · OP1 | Processor-B production evidence for each proposed new corridor | Block the corresponding corridor-expansion budget until passed. |
| Quarterly | Cap table, token ledger and treasury movements | Any unapproved issuance, allocation change or custody exception. |
| Event-driven | Security, regulatory, sanctions or data incident | Immediate investor notice and board review. |
Pass with conditions.
The primary record and DR10 synthetic driver bridge support the operating-company case and exact transaction economics. Funding remains conditional on CP1–CP4, OP1 and quarterly refresh of the bridge; AQY remains valued at US$0.
Sources, methodology and limitations
Entity status, directors and filing currency checked 14 September 2026.
Non-custodial settlement architecture, supported corridors and incident history.
SDK activity, license and tagged release history.
Five relationships cross-checked to partner-controlled pages; two described as pilots.
Company, founders, directors and named affiliates; no material match identified.
Testnet deployments and administrative addresses; no live AQY token observed.
51 contracts; 42 transacting businesses at cutoff; invoices sampled to receipts.
Q2 2026 US$26.4m payment volume, revenue and 64.00% largest-processor share independently reconciled.
Cash, liabilities, revenue, margin and burn re-performed.
January cohort logo retention, 118.00% NRR and six reference calls.
Cap table, board approvals, assignments and material employment records.
Near-final instrument, dilution mechanics, 1bn genesis supply and investor entitlement.
Independent audit, remediation evidence, multisig design and access-control review.
Driver reconciliation, runway, dilution and three equity-only outcome cases.
Vendor, wallet, management and counterparty populations screened for related-party and sanctions indicators.
Method
Material representations were translated into testable claims, ranked by decision impact, tied to primary records and independently re-performed where numerical. The review separated transaction price from company value and future token value; tested alternative explanations; screened conflicts and revenue-existence indicators; and converted residual gaps into documentary conditions and monitoring triggers.
This is a synthetic specimen. No real person, company, counterparty, wallet, legal opinion or financial record is represented. A live engagement would retain source files, locators, reviewer notes, management responses, legal work product and an auditable evidence trail.