2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
Claim ID | Cover ID | Project | Claim Amount | Purchase Date | Claim Submitted | Verdict | Notes | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
V2 #23 | 1375 | ExtraFi | 2024-10-10 10:44 | 2024-12-13 11:39 | Denied | OpenCover filed this partial claim request on behalf of one of their users. Proof of loss was provided, and claim assessors reviewed the incident details. After discussing the evidence provided, assessors concluded that a loss of funds had not occurred, and while the value of the claimant’s OVN tokens went down in USD value, they did not suffer a loss of funds. No loss of funds occurred due to one of the covered terms, so assessors conlcuded on the governance forum that this claim was not valid and no votes to approve were cast, which resulted in an outcome to deny this claim. | 2024 | |
V2 #24 | 1369 | Goldfinch | 2024-10-09 11:11 | 2025-02-02 14:37 | Denied | The claimant provided onchain proof of loss, which claim assessors reviewed and discussed along with the submitted incident details in the claim submission. Assessors discussed this claim request on the governance forum, where they concluded that no loss of funds due to any of the covered terms occurred. The loss in question was due to a loan default on an uncollateralized loan issued from Goldfinch’s senior pool. Assessor’s noted that Protocol Cover does not cover credit risk, and Goldfinch’s documentation noted that Protocol Cover did not provide protections for credit risk. Assessors concluded in their discussion on the forum that this claim was not valid and no votes were cast to approve this claim request, which resulted in a deny outcome. | 2025 | |
V2 #25 | 1369 | Goldfinch | 2024-10-09 11:11 | 2025-02-08 22:42 | Denied | The claimant who submitted Claim V2 #24 re-submitted their claim with the same details included in their previous claim submission. Assessors discussed this on the forum where they concluded that no new information was provided and this claim was not valid. No votes were cast to approve this claim request, which resulted in a deny outcome. | 2025 | |
V2 #22 | 1436 | Pocket Universe | 2024-10-25 15:32 | 2024-11-19 17:49 | Approved | OpenCover filed this partial claim request under the Pocket Universe Transaction Cover product. A Pocket Universe users signed a transaction that resulted in a loss of funds. The simulation provided did not flag the transaction as suspicious. Such a case is covered under the OpenCover Transaction Cover wording. Claim assessors reviewed the incident details for this claim, verified the loss amount and voted to approve this claim. | 2024 | |
V2 #21 | 1335 | Pocket Universe | 2024-09-25 15:15 | 2024-10-11 04:33:11 PM UTC | Approved | OpenCover filed this partial claim request under the Pocket Universe Transaction Cover product. One of Pocket Universe's users signed a transaction that resulted in a loss of funds. The simulation provided did not flag the transaction as suspicious. Such a case is covered under the OpenCover Transaction Cover wording. Claim assessors reviewed the incident details for this claim, verified the loss amount and voted to approve this claim. | 2024 | |
V2 #20 | 310 | FTX | 2022-10-31 15:55 | 2023-10-30 15:05 | Approved | The member who filed this claim verified their account and provided information regarding their loss amount, which was verified through Kroll. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V2 #19 | 305 | FTX | 2022-10-21 19:58 UTC | 2023-10-21 11:11 UTC | Approved | The member who filed this claim verified their account and provided information regarding their loss amount, which was verified through Kroll. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V2 #18 | 268 | Sherlock Quota Share Cover | 2023-09-20 15:33 UTC | 2023-09-29 21:30 UTC | Approved | Sherlock paid out a portion of Anja Finance’s bug bounty payout after a whitehat responsibly disclosed a critical vulnerability. In total, Sherlock paid out 49,500 USDC to Anja, and according to their Quota Share Cover, they cover 37.5% of their cover agreements with cover from Nexus Mutual. Sherlock filed a claim request for 18,562.50 DAI, which claim assessors reviewed and approved after comparing their submission against the Quota Share Cover wording and Sherlock’s cover wording for Anja Finance. | 2023 | |
V1 #154 | 6323 | Hodlnaut | 2021-12-04 10:43 UTC | 2022-12-29 15:50 UTC | Denied | This claim was filed without proof of loss. There was a request on Discord for this member to submit further off-chain evidence for Claims Assessors to review, but no proof of loss was provided. Without any proof of loss, assessors could not determine if a loss had occurred and voted to deny the claim. | 2022 | |
V2 #17 | 126 | Binance | 2022-11-09 12:58 UTC | 2023-07-03 16:13 UTC | Denied | The member who filed this claim did not verify their account or provide proof of loss. The details they submitted describe a personal account breach and not a custodial failure that affected all users. Claim assessors reviewed this claim and did not vote to approve. | 2023 | |
V2 #16 | 126 | Gemini | 2022-07-21 23:04 UTC | 2023-06-26 23:41 UTC | Approved | The member who filed Claim V2 15 resubmitted after verifying ownership of their account. They provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #84 | 1804 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-09-16 22:07 UTC | 2021-02-07 01:11 UTC | Accepted | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #16 | 248 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-03-05 07:14 UTC | 2020-03-14 03:47 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #91 | 2385 | Eth 2.0 (deposit contract) | 2020-11-18 20:36 UTC | 2021-04-30 05:21 UTC | Denied | The loss was due to an issue with the ETH 2.0 client, no the ETH 2.0 Beacon Chain smart contract. The loss was outside of the scope covered in Protocol Cover. As such, the claim was denied. | 2021 | |
V2 #5 | 12 | Euler Finance | 2022-12-19 00:17 UTC | 2023-03-18 13:36 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #51 | 2231 | Balancer v1 | 2020-10-03 09:07 UTC | 2020-10-07 15:54 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #49 | 1935 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-09-19 00:41 UTC | 2020-10-05 21:01 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #162 | 7739 | FTX | 2022-09-05 08:19 UTC | 2023-02-07 11:13 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #2 | 152 | bZx v1 | 2020-02-03 19:58 UTC | 2020-02-18 17:01 UTC | Accepted | The bZx hack occurred during the cover period and a loss did occur. No proof of loss was required at this time. Members voted to approve. | 2020 | |
V1 #116 | 7092 | Anchor | 2022-03-31 02:41 UTC | 2022-05-17 18:07 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed and member cited the UST depeg as the cause of their loss. Protocol Cover v1.0 protects against a loss of funds due to smart contract and technical failure within one smart contract system. The UST peg mechanism was not a part of Anchor Protocol, and Protocol Cover does not cover depeg events. Because the loss was due to a depeg event, which is a loss of value and not a loss of funds, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #1 | 121 | bZx v1 | 2019-12-10 15:49 UTC | 2020-02-15 13:11 UTC | Denied | No discussion took place ahead of denying this claim. When it was filed again as Claim 3, members voted to approve. | 2020 | |
V1 #78 | 1815 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-09-16 23:08 UTC | 2021-02-05 18:58 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #57 | 506 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-07-21 18:08 UTC | 2020-10-27 21:50 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #99 | 5714 | CREAM V1 | 2021-09-15 15:48 UTC | 2021-10-30 20:04 UTC | Accepted | Proof of Loss was submitted; the user lost funds due to the exploit; and the claim was approved. | 2021 | |
V1 #163 | 6572 | FTX | 2022-01-02 09:11 UTC | 2023-02-07 14:46 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #128 | 7480 | Hodlnaut | 2022-06-12 20:47 UTC | 2022-11-07 13:53 UTC | Accepted | Claims 126, 127, and 128 were all filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. At the 90-day mark, there was a loss of 3.56615 BTC (~46.7958 ETH). Claims Assessors discussed these three claims in the Nexus Mutual Discord and decided that Claims 127 + 128 would reimburse the member for their loss without overpaying for the actual loss. After Claims 127 and 128 were paid, the member received 50 ETH, which fully compensated them for their loss. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #97 | 5798 | Alpaca Finance | 2021-09-28 05:31 UTC | 2021-10-12 09:49 UTC | Denied | This user filed a claim for a compromised wallet, which is not covered by Protocol Cover. | 2021 | |
V1 #137 | 7347 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-18 10:08 UTC | 2022-11-08 07:22 UTC | Accepted | Claim 137 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 160.02% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #40 | 2000 | UMA | 2020-09-23 06:11 UTC | 2020-09-23 09:45 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V2 #8 | 17 | Euler Finance | 2023-01-05 07:41 UTC | 2023-03-20 04:34 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #3 | 121 | bZx v1 | 2019-12-10 15:49 UTC | 2020-02-18 17:07 UTC | Accepted | Initially, members voted to deny this claim, but after further discussion in Discord, members agreed it met the cover wording terms. The bZx hack occurred during the cover period and a loss did occur. No proof of loss was required at this time. Members voted to approve. | 2020 | |
V2 #7 | 16 | Euler Finance | 2023-02-27 01:27 UTC | 2023-03-19 23:46 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #70 | 2524 | SushiSwap v1 | 2020-12-18 23:04 UTC | 2020-12-18 23:17 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #102 | 5331 | CREAM V1 | 2021-08-09 15:40 UTC | 2021-11-01 18:05 UTC | Denied | Proof of Loss was submitted but the user only lost 2% of the covered amount. Partial claims are not yet possible but will be when Nexus V2 launches. This claim was denied but Nexus members created a Snapshot proposal to compensate this user for their loss using crypto from the Community Fund. This Snapshot proposal was approved and the member who filed this claim was compensated for their loss. | 2021 | |
V1 #58 | 2319 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-10-28 05:38 UTC | 2020-10-28 05:39 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #143 | 7425 | Hodlnaut | 2022-06-04 04:11 UTC | 2022-11-11 01:08 UTC | Accepted | Claim 143 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 113.49% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #96 | 5173 | Bancor | 2021-07-24 22:01 UTC | 2021-09-24 21:03 UTC | Denied | This user filed a claim but was later helped by the Bancor team to withdraw their BNT that had accrued as part of the IL protection feature within Bancor. No loss had occurred, and the user was able to withdraw all of their funds with assistance from the Bancor team. | 2021 | |
V1 #38 | 1801 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-09-16 16:56 UTC | 2020-09-16 23:24 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V2 #1 | 7 | Sherlock Excess Cover | 2023-02-20 06:49 UTC | 2023-03-16 21:18 UTC | Denied | Sherlock filed their Excess Cover claim after they paid out a claim to Euler Finance per Sherlock's coverage. The Sherlock team did not factor in the $500,000 deductible and the requested claim amount was higher than the actual amount that could be claimed. Claims assessors voted to deny this claim, and Sherlock filed another claim (Claim V2 10), which was reviewed and approved by claims assessors. | 2023 | |
V1 #177 | 7279 | BlockFi | 2022-05-09 07:08 UTC | 2023-02-14 22:51 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provide proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #82 | 767 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-28 16:57 UTC | 2021-02-06 19:01 UTC | Accepted | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #94 | 3102 | Kraken | 2021-02-03 05:39 UTC | 2021-06-02 20:11 UTC | Denied | No loss event took place within Kraken. This claim was filed and then the claimant voted on their own claim to approve. This was the first instance of fraudulent voting occurring during the Claims Assessment process and this Claims Assessor's staked NXM was burned as a punishment for voting fraudulently to approve a claim where no loss of funds occurred. | 2021 | |
V1 #113 | 7149 | Rari Capital | 2022-04-07 17:05 UTC | 2022-05-12 16:52 UTC | Accepted | The proof of loss provided showed a loss of 28% of their covered amount, and their funds were in one of the affected pools. Claims Assessors voted to approve since the Rari Fuse exploit was due to an unintended use of code and the member provided proof of loss that reflected a loss of funds greater than 20% of their total covered amount. | 2022 | |
V1 #65 | 2444 | Balancer v1 | 2020-11-30 23:09 UTC | 2020-11-30 23:16 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #156 | 7004 | FTX | 2022-03-23 18:10 UTC | 2023-02-06 22:55 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #138 | 7532 | Hodlnaut | 2022-06-18 10:54 UTC | 2022-11-08 10:32 UTC | Accepted | Claim 138 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 113.19% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #155 | 6909 | BlockFi | 2022-03-07 19:52 UTC | 2023-02-03 11:38 UTC | Denied | This member submitted a claim before the 90-day period had passed, and they did not verify ownership of their account. In this submission, they didn't provide proof of loss that Claims Assessors could verify. Because the claim was filed before the 90-day halted withdrawal window had completed, account ownership was not verified, and proof of loss wasn't sufficient for members to determine loss, assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2023 | |
V2 #15 | 126 | Gemini | 2022-07-21 23:04 UTC | 2023-06-07 22:34 UTC | Denied | The member who filed the claim did not previously verify their account ownership prior to filing their claim. Given their account was not verified, no members participated in the vote and it was denied by default. This member can still verify their account ownership and submit another claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #36 | 1301 | Mooniswap | 2020-09-14 06:07 UTC | 2020-09-14 06:09 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #50 | 2198 | Balancer v1 | 2020-09-29 21:13 UTC | 2020-10-07 08:41 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #83 | 517 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-07-22 18:05 UTC | 2021-02-06 20:41 UTC | Accepted | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #31 | 688 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-20 13:24 UTC | 2020-09-05 18:07 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #174 | 7391 | BlockFi | 2022-05-27 23:53 UTC | 2023-02-12 04:56 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #10 | 191 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-18 20:44 UTC | 2020-03-13 19:26 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #93 | 641 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-17 07:34 UTC | 2021-05-25 06:19 UTC | Accepted | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #168 | 7534 | FTX | 2022-06-18 18:50 UTC | 2023-02-08 10:07 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #149 | 6649 | Nexo | 2022-01-17 01:29 UTC | 2022-11-21 13:15 UTC | Denied | Claim filed with no proof of loss included. Only screenshots from Twitter were included, and no information was provided that allowed Claims Assessors to verify the account balance. At the time the claim was filed, Nexo was still processing withdrawals. This was verified by checking the Nexo custodial addresses tagged on Etherscan, which include the address the member included in their proof of loss. Since withdrawals had not been halted for more than 90 days, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #66 | 2449 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-12-02 14:39 UTC | 2020-12-02 14:58 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #14 | 243 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-03-03 19:03 UTC | 2020-03-14 03:45 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #169 | 7835 | FTX | 2022-10-11 13:26 UTC | 2023-02-08 12:23 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #110 | 6947 | Rari Capital | 2022-03-15 11:36 UTC | 2022-05-04 08:30 UTC | Accepted | The proof of loss provided showed a loss of 64.38% of their covered amount, and their funds were in one of the affected pools. Claims Assessors voted to approve since the Rari Fuse exploit was due to an unintended use of code and the member provided proof of loss that reflected a loss of funds greater than 20% of their total covered amount. | 2022 | |
V1 #46 | 852 | Balancer v1 | 2020-09-06 14:36 UTC | 2020-10-01 01:22 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #28 | 799 | Balancer v1 | 2020-08-31 13:26 UTC | 2020-08-31 13:31 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #77 | 652 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-17 21:28 UTC | 2021-02-05 17:42 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #67 | 2451 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-12-02 16:28 UTC | 2020-12-02 16:28 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #103 | 3308 | CREAM V1 | 2021-02-14 16:54 UTC | 2021-11-21 16:30 UTC | Accepted | Proof of Loss was submitted; the user lost funds due to the exploit; and the claim was approved. | 2021 | |
V1 #119 | 4242 | Perpetual Protocol | 2021-05-13 14:57 UTC | 2022-05-27 23:12 UTC | Accepted | The proof of loss provided showed a loss of 116% of their covered amount, which factors in the partial reimbursement they recieved from Perpetual Protocol through governance. Claims Assessors voted to approve since the Perpetual Protocol v1 loss event was due to economic design failure and the member provided proof of loss that reflected a loss of funds greater than 20% of their total covered amount. | 2022 | |
V1 #88 | 641 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-17 07:34 UTC | 2021-02-12 14:03 UTC | Denied | Old Cover Policy: Wasn't accepted during the first submission but was resubmitted as Claim 93 and approved for a payout. Cover Holders can file a claim twice if their first claim is denied. | 2021 | |
V1 #5 | 158 | bZx v1 | 2020-02-05 01:27 UTC | 2020-02-19 23:55 UTC | Accepted | The bZx hack occurred during the cover period and a loss did occur. No proof of loss was required at this time. Members voted to approve. | 2020 | |
V1 #146 | 7613 | FTX | 2022-07-15 01:57 UTC | 2022-11-12 02:03 UTC | Denied | Claim 146 was submitted without proof of loss. This cover was not active when FTX International first halted withdrawals on 8 November 2022, and the 90-day halted withdrawal period had not yet passed. Because the loss did not occur when the member's FTX Custody Cover was active, Claims Assessors voted to deny. | 2022 | |
V1 #139 | 6416 | Hodlnaut | 2021-12-11 08:11 UTC | 2022-11-08 22:28 UTC | Denied | Claims 129 and 139 were both filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. At the 90-day mark, the member suffered a loss of 19.9941558 ETH. Claims Assessors discussed these two claims and decided that paying Claim 129 would reimburse the member for their loss without overpaying more than the actual loss of funds. After Claim 129 was paid, the member received 21 ETH, which fully compensated them for their loss. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #175 | 7322 | FTX | 2022-05-15 18:00 UTC | 2023-02-13 02:29 UTC | Denied | The member who filed this claim verified account ownership, provided proof of loss, but requested a claim payout that was greater than their actual loss. Since partial claims are now possible, Claims Asessors reviewed and voted to deny this claim, as the requested payout way greater than 12x the actual loss. | 2023 | |
V1 #104 | 6029 | CREAM V1 | 2021-10-31 14:33 UTC | 2021-11-24 03:30 UTC | Denied | This cover policy was purchased after the CREAM V1 exploit occurred. Cover policies need to active when an exploit occurs. Members cannot purchase cover after a loss event and recieve a claim payout. As such, this claim was denied. | 2021 | |
V1 #27 | 790 | Balancer v1 | 2020-08-30 12:59 UTC | 2020-08-30 14:40 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V2 #2 | 6 | Euler Finance | 2023-01-25 18:44 UTC | 2023-03-16 22:17 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #72 | 729 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-24 17:36 UTC | 2021-02-04 23:20 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #74 | 616 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-16 10:02 UTC | 2021-02-05 02:49 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V2 #13 | 25 | Sherlock Excess Cover | 2023-03-22 17:18 UTC | 2023-04-07 20:52 UTC | Approved | The Sherlock team filed a claim, as they paid out a claim for the Sentiment exploit on 4 April 2023. The Sherlock team provided evidence they had paid a claim and the evidence provided enough clarify for Claims Assessors to verify the validity of the claim. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #42 | 2019 | UMA | 2020-09-24 03:20 UTC | 2020-09-25 18:34 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #29 | 804 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-31 14:18 UTC | 2020-09-01 08:01 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #117 | 7006 | Anchor | 2022-03-24 02:24 UTC | 2022-05-19 15:21 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed and member cited the UST depeg as the cause of their loss. Protocol Cover v1.0 protects against a loss of funds due to smart contract and technical failure within one smart contract system. The UST peg mechanism was not a part of Anchor Protocol, and Protocol Cover does not cover depeg events. Because the loss was due to a depeg event, which is a loss of value and not a loss of funds, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #127 | 7249 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-05 04:50 UTC | 2022-11-07 13:52 UTC | Accepted | Claims 126, 127, and 128 were all filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. At the 90-day mark, there was a loss of 3.56615 BTC (~46.7958 ETH). Claims Assessors discussed these three claims in the Nexus Mutual Discord and decided that Claims 127 + 128 would reimburse the member for their loss without overpaying more than the actual loss of funds. After Claims 127 and 128 were paid, the member received 50 ETH, which full compensated them for their loss. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims are not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #142 | 6818 | Hodlnaut | 2022-02-23 11:31 UTC | 2022-11-10 04:40 UTC | Denied | Claim 142 was submitted without proof of loss. Claims Assessors made attempts to contact this member in the Nexus Mutual Discord and on Blockscan Chat, but they never replied with proof of loss for this claim. Without proof of loss, Claims Assessors were unable to verify the loss amount for the claim, which resulted in a vote to deny. | 2022 | |
V1 #87 | 1159 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-09-13 07:14:37.000 UTC | 2021-02-07 18:09:19.000 UTC | Accepted | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V2 #0 | 5 | Euler Finance | 2023-01-17 09:43 UTC | 2023-03-16 21:09 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #165 | 7737 | FTX | 2022-09-03 01:41 UTC | 2023-02-07 20:31 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V2 #14 | 90 | FTX | 2022-04-05 11:08 UTC | 2023-05-14 12:20 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V2 #10 | 7 | Sherlock Excess Cover | 2023-02-20 06:49 UTC | 2023-03-22 11:43 UTC | Approved | The Sherlock team filed this second claim and the requested claim amount reflected the 25% portion of Sherlock's Euler Finance coverage with the $500,000 deductible factored into their requested amount. Claims assessors reviewed and approved this claim. The Sherlock team redeemed their claim payout after their claim was approved. | 2023 | |
V1 #4 | 188 | bZx v1 | 2020-02-18 02:25 UTC | 2020-02-19 17:37 UTC | Denied | This cover was purchased after the loss event occurred. For cover to be valid, it needs to be active when a loss occurs. Members voted to deny this claim, as it wasn't active when the loss first occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #56 | 2295 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-10-21 21:37 UTC | 2020-10-22 12:03 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V2 #3 | 9 | Euler Finance | 2023-01-17 11:11 UTC | 2023-03-17 17:10 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #147 | 6972 | Hodlnaut | 2022-03-19 08:10 UTC | 2022-11-13 00:23 UTC | Accepted | Claim 147 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 87.45% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #167 | 7804 | FTX | 2022-10-01 08:17 UTC | 2023-02-07 21:01 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #6 | 229 | Instadapp Registry | 2020-02-26 21:08 UTC | 2020-02-26 21:23 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #125 | 7486 | Celsius | 2022-06-13 04:57 UTC | 2022-10-17 19:24 UTC | Denied | This is second claim filed for Cover ID 7486. This cover was purchased AFTER withdrawals were first halted and was not eligible for a claim payout. Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim, as it was not active when Celsius first halted withdrawals. | 2022 | |
V2 #12 | 47 | FTX | 2022-07-10 14:53 UTC | 2023-04-04 05:54 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #43 | 854 | Balancer v1 | 2020-09-06 15:33 UTC | 2020-09-26 18:54 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #32 | 883 | Compound v2 | 2020-09-07 16:09 UTC | 2020-09-07 16:18 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #17 | 178 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-16 19:17 UTC | 2020-03-14 13:44 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #153 | 8054 | Enzyme v4 | 2022-11-28 00:26 UTC | 2022-11-29 20:04 UTC | Denied | This appears to be a test of the claims process. A cover was purchased for 1 DAI, a claim was filed shortly thereafter, and that claim was denied. This is the second claim filed for this Cover ID. Currently, quorum has been reached with a vote to deny since no proof fo loss was provided that showed a loss of funds had occurred within the Enzyme v4 protocol. | 2022 | |
V1 #122 | 7486 | Celsius | 2022-06-13 04:57 UTC | 2022-09-19 22:50 UTC | Denied | This cover was purchased AFTER withdrawals were first halted and was not eligible for a claim payout. Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim, as it was not active when Celsius first halted withdrawals. | 2022 | |
V1 #106 | 5860 | Pancakeswap v1 | 2021-10-08 23:50 UTC | 2022-01-18 16:19 UTC | Denied | The proof of loss provided didn't show any loss was realized, and no loss event occurred on PancakeSwap v1. Since there was no loss, the claim was denied. | 2022 | |
V1 #18 | 41 | Unknown | 2019-08-06 21:22 UTC | 2020-03-14 14:52 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #8 | 209 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-21 08:10 UTC | 2020-03-13 15:15 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #61 | 1844 | Aave v1 | 2020-09-17 00:59 UTC | 2020-11-04 22:35 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #126 | 7176 | Hodlnaut | 2022-04-14 05:52 UTC | 2022-11-07 13:51 UTC | Denied | Claims 126, 127, and 128 were all filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. At the 90-day mark, there was a loss of 3.56615 BTC (~46.7958 ETH). Claims Assessors discussed these three claims in the Nexus Mutual Discord and decided that Claims 127 + 128 would reimburse the member for their loss without overpaying for the actual loss. After Claims 127 and 128 were paid, the member received 50 ETH, which full compensated them for their loss. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims are not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #47 | 1153 | Opyn | 2020-09-12 22:24 UTC | 2020-10-01 10:13 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #121 | 7300 | Bancor v3 | 2022-05-13 18:47 UTC | 2022-08-17 19:08 UTC | Denied | The proof of loss provided showed a loss of 18.15% of their covered amount. Claims Assessors voted to deny since the loss amount was less than 20% of their total covered amount, which is a requirement in Protocol Cover wording v1.0 due the technical inability to pay partial claims in the Nexus V1 smart contracts. | 2022 | |
V1 #115 | 7006 | Anchor | 2022-03-24 02:24 UTC | 2022-05-17 15:58 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed and member cited the UST depeg as the cause of their loss. Protocol Cover v1.0 protects against a loss of funds due to smart contract and technical failure within one smart contract system. The UST peg mechanism was not a part of Anchor Protocol, and Protocol Cover does not cover depeg events. Because the loss was due to a depeg event, which is a loss of value and not a loss of funds, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #24 | 276 | Uniswap v1 | 2020-04-14 01:07 UTC | 2020-04-20 02:14 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V2 #9 | 19 | Ease | 2023-02-17 00:15 UTC | 2023-03-21 01:06 UTC | Approved | The Ease team filed a claim for an exploit on the arNXM contract, which resulted in a loss of funds across arNXM holders. They provided a summary of the exploit and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed and approved this claim. After their claim was approved, the Ease team redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #30 | 571 | Curve BTC Pools | 2020-08-12 00:14 UTC | 2020-09-05 02:13 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #75 | 203 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-02-20 04:33 UTC | 2021-02-05 03:19 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V2 #4 | 8 | Euler Finance | 2023-01-17 09:34 UTC | 2023-03-17 19:54 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #9 | 172 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-16 05:07 UTC | 2020-03-13 16:18 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #141 | 7475 | Hodlnaut | 2022-06-12 07:45 UTC | 2022-11-09 13:57 UTC | Accepted | Claim 141 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 94.70% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #152 | 8054 | Enzyme v4 | 2022-11-28 00:26 UTC | 2022-11-28 03:00 UTC | Denied | This appears to be a test of the claims process. A cover was purchased for 1 DAI and a claim was filed shortly thereafter. Claims Assessors voted to deny since no proof fo loss was provided that showed a loss of funds had occurred within the Enzyme v4 protocol. | 2022 | |
V1 #157 | 7894 | FTX | 2022-11-03 09:25 UTC | 2023-02-06 23:08 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #166 | 7683 | FTX | 2022-08-06 08:04 UTC | 2023-02-07 20:58 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #71 | 2525 | SushiSwap v1 | 2020-12-18 23:58 UTC | 2020-12-19 00:48 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #109 | 6653 | Abracadabra | 2022-01-17 16:39 UTC | 2022-02-01 12:27 UTC | Denied | Member bought cover hours before they were liquidated on Abracadabra. The proof of loss outlined that the member could not repay their position and avoid liquidation, but after simulating the conditions on Avalanche at the time of the liquidation, the member could have repaid their loan and avoided liquidation. The protocol operated without issue at the time of liquidation, and Claims Assessors denied this claim, as the loss was the result of normal market movements. | 2022 | |
V1 #33 | 893 | dForce Yield Market | 2020-09-08 02:10 UTC | 2020-09-08 02:30 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #171 | 7735 | FTX | 2022-08-30 21:23 UTC | 2023-02-08 22:57 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #81 | 768 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-28 16:58 UTC | 2021-02-06 19:01 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #52 | 2268 | UMA | 2020-10-11 21:50 UTC | 2020-10-11 21:56 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #23 | 109 | MakerDAO MCD | 2019-11-22 21:36 UTC | 2020-03-30 19:24 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #76 | 2929 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2021-01-23 23:31 UTC | 2021-02-05 03:48 UTC | Denied | Cover Policy Requiring Proof of Loss: The address provided as Proof of Loss was not among the affected addresses and was not impacted by the yDAI vault hack. Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim as no loss of funds occurred due to the hack. | 2021 | |
V1 #85 | 2458 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-12-04 13:34 UTC | 2021-02-07 13:14 UTC | Denied | Cover Policy Requiring Proof of Loss: The address provided as Proof of Loss was among the affected address but did not incur a loss of funds that met the 20% or greater criteria as specified in the cover wording. Given this, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2021 | |
V1 #101 | 5722 | CREAM V1 | 2021-09-16 14:16 UTC | 2021-10-31 06:10 UTC | Accepted | Proof of Loss was submitted; the user lost funds due to the exploit; and the claim was approved. | 2021 | |
V1 #53 | 2274 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-10-15 08:32 UTC | 2020-10-15 12:24 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #134 | 7360 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-21 17:23 UTC | 2022-11-07 21:00 UTC | Accepted | Claim 134 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 90.30% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #80 | 759 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-28 06:40 UTC | 2021-02-06 07:31 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #60 | 1189 | Compound v2 | 2020-09-13 14:02 UTC | 2020-11-04 00:25 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #41 | 1061 | UMA | 2020-09-12 16:44 UTC | 2020-09-24 19:46 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #148 | 7160 | FTX | 2022-04-09 07:22 UTC | 2022-11-14 11:22 UTC | Denied | Claim 148 was filed before the 90-day halted withdrawal period had passed for FTX International. The screenshots of emails provided as evidence were insufficient to judge whether or not this claim was valid. Claims Assessors voted to deny at this time because the 90-day period hasn't yet passed, and the proof of loss wasn't sufficient. This member can still file a claim and have it reviewed after the 90-day period has passed. | 2022 | |
V1 #68 | 2452 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-12-02 16:31 UTC | 2020-12-02 16:31 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #7 | 253 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-03-09 18:38 UTC | 2020-03-13 05:14 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V2 #6 | 15 | Euler Finance | 2023-01-13 09:20 UTC | 2023-03-18 21:00 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #111 | 7185 | Rari Capital | 2022-04-18 03:47 UTC | 2022-05-06 03:57 UTC | Accepted | The proof of loss provided showed a loss of 21.25% of their covered amount, and their funds were in one of the affected pools. Claims Assessors voted to approve since the Rari Fuse exploit was due to an unintended use of code and the member provided proof of loss that reflected a loss of funds greater than 20% of their total covered amount. | 2022 | |
V1 #159 | 7697 | FTX | 2022-08-11 01:40 UTC | 2023-02-07 03:49 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #112 | 6916 | Anchor | 2022-03-09 07:46 UTC | 2022-05-11 08:28 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed and member cited the UST depeg as the cause of their loss. Protocol Cover v1.0 protects against a loss of funds due to smart contract and technical failure within one smart contract system. The UST peg mechanism was not a part of Anchor Protocol, and Protocol Cover does not cover depeg events. Because the loss was due to a depeg event, which is a loss of value and not a loss of funds, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #11 | 126 | MakerDAO MCD | 2019-12-15 10:04 UTC | 2020-03-13 19:53 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #98 | 3951 | CREAM V1 | 2021-04-23 13:19 UTC | 2021-10-30 17:27 UTC | Accepted | Proof of Loss was submitted; the user lost funds due to the exploit; and the claim was approved. | 2021 | |
V1 #69 | 2487 | Aave v2 | 2020-12-09 04:26 UTC | 2020-12-10 11:43 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #144 | 7382 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-26 10:35 UTC | 2022-11-11 14:16 UTC | Accepted | Claim 144 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 83.41% of the covered amount. Proof of loss was provided in the Nexus Mutual Discord. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #108 | 6686 | Notional Finance v2 | 2022-01-24 10:28 UTC | 2022-01-25 10:14 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed as a test by a member of the Qredo team. | 2022 | |
V1 #92 | 3675 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2021-03-24 05:40 UTC | 2021-05-14 04:40 UTC | Denied | While a loss did occur, Yearn compensated this user prior to the claim being filed. As such, no loss occurred and the claim was denied. | 2021 | |
V1 #59 | 1163 | Opyn | 2020-09-13 07:21 UTC | 2020-10-28 20:59 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #136 | 6319 | Hodlnaut | 2021-12-04 09:23 UTC | 2022-11-08 03:26 UTC | Accepted | Claim 135 and 136 were both filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve both claims, as the loss at the 90-day mark was 78.6654 ETH, or 143.02% of the total covered amount between Claims 135 + 136. | 2022 | |
V1 #135 | 7346 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-18 10:04 UTC | 2022-11-08 03:22 UTC | Accepted | Claim 135 and 136 were both filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve both claims, as the loss at the 90-day mark was 78.6654 ETH, or 143.02% of the total covered amount between Claims 135 + 136. | 2022 | |
V1 #15 | 244 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-03-03 19:20 UTC | 2020-03-14 03:46 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #114 | 7067 | Rari Capital | 2022-03-29 16:04 UTC | 2022-05-14 16:40 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed and cited the Ichi Fuse pool loss event. Claims Assessors reviewed this event and after looking into the details, the cause of the loss was due to low liquidity on Uniswap V3, which was an external component necessary for liquidations. Everything within the Fuse pool operated without issue at the smart contract level, but the liquidity on Uniswap V3 was exhausted. Because this failure occurred outside of the Rari Fuse protocol and pool, Claims Assessors voted to deny. | 2022 | |
V1 #160 | 7901 | FTX | 2022-11-04 16:31 UTC | 2023-02-07 04:11 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #140 | 7168 | Hodlnaut | 2022-04-11 01:25 UTC | 2022-11-09 02:32 UTC | Accepted | Claim 140 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 101.76% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #178 | 7909 | FTX | 2022-11-06 06:41 UTC | 2023-02-22 00:46 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provide proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #79 | 467 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-07-19 22:50 UTC | 2021-02-06 03:22 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #34 | 899 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-09-08 07:51 UTC | 2020-09-08 07:52 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #118 | 4499 | Perpetual Protocol | 2021-06-03 21:09 UTC | 2022-05-27 22:41 UTC | Accepted | The proof of loss provided showed a loss of 75.1% of their covered amount, which factors in the partial reimbursement they recieved from Perpetual Protocol through governance. Claims Assessors voted to approve since the Perpetual Protocol v1 loss event was due to economic design failure and the member provided proof of loss that reflected a loss of funds greater than 20% of their total covered amount. | 2022 | |
V1 #12 | 206 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-20 05:37 UTC | 2020-03-14 03:06 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #19 | 155 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-04 07:44 UTC | 2020-03-15 08:33 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #123 | 7730 | Beefy | 2022-08-25 19:47 UTC | 2022-09-21 18:26 UTC | Denied | This member provided proof of loss, but there was no evidence of a hack, exploit, or other covered event. Instead, the member claimed they had lost funds due to impermanent loss, which is caused by normal market movements and is not a covered event. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to deny this claim as no exploit or technical failure occurred. | 2022 | |
V1 #173 | 7911 | FTX | 2022-11-06 11:13 UTC | 2023-02-11 14:34 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #124 | 6995 | Anchor | 2022-03-22 13:56 UTC | 2022-10-11 16:21 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed and member cited the UST depeg as the cause of their loss. Protocol Cover v1.0 protects against a loss of funds due to smart contract and technical failure within one smart contract system. The UST peg mechanism was not a part of Anchor Protocol, and Protocol Cover does not cover depeg events. Because the loss was due to a depeg event, which is a loss of value and not a loss of funds, Claims Assessors voted to deny this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #90 | 3989 | 2021-04-25 06:41 UTC | 2021-04-27 07:05 UTC | Denied | This claim was likely a test claim. In any event, this policy required Proof of Loss and none was provided, so this claim was denied. | 2021 | ||
V1 #170 | 7802 | FTX | 2022-10-01 03:59 UTC | 2023-02-08 17:08 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #176 | 7322 | FTX | 2022-05-15 18:00 UTC | 2023-02-14 19:31 UTC | Approved | The member who filed Claim 175, which was denied as stated above, resubmitted their claim with this submission. They verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss, and requested a claim payout for their actual loss amount. After Claims Assessors reviewed and confirmed that the actual loss matched the requested claim payment, assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #150 | 7595 | Hodlnaut | 2022-07-08 23:31 UTC | 2022-11-22 17:36 UTC | Denied | When Hodlnaut withdrawals were first halted, this cover was expired. Per the cover wording, a cover only protects against loss during the active cover period. Since this cover was expired, it was not eligible for a claim payout. Claims Assessors discussed this in Discord and voted to deny in both the Claims Assessment period and the full member vote. | 2022 | |
V1 #105 | 5920 | CREAM V1 | 2021-10-16 20:30 UTC | 2021-12-05 11:18 UTC | Accepted | Proof of Loss was submitted; the user lost funds due to the exploit; and the claim was approved. | 2021 | |
V1 #39 | 1420 | UMA | 2020-09-14 09:14 UTC | 2020-09-18 02:12 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #100 | 5803 | CREAM V1 | 2021-09-28 23:55 UTC | 2021-10-31 03:15 UTC | Accepted | Proof of Loss was submitted; the user lost funds due to the exploit; and the claim was approved. | 2021 | |
V1 #151 | 7331 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-16 10:11 UTC | 2022-11-26 10:29 UTC | Accepted | Claim was filed with proof of loss that allowed Claims Assessors to verify the loss. It was active when Hodlnaut first halted withdrawals and the member did suffer a loss of funds. As such, Claims Assessors voted to approve. | 2022 | |
V1 #89 | 2268 | UMA | 2020-10-11 21:50 UTC | 2021-04-08 12:00 UTC | Denied | UMA experienced no loss event and this claim was denied, as no loss of funds had occurred. | 2021 | |
V1 #172 | 7608 | FTX | 2022-07-14 07:42 UTC | 2023-02-10 01:50 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #161 | 7910 | FTX | 2022-11-06 09:30 UTC | 2023-02-07 08:30 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #164 | 7696 | FTX | 2022-08-09 07:47 UTC | 2023-02-07 15:40 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #62 | 559 | Argent | 2020-08-05 20:06 UTC | 2020-11-10 11:49 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #44 | 802 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-31 13:43 UTC | 2020-09-29 04:18 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #45 | 727 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-08-24 14:05 UTC | 2020-09-29 05:16 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #54 | 2297 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-10-22 04:12 UTC | 2020-10-22 10:23 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #130 | 7561 | Hodlnaut | 2022-06-25 13:21 UTC | 2022-11-07 16:07 UTC | Accepted | Claim 130 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 102.37% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #37 | 859 | Balancer v1 | 2020-09-06 15:57 UTC | 2020-09-16 14:44 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #22 | 252 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-03-08 14:57 UTC | 2020-03-16 03:50 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #158 | 7160 | FTX | 2022-04-09 07:22 UTC | 2023-02-07 03:10 UTC | Approved | This member verified account ownership, provided proof of loss with evidence of their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed the proof of loss and confirmed the validity of the requested claim amount. Assessors voted to approve this claim. | 2023 | |
V1 #20 | 138 | MakerDAO MCD | 2019-12-31 13:54 UTC | 2020-03-15 09:07 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #107 | 2923 | BadgerDAO | 2021-01-23 22:17 UTC | 2022-01-20 19:47 UTC | Denied | Claim was filed for the BadgerDAO frontend attack, where the smart contract system was not affected but the web2 interface was compromised. Because the protocol itself operated without issue and was not compromised, this claim was denied as it didn't meet the terms outlined in Protocol Cover wording v1.0. | 2022 | |
V1 #21 | 172 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-02-16 05:07 UTC | 2020-03-15 23:26 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #73 | 278 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-04-16 00:45 UTC | 2021-02-05 02:47 UTC | Approved | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #13 | 247 | MakerDAO MCD | 2020-03-05 07:02 UTC | 2020-03-14 03:43 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #55 | 2296 | Balancer v1 | 2020-10-21 21:50 UTC | 2020-10-22 11:39 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #131 | 6980 | Hodlnaut | 2022-03-20 05:17 UTC | 2022-11-07 16:08 UTC | Accepted | Claim 131 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 215.56% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim1 | 2022 | |
V1 #25 | 109 | MakerDAO MCD | 2019-11-22 21:36 UTC | 2020-05-22 16:48 UTC | Denied | The MakerDAO Black Thursday event was widely discussed in Discord among members. It was agreed that this was not a smart contract failure, but a failure of the economic design of the protocol, which wasn't covered under the original Smart Contract Cover. Because the cause of this loss event wasn't included in the terms outlined in Smart Contract Cover, members denied this claim. | 2020 | |
V1 #129 | 7531 | Hodlnaut | 2022-06-18 10:09 UTC | 2022-11-07 15:53 UTC | Accepted | Claims 129 and 139 were both filed by the same member and the loss was tied to one (1) account. At the 90-day mark, the member suffered a loss of 19.9941558 ETH. Claims Assessors discussed these two claims and decided that paying Claim 129 would reimburse the member for their loss without overpaying more than the actual loss of funds. After Claim 129 was paid, the member received 21 ETH, which fully compensated them for their loss. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #86 | 1044 | Yearn Finance (all vaults) | 2020-09-12 14:11 UTC | 2021-02-07 17:03 UTC | Accepted | Old Cover Policy: didn't require Proof of Loss. Accepted, as the loss event met the conditions outlined in Smart Contract Cover Wording v1.2 | 2021 | |
V1 #35 | 994 | mStable | 2020-09-11 22:22 UTC | 2020-09-14 01:48 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #132 | 7318 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-15 08:42 UTC | 2022-11-07 16:40 UTC | Accepted | Claim 132 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 39.03% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #63 | 2354 | Aave v1 | 2020-11-10 11:57 UTC | 2020-11-11 04:50 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #95 | 4895 | Aave v2 | 2021-06-30 02:56 UTC | 2021-06-30 17:41 UTC | Denied | This was a test claim BraveNewDeFi filed in order to document the claims filing process for an entry in the documentation. | 2021 | |
V1 #145 | 7618 | Hodlnaut | 2022-07-16 04:28 UTC | 2022-11-11 20:59 UTC | Accepted | Claim 145 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of103.13% of the covered amount. Proof of loss was provided in the Nexus Mutual Discord. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. | 2022 | |
V1 #133 | 7390 | Hodlnaut | 2022-05-27 23:35 UTC | 2022-11-07 18:17 UTC | Accepted | Claim 133 was submitted with proof of loss that showed a loss of 83.37% of the covered amount. Claims Assessors reviewed and voted to approve this claim. At the time this claim was filed and assessed, partial claims were not technically possible. | 2022 | |
V1 #64 | 910 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-09-09 00:02 UTC | 2020-11-27 03:26 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #48 | 2156 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-09-28 13:07 UTC | 2020-10-03 15:46 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V2 #11 | 28 | Euler Finance | 2023-02-11 19:36 UTC | 2023-03-23 15:37 UTC | Approved | This member provided proof of loss and requested a claim amount that matched their actual loss. Claims assessors reviewed this claim and voted to approve. After the claim was approved, the member redeemed their claim payout. | 2023 | |
V1 #26 | 557 | Uniswap v2 | 2020-08-03 18:06 UTC | 2020-08-05 22:47 UTC | Denied | No smart contract failure occurred, and members could not identify any loss event that took place. Given this, members voted to deny this claim, as no loss had occurred. | 2020 | |
V1 #120 | 7452 | Bancor v3 | 2022-06-08 18:32 UTC | 2022-08-08 04:32 UTC | Accepted | Claim was filed and cited economic design failure. Claims Assessors reviewed the claim, saw that the LINK deposited and withdraw showed a difference of ~73.1% without the IL protection, and determined that a loss of funds had occured. Claims Assessors voted to approve. | 2022 |