Skip to main content

Balance

Balance (E‑PAL / Balance Labs) — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

Balance — an “AI‑focused Web3 user experience infrastructure”: a platform where users create/use AI agents (including for gaming/social scenarios) and interact with onchain mechanics (fan tokens, etc.); token: EPT (ERC‑20).

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: a platform/protocol around AI agents for entertainment/games and a Web3 economy.
  • Who it’s for: E‑PAL/Balance users, creators of AI agents (“AI Epals”), participants in fan economies.
  • Why onchain/token: onchain — issuance/trading of tokens (EPT and fan tokens) and economic rules; EPT is used as a payment/service/governance token (per the docs).

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: creates a personalized AI agent (prompt/strategies/preferences) or chooses a ready‑made one.
  2. The system does: deploys/maintains the agent in the ecosystem and connects the Web3 mechanics (including fan tokens/economy).
  3. The user gets: an interactive “AI Epal” and/or tokenized participation/reward mechanics.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the EPT and fan tokens, trading/minting and accounting of incentives (per the description of the Token Layer).
  5. Token role (if any): EPT — payments for services, the currency of the Fans Protocol, governance, access to features, incentives and (claimed) a gas role for the “Balance Chain”.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Balance
Also known as (aliases) E‑PAL; Epal Labs; $EPT
Logo (logo) ../assets/154_balance_logo.svg
Token symbol (ticker) EPT
Category AI/Agents | Gaming | Infra
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x3Dc8e2d80b6215a1BCcAe4d38715C3520581E77c
Token model (token_type) utility (incentives + governance)
Max supply 10,000,000,000 (per the docs) / Max Total Supply ≈ 3.075B (per Etherscan) — the conflict requires clarification
Issuance —
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) The docs list the roles of the token (payments, fan economy, governance, gas/nodes); the supply is claimed as 10B, but the explorer shows a different max supply.
Governance governance via $EPT (per the docs)
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) AI agents ("AI Epals")
Use‑case (use_case) create + monetize AI agents
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 1 / 2 / 3 / 3
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Balance describes itself as an “AI‑Focused Web3 User Experience Infrastructure”. The documentation emphasizes the connection with E‑PAL (a gaming companionship platform) and the concept of “AI Epals”: users can create personalized AI agents and interact with them in gaming/social scenarios.

The Tier‑1 sources confirm:

  • the description of Balance AI as a product (creation of AI Epals, rewards/liquidity for “highly rated” agents, revenue share),
  • the role of the EPT token as a multi‑purpose ecosystem token (payments, mint/trade of fan tokens, governance, service functions, incentives).

Features/modules

  • Balance AI: creation of personalized “AI Epals” (via prompts/strategies/preferences) and their use in entertainment scenarios.
  • Fan Tokens (per the Token Layer): mint/trade of “fan tokens” as an engagement economy.
  • EPT token: payment for services, governance, incentives and a (claimed) role in paying for nodes/resources.

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1 (agent creation): a user sets parameters/strategies → creates an AI Epal → gets an “agent” and (per the model) an opportunity to earn.
  • Scenario 2 (service consumption): a user pays EPT for gaming companion services → gets access to the services of “Epals”.
  • Scenario 3 (fan economy): mints/trades fan tokens (per the docs) → gets an engagement economy around a specific “companion/creator”.

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet for onchain operations with EPT; access to the Balance/E‑PAL products/interfaces — via the project’s links.
  • Network/chain: Ethereum mainnet (EPT ERC‑20).
  • Fees: Ethereum gas for operations with the token and onchain functions (if used).

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: the EPT token (ERC‑20), the Balance AI web products and related services (per the docs).
  • Participant roles: users/creators of AI Epals, EPT holders/stakers, participants in the fan economy.
  • Where logic runs: onchain — the token and related onchain mechanics (per the descriptions of the Token Layer); AI agents and UX — offchain.
  • Dependencies: Ethereum, the product’s offchain infrastructure, DEXes/exchanges for liquidity.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • EPT utility (per the docs): payments for services (gaming companionship / platform services), the currency for mint/trade of fan tokens, governance (voting rights with a stake), a “gas token for Balance Chain” and payment for decentralized nodes/resources.
  • Supply: the docs claim a “10 billion total supply”, but Etherscan shows a different Max Total Supply (requires clarification/which contract is considered the “main” one).

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: governance via $EPT (per the docs), the details of the process are not disclosed.
  • How protocol parameters change: — (no Tier‑1 voting/update procedure described).
  • Where decisions are discussed/made: — (no Tier‑1 forum/repo/discussion process found).
  • Keys/multisig: — (no Tier‑1 information on keys/multisig found).

Security and incidents

  • Audits: — (no Tier‑1 audit reports found).
  • Bug bounty: — (no Tier‑1 bug bounty found).
  • Incidents: — (no Tier‑1 postmortems/incidents found).
  • Threat model: AI service risks (quality/privacy), key/administration risks (not disclosed), risks of the onchain economy of fan tokens (if used).

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active (public docs + the EPT token on Ethereum).
  • Key releases/milestones: — (no Tier‑1 list of releases/milestones recorded).
  • Roadmap: see links_* → Roadmap.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: not established (no Tier‑1 list of integrations found).
  • Partners: — (no Tier‑1 confirmed list of partners found).
  • Where it’s actually used: as a product/UX layer for creating and using AI agents (per the docs) + the token economy (EPT).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? The docs claim “AI Epals” and the ability to create personalized AI agents; at the same time, the model/architecture is not disclosed and there are no quality metrics.
  • What is truly onchain? The EPT token (ERC‑20) and the onchain mechanics of the fan economy/payouts (at the level of descriptions).
  • Why is a token needed? Payments and access to features, governance, incentives; a role in paying for nodes/resources is also claimed.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing — medium risk (many claims, few technical artifacts); what to double‑check: the architecture of the “Fans Protocol” and the actual onchain implementation of revenue share.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality low 1
Onchain necessity medium 2
Token necessity high 3
Evidence Tier‑1 present 3
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): — (there is AI_1: what the AI agents/AI Epals do is described).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/balance-ai
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_0 applies only if AI_1..AI_4 = 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): AI agents (“AI Epals”) are created by users and used for interactive scenarios (games/entertainment/work), with a reward economy.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/balance-ai
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Balance AI page describes the purpose and behavior of the AI agents.
  • Conflict note (if any): Without metrics/technical details (AI_3=0, AI_4=0).

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The reviewed Tier‑1 sources contain no reproducible demo of an AI agent in operation/its results.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): A description of functions without specific examples of outputs.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Quality metrics of the AI agents are not provided in the docs.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): A technical description of the models/architecture of AI Epals is not disclosed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There are product descriptions, but without architecture/versions.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum (mainnet)
  • Addresses/identifiers: EPT ERC‑20 0x3Dc8e2d80b6215a1BCcAe4d38715C3520581E77c
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x3Dc8e2d80b6215a1BCcAe4d38715C3520581E77c ; https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The explorer confirms the token/network; the docs describe the role of EPT.
  • Conflict note (if any): There is a max supply conflict between the docs and the explorer — an analysis of “which supply to count” is needed.

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 1
  • What useful logic is onchain: Mint/trade of fan tokens and the economic rules of the “Fans Protocol currency”; governance mechanics via stake.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Token Layer describes onchain functions beyond the basic token.
  • Conflict note (if any): The “Fans Protocol” is not disclosed on separate technical pages (artifacts are needed).

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: the engagement economy can be implemented in a centralized way; the criticality of the blockchain as a unique property is not proven.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no clear argumentation that “without onchain a key property breaks down”.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The project has a token, EPT.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x3Dc8e2d80b6215a1BCcAe4d38715C3520581E77c
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Onchain confirmation of the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): EPT is claimed as the payment token for services (gaming companionship + platform services).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Token Layer explicitly specifies the payment use case.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): EPT is used for incentives (liquidity support/incentives) and for paying for nodes/resources (per the docs).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Token Layer describes the distribution of EPT to nodes and the incentive mechanics.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): EPT grants holders voting rights; voting power requires a stake (per the docs).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The governance role is described in the Token Layer.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Per the description, the token is embedded in payments, governance and the incentivization of nodes/resources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): This is a claimed “systemic” role of the token, not only monetization.
  • Conflict note (if any): The actual necessity requires verification once Balance Chain/node artifacts appear.

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/balance-ai Description of Balance AI and “AI Epals” (what the AI part does at the product level).
Tier‑1 https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/products/token-layer EPT utility (payments, fan tokens, governance, nodes/resources).
Tier‑1 https://balancefun.gitbook.io/balance/assets/usdept Additional description of $EPT and the claimed supply/role of the token.
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0x3Dc8e2d80b6215a1BCcAe4d38715C3520581E77c Onchain confirmation of the EPT token (contract, max total supply per the explorer).
Tier‑2 — —
Tier‑3 — —

No comments to display

Back to top