Skip to main content

Kudai

Kudai (KUDAI) — 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).

Kudai — an AI/Agents / DeFi (“DeFAI”) project that a Tier‑2 aggregator (CoinMarketCap) describes as an AI agent for the GMX and DeFi ecosystem, oriented toward “advanced DeFi strategies” and the idea of “share its wealth with $KUDAI holders”. The onchain SSOT of the token in this card: Base (ERC‑20), the contract on BaseScan.

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 token/community project around an “AI agent” for DeFi/GMX (description on CMC).
  • Who it’s for: GMX/DeFi community members and KUDAI holders.
  • Why onchain/token: onchain records the ownership and circulation of the KUDAI token on the Base network; no confirmed onchain logic of the “agent” was found in Tier‑1.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: interacts with KUDAI and follows community updates.
  2. The system does: claims the development/use of “AI agent” DeFi strategies (details not confirmed by tech docs).
  3. The user gets: participation in the token economy; potential utility/benefit of the project — per the claims.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the KUDAI token is an ERC‑20 on Base; the contract address and supply are visible in BaseScan.
  5. Token role (if any): a utility/community token around the project; specific mechanics of “wealth” distribution are not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Kudai
Also known as (aliases) KUDAI; Kudai_IO
Logo (logo) ../assets/306_kudai_logo.svg
Token symbol (ticker) KUDAI
Category DeFi
Primary chain (chain) Base
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) L2 (Optimistic Rollup, Base on Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x288f4eb27400fa220d14b864259ad1b7f77c1594
Token model (token_type) utility (community)
Max supply 100,000,000,000 KUDAI (BaseScan: Max Total Supply; CMC: total supply 100B)
Issuance fixed (per the supply on BaseScan/CMC)
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) No Tier‑1 description of the utility/tokenomics was found; the onchain fact of the token is confirmed (BaseScan).
Governance — (not confirmed)
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) —
Use‑case (use_case) community agent for GMX/DeFi
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
DecAI Fit component summary 0 / 1 / 0 / 2
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Kudai is positioned as an “AI Agent project” to support the GMX ecosystem and DeFi in general (description on CoinMarketCap). The available sources mainly confirm the fact of the token (Tier‑1: BaseScan) and general marketing claims about goals/community (Tier‑2: CoinMarketCap). The website and the “whitepaper” from links_* could not be retrieved (unavailable per the available sources), so the technical implementation of the “AI agent” in this card is not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Features/modules

  • The KUDAI token (ERC‑20 on Base).
  • “AI agent” and DeFi strategies positioning (per the CMC description).
  • Community origin: GMX Blueberry Club (per CMC).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a GMX community member interacts with KUDAI → follows the updates → participates in community activity.
  • Scenario 2: a trader/DeFi user uses KUDAI as access/utility (if the functions are implemented) → receives a service/signals/strategies (not confirmed by Tier‑1).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet (for example, MetaMask) and funds on the Base network for fees.
  • Network/chain: Base mainnet.
  • Fees: Base network fees (in ETH on Base) for transfers/swaps; DEX/CEX fees — separately.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: the KUDAI ERC‑20 contract on Base; the (claimed) offchain part of the “AI agent” is not described in the available Tier‑1.
  • Participant roles: token holders; the community; GMX/DeFi users.
  • Where logic runs: onchain — the token; the rest of the logic (AI/strategies) — not confirmed and probably offchain.
  • Dependencies: Base RPC; DEX/CEX; the GMX ecosystem (per the positioning).

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: not confirmed by Tier‑1 (the website/whitepaper were not retrieved); only the fact of the existence of the KUDAI ERC‑20 token on the Base network is confirmed in Tier‑1.
  • Who pays fees: users pay the network fee on Base (ETH on the Base network) for onchain operations (transfers/swaps).
  • Where fees go: network fees are received by validators/the sequencer and network infrastructure participants (within the Base/Ethereum mechanics); a separate “protocol fee” for KUDAI is not established.
  • Issuance/burn: max total supply 100,000,000,000 (BaseScan).
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: not established by Tier‑1.
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: not established by Tier‑1.
  • Treasury: not established by Tier‑1.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions / process: not established by Tier‑1 (no links found to a DAO/forum/rules/votes).

Security and incidents

  • Audits / bug bounty / incidents: not established by Tier‑1.
  • Threat model: risks typical for a token without a public utility specification: high dependence on offchain promises and the absence of verifiable product artifacts.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: the onchain token is active on the Base network; the product/AI agent is not confirmed by Tier‑1 sources.
  • Key releases/milestones: — (not established by Tier‑1).
  • Roadmap: — (not established by Tier‑1).

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: EVM wallets and Base network infrastructure; DEX/CEX (as markets, not proof of utility).
  • Partners: — (not established by Tier‑1).
  • Where it’s actually used: — (not established by Tier‑1).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? Per the CMC description, the project claims an “AI Agent” and “advanced DeFi strategies”, but without an accessible technical description/demo.
  • What is truly onchain? The KUDAI ERC‑20 token on the Base network and its supply/contract parameters on BaseScan.
  • Why is a token needed? In the available Tier‑1, only the existence of the token is visible; the “share its wealth” utility/mechanics are not confirmed by documentation.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing — no tech docs/demo; token‑washing — the utility is claimed at the level of a description, but not confirmed by mechanisms; what to double‑check — the availability of the whitepaper/docs and the specific functions of the “AI agent”.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
Component Level Score
AI reality absent 0
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 present (partially) 2
Details

AI reality

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

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 declaration of AI intentions/roadmap was found (the website/whitepaper from links_* were not retrieved).
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑2 positioning (“AI agent”) is not sufficient for AI_0 under the rules; Tier‑1 is required.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): specific functions/models of the “AI agent” are not described in the available Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without a technical description, it cannot be confirmed that the “AI agent” actually works.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 demos/examples of the “AI agent” in operation were found (the website/whitepaper from links_* were not retrieved).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without a demo, AI features cannot be confirmed.
  • 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/assessment are not published in the available Tier‑1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): no technical description of the “AI agent”/architecture was found in the available Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the absence of documentation does not allow confirming the implementation.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

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

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Base
  • Addresses/identifiers: 0x288f4eb27400fa220d14b864259ad1b7f77c1594
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://basescan.org/token/0x288f4eb27400fa220d14b864259ad1b7f77c1594
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the contract address and network are confirmed by the explorer.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: in the available sources, no logic other than the KUDAI token is confirmed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no links to a protocol/contracts related to the “AI agent”.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: without onchain, token ownership/transfers break down, but the “AI agent” as a service can be implemented offchain.
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the criticality of onchain for the product is not proven.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the project has a token, KUDAI (ERC‑20 on Base).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://basescan.org/token/0x288f4eb27400fa220d14b864259ad1b7f77c1594
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the token contract is visible in the explorer.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): payment in KUDAI for a specific service is not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no documentation/rules for using the token to pay for features.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): incentives/collateral/penalties via the token are not confirmed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no description of staking/collateral/income distribution mechanisms.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): governance via the token is not confirmed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑2 — https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no links to a DAO/voting.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the replaceability of the token is not established (no Tier‑1 description of the token utility and usage rules).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): given the lack of data, we set 0 under the conservative rule.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑2 https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kudai/ positioning (“AI agent”, GMX Blueberry Club) and reference metadata (context; not Tier‑1 evidence).
Tier‑1 https://basescan.org/token/0x288f4eb27400fa220d14b864259ad1b7f77c1594 the Base network, the ERC‑20 contract address, Max Total Supply/holders
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 tech doc/whitepaper on the product/AI agent was retrieved (the website/whitepaper from links_* were not extracted).

No comments to display

Back to top