Skip to main content

Sturdy

Sturdy — 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).

Sturdy — a DeFi project on the Ethereum network, token (symbol: STRDY).

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 DeFi credit/lending protocol (“money market”) with a two‑tier architecture (isolated pairs + aggregators).
  • Who it’s for: lenders/borrowers, as well as DAO participants who influence the protocol parameters.
  • Why onchain/token: onchain enforces the lending rules and stores the state; STRDY is used for governance.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: deposits an asset for lending or provides collateral for a loan (in the selected markets).
  2. The system does: uses isolated lending pairs (silos) and “aggregators” that distribute liquidity among whitelisted pairs.
  3. The user gets: participation in the money market (lending/borrowing) with the chosen exposure to collateral and markets.
  4. Where the blockchain is: smart contracts (pairs/aggregators/parameters) and the STRDY token — on the Ethereum network.
  5. Token role: STRDY is the governance token of Sturdy DAO.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Sturdy
Also known as (aliases) Sturdy Finance, Sturdy V2
Logo (logo) ../assets/561_sturdy_logo.png
Token symbol (ticker) STRDY
Category DeFi
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 0xaeB3607eC434454ceB308f5Cd540875efb54309A
Token model (token_type) utility (rewards + governance)
Max supply 100 000 000 STRDY (total supply)
Issuance fixed
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) Treasury 60.5% (no vesting); Contributors 19% (3y vesting, 1y cliff); Investors 19% (3y vesting, 1y cliff); Airdrop 1.5% (no vesting).
Governance DAO (Snapshot + forum)
Admins/keys —
Audit yes
Bug bounty yes
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) —
Use‑case (use_case) collateralized lending/borrowing
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
DecAI Fit component summary ai_score 0 / onchain_score 2 / token_score 1 / evidence_score 2
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Sturdy describes itself as a DeFi credit/lending protocol (money market) that allows creating markets for tokens and isolating risks between assets. The Tier‑1 documentation describes a two‑tier architecture: at the first level — isolated lending pairs (siloed lending pairs), at the second — aggregators that redistribute liquidity among whitelisted pairs.

The v2-aggregator repository publishes the code of the aggregation layer (smart contracts and tooling), as well as a list of contract addresses on the Ethereum network.

Features/modules

  • Siloed lending pairs: isolated markets (1 lending asset + 1 collateral asset) with limited exposure between pairs.
  • Aggregators: a layer that distributes funds among whitelisted pairs (the docs mention allocation optimization).
  • Sturdy DAO: management of the protocol parameters/settings via voting.

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a lender deposits an asset into an aggregator → gets exposure only to the selected collateral types/markets (within whitelisted pairs).
  • Scenario 2: a borrower deposits collateral and takes a loan in a specific pair → gets liquidity against collateral under the smart contract rules.
  • Scenario 3: a DAO participant discusses a change of parameters/rules and votes via Snapshot.

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet.
  • Network/chain: Ethereum mainnet.
  • Fees: Ethereum network fees (gas) when interacting with the smart contracts.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: smart contracts of the lending pairs and aggregators; a set of auxiliary contracts (factory, data provider, accountant, etc.); offchain infrastructure (wallet/interface).
  • Participant roles: lenders, borrowers, DAO participants.
  • Where logic runs: the key logic of funds/loans/limits — onchain (Ethereum); interfaces/operator processes — offchain.
  • Dependencies: the documentation mentions oracles (for example, RedStone/API3/eOracle for individual markets).

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: STRDY is described as the governance token of Sturdy DAO.
  • Who pays fees: protocol users pay Ethereum network gas.
  • Issuance/burn: total supply 100 000 000 STRDY (fixed issuance per the Tier‑1 source).
  • Distribution: Treasury 60.5% (no vesting), Contributors 19% (3y vesting, 1y cliff), Investors 19% (3y vesting, 1y cliff), Airdrop 1.5% (no vesting).
  • Treasury: the existence of a treasury is indicated in the token distribution; details of spending/control — not established per the available sources.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: Sturdy DAO (votes via Snapshot; discussions — in the forum).
  • How protocol parameters change: via the SIP process (discussion → proposal → vote on Snapshot).
  • Proposal threshold: the docs specify a holding threshold of 1 000 STRDY to create a proposal on Snapshot.
  • Keys/multisig: — (not established per the available sources).

Security and incidents

  • Audits: the Tier‑1 documentation lists the audits of Sturdy V2 (ChainSecurity, Spearbit/Cantina, etc.) and Sturdy V1 (Certik, Code4rena, Quantstamp).
  • Bug bounty: yes (the link to Cantina is given in links_*).
  • Incidents: — (not established per the available sources).
  • Threat model: standard DeFi lending risks (smart contracts, oracles, market parameters); details of the threat model are not established per the available sources.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: mainnet
  • Key releases/milestones: — (not found per the available sources)
  • Roadmap: — (not found per the available sources)

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: — (not established per the available sources)
  • Partners: — (not established per the available sources)
  • Where it’s actually used: — (not established per the available sources)

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? No Tier‑1 confirmation of an AI component as “part of the product/protocol” was found. The docs mention the use of “Sturdy’s Bittensor subnet” for allocation optimization, but without a description of AI models/metrics/architecture this is not counted as a confirmed AI component.
  • What is truly onchain? smart contracts (aggregators/auxiliary contracts) and the STRDY token on the Ethereum network; the contract addresses and the aggregation layer code are published.
  • Why is a token needed? STRDY is claimed as the governance token of Sturdy DAO; it is used for participation in governance.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing — any claims about “AI” without Tier‑1 artifacts (code/docs/metrics); onchain‑washing — absence/incompleteness of addresses/code for the key logic; token‑washing — “the token is needed” without an explicit role (in this case the governance role is confirmed).

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
Component Level Score
AI reality low 0
Onchain necessity medium 2
Token necessity low 1
Evidence Tier‑1 present (per onchain/token) 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 for the protocol was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the Tier‑1 description of the protocol does not explicitly formulate AI intentions; the mention of “Bittensor subnet” without AI artifacts is not counted as AI intent.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): it is not established that the protocol has an AI module performing an ML/AI task.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no Tier‑1 description of “what exactly the AI does” (model/task/output).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 demo of a working AI component was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no Tier‑1 demo of the AI component itself (not of the DeFi protocol interface).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: — (not found)
  • Context (version/date/how measured): — (not found)
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no quantitative metrics/benchmarks of the AI part in Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): no tech description of the AI component (architecture/model versions) was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no Tier‑1 artifacts describing an AI model/architecture as part of the product.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

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

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: STRDY (0xaeB3607eC434454ceB308f5Cd540875efb54309A) + a list of contracts (AggregatorFactory, DataProvider, etc.) in Addresses.md.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sturdyfi/v2-aggregator/main/Addresses.md
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): a Tier‑1 list of contract and token addresses on the Ethereum network is published.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • OC_2 (decision): 1
  • What useful logic is onchain: lending pairs/aggregators and related contracts (strategy management, accounting of debts/reports, etc. at the smart contract level).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://github.com/sturdyfi/v2-aggregator
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the Tier‑1 aggregation layer code and a description of the smart contract functions are published.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: no Tier‑1 statement was found that without the blockchain the product loses a key property; per the available sources this is not established.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): without an explicit justification of “why trustless/onchain is critical” we set 0 (conservatively).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the project has a token, STRDY.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/usdstrdy
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the Tier‑1 documentation directly describes the token and its contract/issuance.
  • 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): no Tier‑1 confirmation was found that STRDY is used as a payment token for the service.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/usdstrdy
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): in the Tier‑1 description STRDY is claimed as a governance token, not as a payment token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): it is not established that STRDY is critical for the protocol’s incentives/collateral/penalties (per the available sources).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/usdstrdy
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): in the available Tier‑1 description of STRDY the focus is governance; the details of “security/staking/slashing” are not established.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): STRDY is used for participation in governance (and for the proposal creation threshold).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/governance
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the Tier‑1 documentation describes governance and the STRDY holding requirements.
  • 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 per the available sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/usdstrdy
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no Tier‑1 justification allowing one to confidently assert replaceability/irreplaceability.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://docs.sturdy.finance/ Description of the protocol: lending / two‑tier architecture (silos + aggregators); no explicit AI component is claimed.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “the project has an AI component (model/agents/metrics)” was found.
Tier‑1 https://github.com/sturdyfi/v2-aggregator Tier‑1 repository of the aggregation layer (contracts/functions), confirms the onchain logic of the protocol.
Tier‑1 https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sturdyfi/v2-aggregator/main/Addresses.md Tier‑1 list of contract addresses and the STRDY token on the Ethereum network.
Tier‑1 https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/usdstrdy STRDY — governance token; total supply 100 000 000; distribution (treasury/contributors/investors/airdrop).
Tier‑1 https://docs.sturdy.finance/sturdy-dao/governance Governance via forum + Snapshot; threshold of 1 000 STRDY to create a proposal.
Tier‑1 https://docs.sturdy.finance/overview/security-and-audits List of Sturdy V2/V1 audits (auditors + dates).
Tier‑2 https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/sturdy Token profile (for reference; not proof of “AI/onchain necessity”).

No comments to display

Back to top