Skip to content

Revenue Model

AsiliChain generates revenue through protocol fees embedded in lending operations, DDS generation, and aggregator licensing. There is no native speculative token.

StreamRateVolume driverPhase active
Protocol lending fee4% fixed margin per loan cycleNumber of loans auto-repaidPhase 2+
DDS generation fee$15–40 per shipmentNumber of export containersPhase 2+
Aggregator licensing fee0.5% on every batch transfer through mid-tier exportersExport volume through licensed aggregatorsPhase 3+
Buyer portal SaaS$200–500/month per commodity trader organisationNumber of trader organisationsPhase 3+
Data API accessVolume-tiered (negotiated with DFIs, research institutions)Data licensing agreementsPhase 4+

Baseline scenario: 2,000 farmers, 500 active loans, $450 avg loan, 6-month cycle

MetricValue
Loans in flight500
Total loan book$225,000 USDC
Protocol fee per cycle (4%)$9,000 USDC per 6-month cycle
DDS shipments per season~40 containers
DDS fee revenue$600–1,600 per season
Total protocol revenue (Phase 2 steady state)~$18,000–20,000 USDC/year

Phase 3 scenario: 10,000 farmers, 3,000 loans, 5 cooperatives, 3 commodity trader portals

MetricValue
Total loan book$1.35M USDC
Protocol fee per year$108,000 USDC
DDS revenue$4,000–10,000/year
Aggregator licensing (0.5% on $3M exports)$15,000/year
Buyer portal SaaS (3 traders × $300/mo)$10,800/year
Total Phase 3 annual revenue~$138,000–144,000 USDC/year

MFIs are not revenue sources — they are capital sources. The MFI earns 8–10% APY on their USDC pool position. AsiliChain earns the 4% spread above MFI yield. Both parties benefit when loans auto-repay.

ComponentRateRecipient
Borrower APR (gross)14–18%
MFI yield8–10%MFI pool
AsiliChain protocol fee4%AsiliChain treasury
Credit loss reserve1–2%Smart contract buffer

AsiliChain does not issue a governance token. This is a permanent design decision, not a deferral.

The reasons are structural, not temporary:

Regulatory clarity. A token sold to Ugandan farmers, EU-regulated MFIs, or any participant in the protocol creates securities obligations, VASP registration requirements, and compliance costs that consume resources better spent on cooperative onboarding and MFI partnerships. Avoiding a token is not a limitation — it is a deliberate choice to keep the legal structure clean.

Mission alignment. A speculative token creates incentives that are independent of, and potentially harmful to, the farming communities the protocol serves. A token whose price fluctuates with crypto market sentiment has no relationship to whether a farmer in Mbale received a fair loan or whether a cooperative exported successfully. AsiliChain does not want that disconnection baked into its incentive structure.

Sufficient without one. The protocol generates revenue through lending margin, DDS fees, aggregator licensing, and buyer portal SaaS. These revenue streams fund operations and growth without requiring a speculative instrument. There is no economic gap that a governance token would fill.

The protocol is not governed by token holders. Protocol upgrades, fee parameters, and forbearance decisions are governed by a 3-of-5 multisig held by the founding team, an independent technical advisor, and an MFI representative. This is accountable governance without speculative tokenomics.

There is no future token event. If this position changes, it will be announced explicitly with full regulatory and community context — not discovered in a footnote.