Compound Governance

Summary The Compound Foundation ("Foundation") and Compound Governance Working Group ("CGWG") are submitting this Snapshot to seek community approval for a one-year renewal of Compound DAO's security service provider arrangement, covering all three providers that secure the protocol today, as described in the Foundation's forum proposal: "Renewal of Compound's Security Service Providers 2026-2027". The package saves the DAO $341,000, or 17%, against what these same three services cost today. Combined spend today is $2,036,000 — $2,000,000 of DAO-funded security spend plus the $36,000 of ChainPatrol coverage the Foundation has been carrying since the DAO's own funding line for it lapsed. The renewal brings that to $1,695,000, and to $1,395,000 annualised once the vCISO component comes off, a reduction of $641,000, close to a third. This Snapshot asks the community to approve the renewal on terms materially consistent with the forum proposal, authorize CGWG to coordinate with the Foundation and relevant stakeholders to finalize the arrangements, and approve disbursement from funds administered under the Treasury Management Committee ("TMC") framework. Background The current arrangement was selected through the Security Service Provider RFP the Foundation ran in mid-2025, to which sixteen proposals were submitted. Delegates selected ChainSecurity & Certora as SSP at $1.75M annually, with monitoring and incident response carved out to zeroShadow under a separate $250,000 engagement, taking the DAO's security spend from roughly $4M annualised to $2M. ChainPatrol sits outside that structure, and this proposal returns it to the DAO rather than adding it. It was engaged on the DAO's behalf in 2024 and funded from the Growth Program budget. When that programme was not renewed, the coverage would have lapsed along with the authorisation the DAO had just granted; the Foundation has carried the $36,000 a year directly since then so that it did not. The service, the scope, and the DAO's authorisation have been continuous throughout; only the payer changed. The DAO held two one-year renewal options at the prior commercial terms. Rather than exercise them at $1.75M, the Foundation renegotiated both security engagements from open-ended continuous models into defined, measurable ones, with reported utilisation. That restructuring is the substance of this proposal. Cost | Provider | Current term | Proposed renewal | | --- | --- | --- | | ChainSecurity & Certora | $1,750,000 | $1,324,000, reducing to $1,024,000 annualised if the vCISO component comes off | | zeroShadow | $250,000 | $335,000 | | ChainPatrol | $36,000 (carried by the Foundation) | $36,000 (returns to the DAO) | | Total | $2,036,000 | $1,695,000, reducing to $1,395,000 annualised | Coverage is mostly restructured rather than cut. The auditor allocation is smaller than last year's consumption because routine governance proposal review moves to zeroShadow, where it costs less. zeroShadow's scope grows to absorb it: $93,000 of new scope less $8,000 of savings on the services being renewed, a net increase of $85,000. Of the ChainSecurity & Certora figure, $300,000 is the vCISO component. The Foundation retains the vCISO for now and is not committing to a transition during this term. It is charged monthly, so the DAO pays only for the months in which it is provided and any balance not drawn stays with the TMC. The renewal term runs twelve months, from August 18, 2026 to August 17, 2027, the day after the current funded term ended, so the renewal continues it without a gap. The three engagements have run to different anniversaries until now; this term brings them onto one. Scope of Engagement Scope is described at a high level; detailed statements of work sit with the Foundation. ChainSecurity & Certora. An annual allocation of auditor capacity that Compound directs across its own priorities — smart contract audits, formal verification, web2 security reviews, and security architecture advice — rather than a fixed schedule of deliverables. Surge capacity is available for periods of exceptional activity, which is how a V4 audit programme would be funded once V4 is audit-ready, without a mid-term renegotiation. Both firms continue to hold a signer seat on the community multisig. Terms secured: 58 audit weeks a year with unused weeks rolling over, monthly usage reporting, and V4 surge rates locked now. zeroShadow. Continued operation of the 24/7/365 virtual Security Operations Center, incident response, monitoring maintenance across onchain activity and Compound's front end, participation as an independent security signer in the DAO's multisig structure, and threat intelligence platform access. The substantive change is that zeroShadow expands its coverage of governance proposal review. Proposal simulation and mitigation becomes a defined, separately scoped part of the engagement rather than something absorbed informally alongside monitoring, freeing auditor capacity for code. Routine proposal review therefore sits with zeroShadow, with ChainSecurity and Certora engaged on request where a proposal warrants auditor attention. Terms secured: incident SLAs of acknowledgement under 15 minutes and escalation within three hours; and 200 hours of engineering support, split 120 to the current protocol version and 80 to V4, with unused hours rolling over. ChainPatrol. Unchanged. Real-time monitoring for brand impersonation, phishing domains, fake social profiles, and wallet drainers targeting Compound, with takedowns across domains, app stores, and social platforms. Rationale for Renewal The cost has moved in the DAO's favour without a concession on coverage. The DAO held contractual options to renew at $1.75M. It is instead being asked to approve $1,324,000 now and $1,024,000 on a steady-state basis for the audit and advisory mandate, alongside a monitoring engagement that has grown in scope but reduced overall cost. The track record of security service partners is good. 92 proposals reviewed in the first six months with no execution-related incident, and the cadence maintained through proposal 603. Eleven protocol audits with every critical and high finding resolved before deployment. Five proposals stopped and corrected before a vote. Two live events — deUSD and the rsETH exploit — met with same-day emergency action, every step reviewed before execution. Protocol-specific context is expensive to rebuild. The team holds the proposal decoding and simulation tooling, sits on the community multisig, and has run the multisig fire drills. Re-tendering a year after a sixteen-proposal competitive RFP would cost more in transition risk than it could recover in price. On ChainPatrol, restoring a $36,000 line the DAO already voted for is the correction of an accident of administration, not a new commitment. Funding and Process This proposal follows the below timeline: RFC period: seven days, September 16 through September 23, with questions answered in the forum thread by the Foundation, CGWG, or the providers. Snapshot vote: three days, opening Wednesday, September 23 at 12:00 PM ET and closing Saturday, September 26 at 12:00 PM ET. Funding: on approval, the TMC will fund the required streams and administer back pay. Consistent with the Woof Year 3 and Cactus renewals, funding will be disbursed from the pool administered under the TMC, subject to the onchain controls described in that framework. Upon approval, the TMC would fund the term through four separate streams, with the capital committed upfront: ChainSecurity & Certora — $1,024,000, excluding the vCISO component vCISO — $300,000, cancellable independently of the rest zeroShadow — $335,000 ChainPatrol — $36,000 Funding each provider separately means the DAO can act on one engagement without disturbing the others, and carving the vCISO out means it can be stopped at the point the Foundation's own security leadership takes the function on, without touching the audit retainer underneath it. The portion accrued from August 18 through the start of the streams will be released upfront as back pay for the trailing period, as was done for the Cactus renewal, with the remainder streamed over the rest of the term. Each stream is cancellable by the Foundation after a 60-day notice and cure period, no further governance proposal is needed to exercise it, and any balance not yet streamed remains under TMC control. Because the streams are separate, a cancellation reaches only the provider concerned. Cancelling the vCISO stream on transition needs no cause or cure period, since it is a planned handover rather than a remedy. A lapse in security coverage is not a risk the DAO should carry for the length of an onchain cycle. The engagements remain fully subject to the service levels and reporting obligations agreed with the Foundation, and ratification by Snapshot does not waive them. Approval Requested By voting "For," the community approves the renewal of the ChainSecurity & Certora, zeroShadow, and ChainPatrol engagements on terms materially consistent with the Foundation's forum proposal, authorizes the CGWG and Foundation to finalize documentation and operational arrangements, and authorizes the applicable $1,695,000 in payments, or equivalent arrangement, to be funded from TMC-administered funds through the four streams described above. For a complete reading of the proposal, visit the Foundation's forum post below. Voting Options For: Approve the renewal and authorize funding from TMC-administered funds on the basis described above. Against: Do not approve the renewal or the proposed funding route. Abstain: Register no position on the proposal. Note: This vote will pass if "Yes" votes reach at least 400,000 COMP and outnumber the "No" votes.

Summary The Compound Foundation ("Foundation") and Compound Governance Working Group ("CGWG") are submitting this Snapshot to seek community approval for the renewal of Compound DAO's engagement with Cactus, the governance interface operated by ScopeLift, in its capacity as the DAO's dedicated Voting Service Provider, as described in the forum proposal: "Renewal of Cactus (ScopeLift) as Compound's Governance Interface". The renewal is proposed at $100,000 for a twelve-month term, a reduction of $50,000 from the $150,000 rate under the current agreement, with no corresponding reduction in scope or service levels. This Snapshot asks the Compound community to approve the renewal on terms materially consistent with the forum proposal, authorize CGWG to coordinate with the Foundation and relevant stakeholders to finalize the arrangements, and approve disbursement from funds administered under the Treasury Management Committee ("TMC") framework. Background The vendor Compound DAO contracted with in July 2025 no longer exists under that name. In mid-2025, the CGWG ran a competitive Request for Proposal for a dedicated Voting Service Provider. Delegates selected Tally Enterprise at $150,000 over twelve months, covering Compound-specific proposal user experience, voting user experience, governance resilience, transparency and reporting, and a defined set of service-level agreements. In March 2026, Tally announced that it was winding down as an organization, together with a commitment to complete its enterprise agreements rather than abandon its DAO customers mid-term. That commitment was honored. ScopeLift assumed the existing contract between Compound DAO and Tally in its entirety, and the governance interface continued to operate throughout. There was no migration, no change to Compound's governance contracts, and no disruption to delegate workflows. On June 17, 2026, ScopeLift announced that the platform had been rebranded to Cactus. This is a change of name, brand, and domain only. The product, the underlying data, and the team operating it are unchanged. The application is moving to cactushq.xyz, with tally.xyz continuing to resolve and redirect through a transition period. The DAO's primary governance interface has therefore passed through the insolvency of its original vendor and a subsequent rebrand without a service gap and without cost to the DAO. That continuity is the substance of what this proposal asks the DAO to extend. Cost The renewal represents a $50,000 annual reduction, or one third of the current cost, for the same scope of work and the same service-level commitments. The current rate was itself negotiated below standard enterprise pricing at the time of the RFP, so the reduction compounds an existing discount rather than correcting an inflated baseline. This reduction forms part of a broader effort by the Foundation to bring the DAO's recurring service-provider spend down where it can be done without weakening the workstreams the protocol depends upon. The term runs from August 1, 2026 to July 31, 2027. As the prior term expired on July 31, 2026, this term is backdated to August 1, 2026, and Cactus has continued to operate the interface in the intervening period. Scope of Engagement The scope is unchanged from the approved Voting Service Provider engagement. Rather than a fixed deliverable schedule, the Foundation and the CGWG set priorities on a quarterly basis and Cactus executes against them, which is the model that allowed the engagement to absorb a change of counterparty without renegotiation. Cactus will maintain the following as baseline obligations for the term: 1. Continued operation of the Compound governance interface through the domain transition, requiring no action from delegates or integrators. 2. Continued availability of the public governance API, with advance notice of any change affecting Compound integrators. 3. Support for proposal creation, voting, delegation, and execution across Compound's Governor contracts and cross-chain proposal formats. 4. The service levels specified in the original engagement, being 99% monthly uptime, a four-hour response time on high-priority incidents during United States working hours, and resolution of critical bugs within one business day. Cactus will publish a quarterly report before each payment period covering uptime, feature usage, priorities delivered, and support volume, hold monthly office hours open to Compound contributors, and continue to participate in community calls. A retrospective on the concluding term will be published in a new Cactus communications thread. Rationale for Renewal The cost has moved materially in the DAO's favour without a corresponding concession. The DAO is being asked to approve one third less spend for the same scope, the same service levels, and a counterparty that now holds a further year of Compound-specific context. Continuity of service has been well demonstrated by the ScopeLift team over the past 5 months since taking over the interface from the Tally team. The Foundation has been satisfied with ScopeLift's takeover of the platform and in many ways has actually seen support, performance and platform reliability of the governance interface materially improve. Compound-specific context is expensive to reconstitute. Cross-chain calldata decoding, support for Comet and cToken proposal formats, and the optimistic governance implementation all sit with a single team. Rebuilding that understanding elsewhere would cost more than the renewal and take longer than the term it would replace. Funding and Process Consistent with the process used for the Woof Year 3 renewal, funding will be disbursed from the pool administered under the TMC, subject to the onchain controls described in that framework. Upon approval, the TMC will allocate $100,000 in total for ScopeLift's August 1, 2026 - July 31, 2027 term. The portion accrued from August 1st through the start of the stream will be released upfront as back pay for the trailing period, with the remaining balance streamed over the rest of the term. A lapse in the DAO's primary governance interface would directly impair its capacity to govern, including its capacity to pass the proposal that would remedy the lapse. The engagement remains fully subject to the service levels, reporting obligations, and review mechanics described above, and ratification by Snapshot does not waive any of them. Approval Requested By voting "For," the community approves the renewal of the Cactus (ScopeLift) engagement as Compound's governance interface on terms materially consistent with the Foundation's forum proposal, authorizes the CGWG and Foundation, along with relevant stakeholders, to finalize documentation and operational arrangements, and authorizes the applicable $100,000 payment, or equivalent payment arrangement, to be funded from TMC-administered funds. Voting Options For: Approve the renewal and authorize funding from TMC-administered funds on the basis described above. Against: Do not approve the renewal or the proposed funding route. Abstain: Register no position on the proposal. Note: This vote will pass if "Yes" votes reach at least 400,000 COMP and outnumber the "No" votes.

Treasury Management Program USDC Allocation The Treasury Management Committee (TMC) has concluded its manager selection process and is now seeking a sentiment check from delegates via this Snapshot vote. These proposed allocations are relegated to the DAO’s USDC and are intended for allocation across a Primary Allocation Sleeve (onchain-heavy) and an RWA Sleeve. The RWA Sleeve puts $4M of the DAO's USDC into two tokenized positions held directly in the DAO's escrow: $1M in USTB and $3M in CUSHY. Full RWA Sleeve Recommendation Memorandum accessible here. The Primary Allocation Sleeve places up to ~$12M with Steakhouse Financial as curator of a dedicated, single-chain noncustodial vault on Ethereum, with flexibility around allocation amount depending on accessible capital and revenue. The DAO holds the position and retains guardian rights, the fee is 0.5% of NAV with no performance fee and no lockup, and the mandate is terminable on 30 days' notice. The book is entirely onchain, holds no tokenized RWAs at launch, and runs an indicative 35/45/15/5 split across prime repo, high-yield repo, term, and turbo strategies. Full Primary Manager Recommendation Memorandum accessible here. Both memos set out how each manager and position was selected, what the vaults can and cannot do, how each sleeve earns its return, what the DAO is exposed to underneath, and the risks the TMC thinks are worth naming. We ask delegates to read them before voting and to comment on the forum threads/delegate platforms rather than only registering a preference here. On what this Snapshot does: The TMC already holds delegated authority to execute allocations under the Treasury Management Program as approved by governance, so this Snapshot is not a gate on deployment. We are running it because a program of this size should have a formal moment for delegates to weigh in as per the initial RFP outline. Any actions taken by the TMC-operated addresses will be published publicly in this thread. Voting Options: Support as Proposed — proceed with both sleeves as set out in the memos Suggest Changes — please comment with what you would change on the forum Abstain This vote will be live for three days, after which the TMC will begin mobilizing capital for allocation.

Summary The Compound Foundation ("Foundation") and Compound Governance Working Group ("CGWG") are submitting this Snapshot to seek community approval for the renewal of the Compound x Woof partnership described in Woof's forum proposal, "Compound x Woof - Year 3 Partnership". Woof's renewal contemplates a one-year engagement from May 26, 2026 to May 26, 2027, for a total fee of $2,000,000, streamed over the engagement period and subject to the accountability, KPI review, cure, and cancellation mechanics described in the forum proposal. This Snapshot asks the Compound community to approve the renewal on terms materially consistent with the forum proposal, authorize CGWG to coordinate with the Foundation and relevant stakeholders to finalize the arrangements, and approve disbursement from funds administered under the Treasury Management Committee ("TMC") framework rather than through a separate onchain treasury proposal. Background Woof has served as a core technical contributor to Compound V3 and related ecosystem infrastructure. Its current and proposed mandate includes protocol development, V3 interface and API reliability, protocol maintenance, risk-management support, integration infrastructure, governance and transparency tooling, and V4 kickoff support. During the prior engagement period, Woof supported or delivered market and collateral proposals, CAPO deployment, SVR/OEV integration, Compound Streamer, financial dashboards, UI bug fixes, integration tooling, and other Foundation- and DAO-requested initiatives. The Year 3 renewal is intended to preserve continuity across these workstreams while Compound advances its broader protocol roadmap and operational infrastructure plans. Strategic Rationale Compound is entering an important execution phase. V3 remains the active production protocol supporting users, integrators, revenue, and collateral markets, while the DAO and Foundation continue to advance longer-term protocol development initiatives. In parallel, the ecosystem is coordinating near-term continuity planning for user-facing protocol interfaces and related infrastructure. This work is operationally important and time-sensitive, requiring experienced contributors with existing context across Compound's protocol architecture, production infrastructure, integrations, governance workflows, and user-facing systems. It cannot be paused or deferred. A coverage gap of even a few weeks would create execution risk for the protocol, its integrators, and its users. The Foundation believes Woof is well-positioned to support this transition and continue advancing Compound V3. Renewing the engagement promptly is expected to reduce execution risk, preserve institutional knowledge, and support uninterrupted progress across protocol, interface, infrastructure, and integration workstreams. Scope of Renewal This Snapshot incorporates the scope described in Woof's forum post and asks the community to approve the renewal on terms materially consistent with that proposal. Key workstreams include: revenue expansion initiatives (including user-facing revenue features); continued V3 evolution and competitiveness improvements; maintenance and reliability of the V3 interface, backend API, and supporting infrastructure; protocol maintenance, operational support, and risk-management coordination; integration and distribution infrastructure (API, SDK, documentation); governance, transparency, and treasury-management tooling; and V4 kickoff support, including knowledge transfer and technical collaboration with the Foundation and incoming contributors. The engagement will remain subject to the KPI framework, reporting obligations, review process, and remedy mechanics described in Woof's forum proposal. Funding and Process In the ordinary course, a renewal of this nature would proceed through a full onchain governance proposal with funding drawn directly from DAO treasury assets. For this renewal, CGWG and the Foundation are proposing a narrower and more time-sensitive process: community approval by Snapshot, followed by disbursement from funds administered under the TMC framework. This is appropriate here because the renewal supports operational continuity for protocol-facing infrastructure; the work is time-sensitive and benefits from avoiding contributor coverage gaps; Woof's proposal has already been publicly posted for community review; the TMC framework was recently approved to provide structured oversight over treasury operations; and the engagement includes ongoing reporting, KPI review, and cancellation/remedy mechanics that preserve accountability. This should be understood as a targeted operational measure in response to a compressed execution timeline, not a general replacement for onchain governance approvals for material DAO expenditures. Approval Requested By voting "For," the community approves renewal of the Compound x Woof Year 3 engagement on terms materially consistent with Woof's forum proposal, authorizes the CGWG and Foundation, along with relevant stakeholders, to finalize documentation and operational arrangements, and authorizes the applicable $2,000,000 payment stream, or equivalent payment arrangement, to be funded from TMC-administered funds. The renewal includes the accountability, KPI review, cure, and cancellation mechanics described in Woof's renewal proposal, together with periodic community updates regarding progress under the renewed mandate. Voting Options For: Approve the renewal and authorize funding from TMC-administered funds on the basis described above. Against: Do not approve the renewal or the proposed funding route. Abstain: Register no position on the proposal. Note: This vote will pass if "Yes" votes reach at least 400,000 COMP and outnumber the "No" votes; else, the vote fails.

Compound Contribution to DeFi United Recovery Effort (Snapshot 2) Co-authored by Compound Foundation and CGWG Background On May 2, 2026, Snapshot 1 passed, with delegates signaling support for Compound DAO contributing to the DeFi United recovery effort in principle, subject to the Conditions to Contribution outlined in the forum proposal. This Snapshot 2 addresses the execution question deferred from Snapshot 1: at what size should Compound contribute? The DeFi United initiative has continued to develop in the days following Snapshot 1. As of this Snapshot, the coalition has secured commitments expected to be sufficient to fully restore rsETH backing, conditional on remaining governance votes and pledges materializing as anticipated. Purpose of Second Snapshot Snapshot 1 established the principle of participation. This Snapshot asks delegates to approve or reject a contribution of approximately 1,860 ETH to the DeFi United recovery effort, drawn solely from recovery of the attacker's position on Compound. A multiple-choice format presenting various contribution amounts was considered, but recent delegate conversations have surfaced a clear preference for sourcing any contribution exclusively from funds connected to the exploit itself, rather than from broader treasury reserves. A binary structure allows the DAO to confirm or reject that preference cleanly, without diluting the signal across multiple amounts. This contribution structure reflects two principles surfaced by delegates: Compound should not profit from the exploit. The attacker's frozen position on Compound is expected to yield surplus value upon resolution of the rsETH backing situation. Returning that surplus to the recovery effort, rather than retaining it in Compound's reserves, ensures Compound does not derive economic benefit from this exploit. The contribution should be appropriately sized to Compound's circumstances and the structure of the incident. Sourcing from the attacker's position provides a natural basis for that sizing while supporting meaningful participation in the overall recovery process. Hence, a "Yes" vote authorizes a contribution of approximately 1,860 ETH sourced from the attacker's position recovery, subject to the Conditions to Contribution. A "No" vote signals that delegates do not support a contribution at this size or from this source. Contribution Structure The proposed contribution would be sourced exclusively from recovery of the attacker's position on Compound. Specifically: The contribution is contingent on restoration of rsETH backing through the DeFi United recovery effort. If recovery is not achieved, the contribution does not materialize. No incremental treasury funds would be deployed beyond the recovered amount. The exact final amount may vary slightly based on the resolution of the attacker's position and prevailing conditions at the time of execution; "approximately 1,860 ETH" reflects the current estimate. Conditions to Contribution Consistent with the conditions affirmed in Snapshot 1 and set out in the forum proposal, any contribution authorized under this Snapshot remains strictly conditional on: Full Backing Condition: rsETH is reasonably expected, based on the agreed Recovery Plan, to be fully re-collateralized such that the backing shortfall is fully addressed. Fair Treatment Condition: recovery funds are applied in a manner that is neutral, proportionate, and non-discriminatory across affected protocols, platforms, and users. Defined Plan Condition: a clear and technically executable Recovery Plan has been specified publicly. Governance Visibility Condition: sufficient information regarding the Recovery Plan and intended use of funds has been made available to enable informed assessment. Execution Determination: the final contribution amount, approximately 1,860 ETH, is determined by the resolution of the attacker’s position and prevailing conditions at the time of execution, with the Execution Group determining the other conditions above have been satisfied. Compound reserves the right not to release funds if these conditions are not satisfied, including releasing a lower amount or no amount at all. Vote Options Yes: Compound should contribute all funds sourced exclusively from recovery of the attacker's position (approximately 1,860 ETH), with no incremental treasury capital, to the DeFi United recovery effort, subject to the Conditions to Contribution. No: Compound should not contribute on these terms. Abstain Note: This vote will pass if "Yes" votes reach at least 400,000 COMP and outnumber the "No" votes; else, the vote fails.

Should Compound Contribute to the DeFi United Recovery Effort? Co-authored by Compound Foundation and CGWG Background Following the rsETH incident, leading DeFi protocols and ecosystem participants have organized under the DeFi United initiative to coordinate a recovery effort aimed at restoring rsETH backing. As of this Snapshot, the initiative has seen over $300M in confirmed and pending commitments, with major participants including Consensys, Aave DAO, Arbitrum DAO, Mantle, Stani Kulechov, Kelp, Lido, Ether.Fi, and others. The forum proposal published on April 27 (linked here) outlines a potential Compound contribution structured in two parts: Part A: approximately 1,857 ETH that may be satisfied through recovery of the attacker's position on Compound, contingent on restoration of rsETH backing. If recovery is not achieved, this portion does not materialize. Part B: any additional discretionary contribution beyond Part A, within an authorized range up to a 3,000 ETH ceiling. The forum post surfaced substantive delegate feedback on both the principle of contribution and the appropriate sizing. To ensure the DAO drives the final outcome, this decision is being guided by two sequential Snapshots. Purpose of First Snapshot This Snapshot is a binary pulse check on whether Compound DAO should contribute to the DeFi United recovery effort at all. It does not authorize a specific amount, source funds, or release any treasury. Those execution choices will be addressed in Snapshot 2, the structure of which will be calibrated to the outcome here. A "Yes" vote signals delegate support for participation in DeFi United, in principle, subject to the Conditions to Contribution set out in the forum proposal. A "No" vote signals that Compound DAO should not participate in the initiative. Conditions to Contribution Any contribution authorized through Snapshot 2 and any subsequent onchain proposal would remain strictly conditional on the following, as set out in the forum proposal: Full Backing Condition: rsETH is reasonably expected, based on the agreed Recovery Plan, to be fully re-collateralised such that the backing shortfall is fully addressed. Fair Treatment Condition: recovery funds are applied in a manner that is neutral, proportionate, and non-discriminatory across affected protocols, platforms, and users. Defined Plan Condition: a clear and technically executable Recovery Plan has been specified publicly. Governance Visibility Condition: sufficient information regarding the Recovery Plan and intended use of funds has been made available to enable informed assessment. Execution Determination: any final contribution amount is determined by the designated execution group following assessment of the conditions above. Compound reserves the right not to release funds if these conditions are not satisfied, including releasing a lower amount or no incremental amount at all. Why a Yes/No Snapshot First The DeFi United landscape is moving daily. Confirmed commitments, pending governance votes from peer DAOs, and the gap between coalition totals and the recovery requirement are all live variables. Decoupling the principle question ("should Compound participate?") from the execution question ("at what size and from what source?") lets the DAO commit on direction without locking in an amount prematurely. This sentiment has been posited by multiple delegates over the past handful of days. Snapshot 2 (if required) will follow at a future date and present specific execution choices/amounts for the DAO calibrated to the outcome of this first Snapshot and the state of the Recovery Plan at that time. Vote Options Yes: Compound should contribute to the DeFi United recovery effort, subject to the Conditions to Contribution, and a subsequent Snapshot vote. No: Compound should not contribute to the DeFi United recovery effort. Abstain Note: This vote will pass if "Yes" votes reach at least 400,000 COMP and outnumber the "No" votes; else, the vote fails. Delegates will have 72 hours to vote on this proposal, concluding at 5:15pm ET on May 2, 2026.

Summary We are seeking to gauge community support for the proposed plan to deprecate Compound Blue. Motivation Compound Blue launched in early 2025 as a collaborative pilot between Compound and Morpho to explore vault-based lending infrastructure on Polygon. The initiative leveraged Morpho’s vault architecture with Compound branding and incentives to test alternative deployment models and gauge demand for isolated lending markets on L2 networks. The trial attracted $188.73M in peak TVL (May 2025) and served as the launchpad for the first Apollo ACRED RWA looping strategy in DeFi. When Compound Blue launched, Compound faced uncertainty around its future direction. Over the past year, Compound’s outlook has shifted significantly. The protocol now operates under strong leadership with a clear roadmap and active growth plans. With TVL declining organically following the tapering of incentives, and considering the attention and maintenance cost required maintaining a separate Morpho-based deployment no longer aligns with the DAO’s strategic direction. Deprecation Plan If approved, the Compound Blue deprecation will be implemented via the following steps: Discourage / inhibit new borrows (repayments, withdrawals, and liquidations remain active) Publish a banner on Compound Blue UI informing users of the deprecation plan 4-week wind-down period for users to close positions Users will retain the ability to interact with vaults on the Morpho frontend Proposed Timeline Forum post (complete): Jan 26, 2026 Snapshot vote: Jan 30 – Feb 6, 2026 UI banner published: Feb 6, 2026 Wind-down period: Feb 6 – Mar 6, 2026 Frontend wind-down: Mar 6, 2026 Voting Options YES – Approve the Compound Blue deprecation plan NO – Reject the Compound Blue deprecation plan Note: This Snapshot vote is advisory/non-binding. Proposed dates are targets and subject to change.

Executive Summary Following Tally's successful RFP response to become Compound's Voting Service Provider, we explored visibility improvements for MarketAdmin transactions. However, consultations revealed that MarketAdmin represents a suboptimal operational model with fundamental limitations: Inherent Opacity: Single guardian entity limits distributed oversight Limited Scalability: Only deployed on OP Mainnet Restricted Community Visibility: Guardian model provides minimal delegate oversight This proposal implements Optimistic Governance as a transparent alternative to MarketAdmin for market parameter updates. Optimistic governance reduces proposal lead times by >80% (from ~20 days to ~5 days) while maintaining DAO oversight and improving transparency. Background Current State Compound parameter changes occur through: 1. Full DAO Vote: 30+ days to complete 2. MarketAdmin: Mid-2024 solution, only on OP Mainnet The Problem Inefficiency: Monthly cycles create delays for time-sensitive decisions Voter Fatigue: Routine changes consume governance bandwidth Lack of Transparency: Opaque process with limited visibility Limited Scope: Only deployed on OP Mainnet The Solution: Optimistic Governance Optimistic governance assumes proposals are approved unless explicitly vetoed by delegates. This streamlines decision-making while maintaining oversight for maintenance upgrades, technical changes, and parameter adjustments. Key Benefits 1. Transparency: All proposals publicly visible on Tally 2. Efficiency: 4 day lifecycle vs 20+ days (>80% reduction) 3. Maintained DAO Control: Token holders retain veto authority 4. Reduced Voter Fatigue: Delegates engage only when disagreeing 5. Faster Risk Response: Adjustments in days, not weeks 6. Accountability: Clear attribution to council members Proposed Implementation Phase 1: Pilot on Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism Deploy optimistic governance for market parameters on three established networks with appropriate risk profiles before mainnet deployment. Council Composition 5 key stakeholders with 3 of 5 votes required: 1. Gauntlet (main proposer) 2. Compound Foundation 3. WOOF 4. ChainSecurity 5. Certora Governance Parameters Council Quorum: 3 of 5 members Proposal Expiration: 1 week Veto Voting Duration: 3 days Veto Quorum: 400,000 COMP Veto Quorum Extension: 3 days (at 200K COMP votes) Timelock Delay: 1 day How It Works 1. Proposal Creation: Council member creates proposal visible on Tally. 3 of 5 votes advances to veto stage. Expires if quorum not reached in 7 days. 2. Veto Period: 3 days for COMP delegates to review and cast veto votes on Tally. 3. Execution: - Veto quorum NOT reached → proposal passes, enters 1-day timelock - 200K COMP veto votes → 3-day extension for more delegate review - 400K COMP veto quorum → proposal canceled Clickable Demo End-to-end lifecycle demo available here (pw: onchain) Scope of Authority Market admin authority over Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism including: Adding/removing collateral assets Adjusting risk parameters Setting interest rate models Configuring supply/borrow caps Transparency & Monitoring All proposals will be: Displayed on Tally with full details Announced in Discord and forum Subject to same transparency standards as regular governance Implementation Details Cross-chain optimistic governance system: Runs on Ethereum mainnet Council membership assigned to 5 parties COMP delegates can veto proposals Timelock contracts on Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism accept cross-chain messages from L1 Main Compound governance can add/remove council members On execution: Assign admin permissions to timelocks on Arbitrum, Optimism and Base. Future Expansion If successful: 1. Expand to Ethereum Mainnet 2. Expand to all chains Cost $40k for complete implementation (partnership discount from typical $100K+ market cost). Covers: Smart contract development and deployment Security review and testing Tally integration Documentation and education materials Comparison: MarketAdmin vs. Optimistic Governance | Feature | MarketAdmin | Optimistic Governance | |---------|-------------|----------------------| | Transparency | Opaque | Fully visible on Tally | | Timeline | Variable | 4 days (consistent) | | DAO Oversight | Guardian veto | Delegate veto (400K quorum) | | Chains | OP Mainnet only | Arbitrum, Base, Optimism | | Engagement | Minimal | Active veto opportunity | Success Metrics (3 months) 1. Average time from proposal to execution 2. Proposals reviewed vs. vetoed 3. Community feedback on visibility 4. Contentious proposals and veto rate 5. Volume processed through optimistic governance Voting Options FOR: Deploy Optimistic Governor on Ethereum mainnet covering Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism AGAINST: Maintain current MarketAdmin for Optimism, full governance for other chains ABSTAIN Next Steps 1. Community Discussion 2. Snapshot Vote 3. Security Review by Certora and ChainSecurity 4. On-Chain Vote on Tally 5. Deployment if approved Optimistic governance enables Compound to be more responsive to market conditions while reducing governance overhead without compromising transparency and DAO oversight.

Summary We are seeking to gauge community support for the proposed plan to deprecate Compound V2. Motivation V2 usage has materially declined as activity has shifted to V3 (the primary deployment for ~3 years). V2’s pooled-collateral model and long-tail markets increase systemic and governance risk compared to V3. A staged wind-down reduces complexity and attack surfaces. Deprecation Plan If approved on-chain, the V2 deprecation plan will be implemented via the following steps: Disable new supply & borrows across all V2 markets (repay/withdraw remain open) Set Reserve Factors to 100% so all interest accrues to reserves Publish a banner on V2 UI informing users of the deprecation plan Reference Full forum post with background and proposed timeline: [[Gauntlet] Compound V2 Deprecation Proposal](https://www.comp.xyz/t/gauntlet-compound-v2-deprecation-proposal/7237) Proposed Timeline Forum post (complete): Sept 19, 2025 Snapshot vote: Sept 29 – Oct 6, 2025 UI banner published: Oct 6, 2025 On-chain proposal: Oct 10 – Oct 18, 2025 Execution (if passed on-chain): Oct 20, 2025 Voting Options YES - Approve the V2 deprecation plan NO - Reject the V2 deprecation plan Note: This Snapshot vote is advisory/non-binding; any protocol changes require an on-chain vote. Proposed dates are targets and subject to adjustment via governance.

Attention Compound community! We’re thrilled to announce the official launch of Phase 1 of the $COMP distribution — made possible by a successful DAO vote. This marks an exciting milestone for Origin Protocol and opens the door for eligible users to claim their share of $COMP. Want to know if you qualify for the airdrop? Check your eligibility and find full details HERE. Don’t miss your chance to be part of this pivotal moment in the Compound ecosystem. Join us as we take the next big step together! !6079906859795504a03187c9_compound.png

Calling all Compound users! We're delighted to share the exciting news that the eagerly anticipated $COMP distribution is now open for your enthusiastic participation. Dive into the specifics below to learn about the launch date and the transformative changes it holds for our vibrant community. Take a moment to check your eligibility for a potential Airdrop by exploring additional details HERE. Seize this golden opportunity to become an integral part of the dynamic developments unfolding within the Compound community! !6079906859795504a03187c9_compound.png

Calling all Compound users! We're delighted to share the exciting news that the eagerly anticipated $COMP distribution is now open for your enthusiastic participation. Dive into the specifics below to learn about the launch date and the transformative changes it holds for our vibrant community. Take a moment to check your eligibility for a potential Airdrop by exploring additional details HERE. Seize this golden opportunity to become an integral part of the dynamic developments unfolding within the Compound community! !6079906859795504a03187c9_compound.png

Calling all Compound users! We're delighted to share the exciting news that the eagerly anticipated $COMP distribution is now open for your enthusiastic participation. Dive into the specifics below to learn about the launch date and the transformative changes it holds for our vibrant community. Take a moment to check your eligibility for a potential Airdrop by exploring additional details HERE. Seize this golden opportunity to become an integral part of the dynamic developments unfolding within the Compound community! !6079906859795504a03187c9_compound.png

Following the Compound Foundation’s recommendations around the DAO’s next Security Service Provider (SSP), the CGWG is coordinating next steps to facilitate the election of Compound’s new SSP. This 7-day Snapshot vote to determine the DAO’s preferred SSP will run from Monday, July 28 at 3pm ET until Monday, August 4 at 3PM ET. Immediately after the conclusion of the Snapshot vote, an onchain vote will be conducted to ratify the SSP selected from the Snapshot vote. Voting Options For this Snapshot, delegates will be able to vote between the following vendors: ChainSecurity & Certora (view their full proposal here) * Two of the industry’s most established formal verification and audit firms, known for deep expertise in protocol correctness and secure smart contract development. * Prior Compound V3 audit and governance proposal experience. * Strong formal verification tooling and track record. * ChainSecurity vCISO will lead the engagement on behalf of both vendors. Cyfrin (view their full proposal here) * A security firm founded by prominent auditors and educators, combining hands-on technical depth with a strong focus on DAO governance, tooling and education. * Includes Patrick Collins as vCISO with researcher support. * Dedicated team available continuously for audits, reviews, and advisory. * Also includes OSS security tooling and education resources. Note that the final voting pool consists solely of the above two vendors. The Foundation narrowed the initial pool of 16 RFPs down to a shortlist of 5 proposals. Correspondingly, the Foundation has publicly voiced their primary vendor recommendation, advocating the DAO to adopt ChainSecurity & Certora as the new SSP team. Due to this endorsement, 3/5 shortlisted vendors—including Cantina, Immunefi Magnus, and OpenZeppelin—opted to not partake in the Snapshot election as to not disclose further details around commercials. However, Cyfrin has chosen to fully disclose their pricing, making them eligible for the Snapshot vote. Cost to Compound Both of the above vendors have submitted 12-month engagement proposals with similar cost structures: Cyfrin at $1.5M and ChainSecurity & Certora at $1.75M. This RFP process has allowed the DAO to solicit a multitude of robust proposals, ensuring a smooth transition from the existing relationship with OpenZeppelin, while opening Compound to a near 50% reduction in security-based expenditure without a reduction in quality. ZeroShadow will be included by default in the overall security engagement, regardless of which SSP is selected by the DAO. Their inclusion will support continuous monitoring and incident response capabilities, complementing the chosen SSP’s services. A total of $250k will be allocated to ZeroShadow; their proposal can be reviewed here. Therefore, the total cost of the engagement will amount to: $1.75M + $250k = $2M if ChainSecurity & Certora are selected $1.5M + $250k = $1.75M if Cyfrin is selected All funds will be streamed linearly over the duration of the engagement. Voting Logistics This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (total number of votes submitted) reaches the onchain threshold of 400k COMP. Once quorum is reached, the winner will be determined by a simple majority. “Weighted Voting” will be utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. Additionally, to ensure that Snapshot votes aren’t altered last-minute, we are implementing a quorum cut-off period for the votes between 12pm - 3pm ET on August 4th. The Snapshot will technically end at 7:59pm ET on the 4th, however, to mimic the nature of onchain votes, the final vote will be counted at 3pm ET—unless a vote flips in the 12pm - 3pm period, at which point, the Snapshot vote will be extended from 3pm - 7:59pm ET. --- Thank you to all vendors who participated and to the Compound community for helping guide this process forward.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on LINEA. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— Api3 and Chainlink have applied for Linea. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Linea will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Linea. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on RONIN. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— Api3 and Chainlink have applied for Ronin. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Ronin will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Ronin. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on MANTLE. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Keep Api3 OEV (current setup) Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Note that— Api3 and Chainlink have applied for Mantle. Compound on Mantle currently utilizes Api3’s OEV solution—so the status quo vote for the Mantle Snapshot will be “Keep Api3 OEV” as opposed to “Do NOT adopt OEV”. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Mantle will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, Api3 OEV will remain in place, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on SCROLL. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— Api3 and Chainlink have applied for Scroll. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Scroll will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Scroll. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on OPTIMISM. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt RedStone Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— All vendors have applied for Optimism. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Optimism will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. RedStone “can support any EVM chain in a maximum of a 2 week timeframe” but their OEV solution is also NOT live on any L2s yet. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. As mentioned in the original RFP, “This program will be revisited in Q1 2026 both to accommodate for innovations on vendors’ OEV solutions as well as to assess the efficacy of the solutions selected for the current year.” Accordingly, the DAO is allowed to vote on specific vendors now—and wait until Q1 2026 to reevaluate the existing options. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Optimism. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on ARBITRUM. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt RedStone Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— All vendors have applied for Arbitrum. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. RedStone “can support any EVM chain in a maximum of a 2 week timeframe” but their OEV solution is also NOT live on any L2s yet. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. As mentioned in the original RFP, “This program will be revisited in Q1 2026 both to accommodate for innovations on vendors’ OEV solutions as well as to assess the efficacy of the solutions selected for the current year.” Accordingly, the DAO is allowed to vote on specific vendors now—and wait until Q1 2026 to reevaluate the existing options. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Arbitrum. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on POLYGON. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt RedStone Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— All vendors have applied for Polygon. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Polygon will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. RedStone “can support any EVM chain in a maximum of a 2 week timeframe” but their OEV solution is also NOT live on any L2s yet. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. As mentioned in the original RFP, “This program will be revisited in Q1 2026 both to accommodate for innovations on vendors’ OEV solutions as well as to assess the efficacy of the solutions selected for the current year.” Accordingly, the DAO is allowed to vote on specific vendors now—and wait until Q1 2026 to reevaluate the existing options. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Polygon. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on BASE. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt RedStone Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— All vendors have applied for Base. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. RedStone “can support any EVM chain in a maximum of a 2 week timeframe” but their OEV solution is also NOT live on any L2s yet. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. As mentioned in the original RFP, “This program will be revisited in Q1 2026 both to accommodate for innovations on vendors’ OEV solutions as well as to assess the efficacy of the solutions selected for the current year.” Accordingly, the DAO is allowed to vote on specific vendors now—and wait until Q1 2026 to reevaluate the existing options. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Base. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on UNICHAIN. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between: Adopt RedStone Adopt Api3 Adopt Chainlink SVR (phased rollout, chain by chain) Do NOT adopt OEV Note that— All vendors have applied for Unichain. Chainlink SVR is NOT yet live on L2s—they are proposing a phased rollout plan for the DAO to consider. In the coming weeks, SVR will be available on Base, and shortly after, on Arbitrum, too. Other L2s like Unichain will have SVR rollout over time. We are enabling the DAO to wait for Chainlink to roll out their OEV solution on alternative chains as a potential voting option. Once Chainlink launches on these L2s, they will update the DAO accordingly, and their solution will undergo an additional review, just like the above OZ analyses. Incorporation of Chainlink SVR on L2s will require another Snapshot vote. RedStone “can support any EVM chain in a maximum of a 2 week timeframe” but their OEV solution is also NOT live on any L2s yet. Api3 is able to offer a near immediate integration, as was evidenced by their existing incorporation onto Mantle. As mentioned in the original RFP, “This program will be revisited in Q1 2026 both to accommodate for innovations on vendors’ OEV solutions as well as to assess the efficacy of the solutions selected for the current year.” Accordingly, the DAO is allowed to vote on specific vendors now—and wait until Q1 2026 to reevaluate the existing options. RedStone feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Unichain. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

This Snapshot is part of the Compound DAO’s 2025 OEV (Oracle Extractable Value) RFP process. Delegates are asked to select whether to adopt an OEV solution for all 10 of the chains that Compound currently resides on, with this vote focusing on ETHEREUM MAINNET. For this Snapshot, delegates are able to vote between Api3 and Chainlink SVR—or maintain the status quo by voting "Do NOT adopt OEV." Note that— RedStone did NOT apply for the Ethereum markets. The Api3 and Chainlink SVR solutions are ready to be adopted on mainnet if opted in by the DAO. Chainlink feeds are currently utilized by Compound on Ethereum Mainnet. To make an informed decision, please visit THIS forum post with references to each individual RFP application and corresponding reviews conducted by OpenZeppelin. This Snapshot vote will be considered valid as long as quorum (the total number of votes submitted, excluding the AGAINST votes, denoted as “Do NOT adopt OEV”) reaches the on-chain threshold of 400k COMP. If quorum is reached, then the winner will be determined by a simple majority. In the event that quorum is not reached for the vote, the chain in question will not adopt any of the OEV options, defaulting to the existing status quo. “Weighted Voting” is utilized, where each delegate has the ability to spread their voting power across any number of choices. This voting system allows delegates to select between multiple options—or simply allocate their entire voting power to a single vendor. We ask delegates to carefully consider all of the votable OEV solutions, from both an implementation/security perspective, as well as with a financial viewpoint. Each RFP response comprehensively lays out all of these variables.

Title: Compound DAO Voting Service Provider (VSP) Selection Please go to the respective forum post to see a more in depth breakdown of the process and options. Details on the Snapshot Options Aragon (read full proposal here) Aragon Enterprise In order for Compound to effectively transition from its current governance voting interface, and attain a branded UI, the most seamless manner to conduct this shift would be to subscribe to Aragon’s Enterprise tier, even though some of Aragon's stack can be adopted in a self-serve manner. This tier costs $5,000/month for 12 months, totaling $60,000, streamed over the duration of the year-long contract. The Enterprise tier allows Compound to deploy a fully customized, branded governance frontend integrated with Aragon OSx, their modular DAO operating system. This includes plugin support for advanced governance mechanics such as optimistic governance, permissioned parameter adjustments, and diverse decision-making flows. The Compound-specific frontend would offer a tailored user experience, mirroring the DAO’s current structure, enabling proposal creation, voting, and tracking. In addition to the UI layer, Aragon commits to maintaining 99.9% frontend uptime and guarantees a 24-hour response time for critical issues that affect the DAO’s governance operations. The team also offers a detailed offboarding pathway to ensure any future transition to an alternative provider is frictionless—or if the DAO decides to opt into the Self-serve tier later, the infrastructure built during the Enterprise phase will sustain. While Aragon’s Self-serve tier is cost-free, it would place the burden of development and maintenance on the DAO during year-one of Aragon adoption. The Enterprise tier, by contrast, provides white-glove service and technical support for at least a year. Afterwards, the DAO may reevaluate its tier selection. Note that Aragon will take one month to complete the initial Enterprise integration. Tally (read full proposal here) Tally Self-serve (This is effectively the “abstain”/status quo option) While Tally’s interface is publicly accessible and already supports Compound governance, further feature development, dedicated support, and UI improvements require an enterprise engagement. As such, relying on Tally without an active relationship would limit Compound’s ability to evolve or customize its interface and tools over time. However, the basic functionality that Tally provides today would remain intact based on this fee tier. Going forward, Tally’s self-serve default option would introduce a 0.25% fee on every transaction send proposed using their platform. This will be automatically deducted and routed to Tally’s multisig wallet. This would mean that every proposal that is directly proposed on the Tally UI and uses the transfer() function would be subject to the stated fee, given the funds being transferred are OUT of the Treasury Address (0x6d903f6003cca6255D85CcA4D3B5E5146dC33925). Compound governance’s native contracts (Comptroller, Timelock, Governor) don’t include Tally’s fee logic since fees are applied at the application layer. The 0.25% protocol fee is applicable only if a proposal is proposed on Tally and ends up being executed. !Screenshot 2025-06-30 at 2.11.25 PM|689x255 Note that the DAO has also contracted Tally in the past via the Compound Grant Program. Last year, they received $32k to make enhancements for Compounds UI. Enhancements completed from this program will NOT be backtracked or removed in the event the Self-serve option is voted in. Tally Enterprise Tally proposes a full-service engagement priced at $12,500/month for one year, totalling $150,000, streamed evenly over the course of the contract. This service includes continued support for Compound’s existing on-chain governance interface, along with additional features outlined in the linked post. The proposed deliverables span four main workstreams. Proposal UX: Tally will deliver Compound-specific simulations, support for scripted proposals and custom calldata, automatic decoding of externally submitted proposals, and automated execution of passed proposals. Voting UX: Features include gasless voting, a custom-branded domain, Karma delegate score integration, a forum bot, enhanced notifications, MarketAdmin proposal display, and support for the Emergency Upgrade Rollback UI. Governance Resilience: Tally will deploy “Tally Zero,” a decentralized, IPFS-hosted frontend that ensures governance continuity without relying on Tally’s servers. Transparency & Reporting: Tally will provide Safe multisig dashboards, DAO analytics, success metrics on the homepage, and real-time treasury reporting with balance and runway insights. To strengthen governance resilience, Tally will launch “Tally Zero,” a decentralized, IPFS-hosted frontend for on-chain voting without reliance on Tally’s servers. For transparency, it will provide Safe dashboards, real-time analytics, homepage success metrics, and detailed treasury reporting. The engagement includes clear service-level guarantees: 99% monthly uptime, a 4-hour response time for critical issues, resolution of critical bugs within one business day, and regular monthly maintenance. Tally will also hold monthly office hours for community feedback and report on both platform usage and adoption of new features over the course of the contract. Lighthouse Labs (read full proposal here) Lighthouse Labs’ proposed budget is $9,500/month, totaling $114,000 over 12 months. They note that this pricing reflects their current offering, with a capped renewal increase of no more than 30% in future terms. Lighthouse proposes a mobile-native governance interface. Their offering includes a fully functional iOS and Android app that enables users to receive push notifications, track proposals, and vote on both Snapshot and on-chain Governor proposals. A core feature of their platform is the “Dispatch” messaging system, which allows DAO contributors to send secure, targeted announcements directly to tokenholders, without needing access to their email addresses. This aims to improve engagement while maintaining privacy and decentralization. Lighthouse also introduces a governance R&D initiative called “Signals,” a still-developing coordination tool meant to help communities surface preferences and resolve ambiguity around proposals. They also commit to 99%+ uptime and offer service-level support for any platform or governance issues that arise. Note that the Lighthouse proposal reads more as a supplementary interface for Compound users as opposed to a full-stack governance platform for proposing and executing votes. Therefore, if this option was voted in, an alternative free service model would likely end up being used as well. Snapshot Labs (read full proposal here) Snapshot Labs’ proposal includes a 12-month engagement priced at $80,000, with a milestone-based payment structure: $40,000 upfront and $40,000 upon successful delivery. Snapshot also outlines an optional annual subscription fee of $6,000 beginning in year two, which would cover ongoing support and maintenance for the integration. In the event of opting out of the subscription, all integrations conducted during the first year will remain intact, so individuals will be able to continue voting, delegating, and proposing—but the enterprise SLA component would be removed. Their proposal focuses on integrating Snapshot with Compound’s governance architecture to support both informal signaling (e.g. temperature checks) and formal on-chain proposal workflows, providing an end-to-end governance experience in a single user interface where proposals can be submitted, executed, and voted on. Note that this would in effect allow Compound to conduct off-chain and on-chain votes in the same venue, even though at the present time Snapshot is solely run for off-chain votes. The core feature set includes a branded Compound voting space with a custom URL, full Governor integration, syncing on-chain proposals to Snapshot automatically, and developing frontend modules that make it easier for users to view, evaluate, and participate in governance. Snapshot also commits to supporting cross-platform notification systems (e.g. email, Discord), wallet/treasury tracking, and a delegation interface. Voters would be able to see clear breakdowns of proposals, quorum thresholds, and real-time vote counts. Snapshot includes operational commitments, offering 99.99% monthly uptime for both frontend and API services, 3-hour response times for technical support, and a 7-day advance notice policy for any updates that could affect Compound governance. In the event that the DAO discontinues the partnership or chooses not to renew the annual support fee, Snapshot commits to a 2-month offboarding grace period, during which they will assist any successor team and provide full data portability. Note that Snapshot Labs would take 3 months to complete the integration. Not selecting Snapshot at the dedicated VSP does NOT mean Compound will lose access to its current off-chain voting setup on Snapshot.