Nostra Pools
Nostra Pools is not eligible for the firm’s current shelf because it falls under the amm-lp policy class. This is a firm policy decision, not a negative quality rating or a client trade instruction. The facts below still show how it works, who controls it, how losses occur, and how users exit.
- A named Nostra product removes two-sided AMM inventory and impermanent-loss exposure and merits a separate review
Watched nightly: a warning on its venues or files, or a cited document that changes, reopens the memo. The first confirmation is due 2026-11-15.
The research file
Product and class applicability
Nostra’s current Pools page asks users to deposit assets into liquidity pools to earn swap fees and says Pools uses two AMM designs. The survey record names constant-product and StableSwap algorithms. Depositor returns therefore come from two-sided AMM inventory and trading flow, so the shared v1 AMM-LP dossier applies directly.
Current observation and perimeter
The DefiLlama API read on 2026-08-15 reported approximately $318,000, all on Starknet, and classified Nostra Pools as a DEX. This replaces the stale $10.3M observation. Size does not drive the class decision because the AMM exposure itself disqualifies the product.
Control, loss and exit applicability
Nostra states that the applications are smart-contract systems and that users bear asset-price, slippage, and cost risks. An LP chooses when to request an exit, but the amount recovered depends on pool reserves, the token mix after rebalancing, prices, slippage, fees, and Starknet execution. The LP has no claim on a fixed principal amount.
Why the class rule decides
The shared v1 AMM-LP dossier decides the result because pool shares retain two-sided inventory and impermanent-loss exposure. Reopen only for a named Nostra product that removes AMM inventory risk instead of merely hedging or rewarding it. Then review its payoff, custody, smart contracts, authority, liquidity, fees, and stressed exit as a separate product.
Class rule
The amm lp class is outside the approved structures, so every protocol in it is not approved until the rule changes. The rule is about the structure, not an adverse finding about this protocol, and it is not a client instruction. The events that would reopen it are listed with the memo.
Sources
The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.
- Nostra — Pools product page · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: liquidity-pool deposits, swap-fee return, two AMM designs, lending-yield integration - Nostra — legal disclaimer and protocol-risk disclosure · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: smart-contract perimeter, user control, asset-price risk, slippage risk, loss risk - DefiLlama — Nostra Pools survey record · secondary · accessed 2026-08-15
Supports: current TVL, Starknet-only perimeter, DEX category, constant-product and StableSwap mechanisms
Inherited controls
The research above describes the protocol layer. Every position also inherits the asset it holds and the chain it settles on. The layer with the most administrative power sets the position’s effective control; that describes control, not quality or suitability.
| Chain | Verdict | Control | Control constraint |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starknet | Approved with limits | Mixed control | validity proofs and a regular exit window constrain control, but permissioned proposers and an instant emergency Security Council remain live dependencies. |