KETJU Research

← The Register

Staking

PepeTeam sWAVES

Not approved Too small to exit at size
Issued
2026-08-16
Last confirmed
2026-08-16
Next check due
2026-11-16
Chains
Waves

PepeTeam sWAVES tokenizes native WAVES leasing. Deposits mint a transferable receipt, protocol contracts lease the WAVES to nodes, and staking rewards raise the receipt’s internal WAVES exchange rate. The 2026-08-16 survey measured about $0.20M on Waves, only 0.20% of the size floor. Node reward delivery, smart-contract control, the receipt rate, and WAVES redemption require full review at scale. Current capacity is too small for an advised-client allocation, so we will not open an individual review until it clears the size floor.

The research file

Mechanism applicability

A WAVES deposit calls the tokenized-staking contract, mints sWAVES at an internal exchange rate, and leases the underlying WAVES to protocol validation nodes. The protocol claims and restakes node rewards and transaction fees. This raises the amount of WAVES represented by each sWAVES instead of changing the receipt quantity. Holders can transfer the receipt or use it in external DEX, AMM, and lending positions.

Control and exit applicability

Protocol contracts select validation nodes, lease WAVES to them, collect rewards, and calculate the receipt rate. The litepaper proposes DAO admission and removal of nodes, but it also lists further DAO implementation, audits, and a bug bounty as ongoing security work. A direct exit uses the withdraw call, burns the sWAVES receipt, unleases WAVES, and pays at the current internal rate. Secondary-market exits add venue liquidity and price risk.

Current observation and perimeter

The DefiLlama API read on 2026-08-16 classified PepeTeam sWAVES as Liquid Staking and reported approximately $0.20M, entirely on Waves. The product site calls the service cross-chain and advertises outside uses for the receipt, but the reproducible survey now measures only the Waves staking contract perimeter. This record does not include separate AMM or lending positions that holders open.

Why the materiality dossier still applies

Measured TVL is about 0.20% of the size floor, so even a small advised-client book would overwhelm observed capacity before review of the receipt rate, nodes, and contracts could make the venue usable. The protocol is below the size floor, and we will not open an individual review until it clears it. Reopen only after TVL remains above the size floor for 30 days, then review node concentration and reward history, contract authorities and audits, receipt liabilities, direct-redemption depth, and secondary liquidity.

Research status

This is a capacity-unproven record for PepeTeam sWAVES, not a quality rejection or approval. Reported TVL says how big the venue is, not what the client owns, who can change the rules, or how a position exits at a proposed size. The individual review opens when the protocol clears the size floor.

Sources

The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.

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.

ChainVerdictControlControl constraint
The memo is public. Monitoring connects the research to positions clients actually hold and flags evidence changes for advisor review. $49 per advisor per month, first 14 days free. Start the trial.