Market › Posted card › Vauld

Vauld

Takes as collateral: bitcoin

cefi_vauld · lending desk · operated by Defi Payments Pte. Ltd. · defunct

Events for this venue: dated moves past a published rule and levels crossed.

Include corporate in the market — financed by bitcoin the issuers hold, no lien

BTC collateral

not applicable

Dollar debt against bitcoin

not applicable

Aggregate LTV

not applicable

Borrow rate (USD loans)

not applicable

Lend rate (USD loans)

not applicable

Liquidates at

not applicable

Dollar loans only: other currencies are separate books, never added in

Debt and rates count loans made in US dollars and dollar stablecoins. Loans in euros, francs, yen, ether or bitcoin itself are separate books, shown by currency on each venue, never added in.

BTC collateral of Posted card

Dollar debt against bitcoin of the market — Posted card 7.3%, 5.0% of its bitcoin collateral

10 of 10 criteria researched. What the criteria are →

Markets — as served, not a venue rate

One row per market, as the venue publishes them. These are market rates: combining them into a single venue rate is a weighting across this venue's markets, and choosing one here would be a methodology decision taken in a web page.

No BTC market rows are served for this venue. This venue runs no contracts, so there is no market state to read — the absence is a property of the venue class, not a gap.

Price

What does credit cost here, and how is the price formed?

Rate formation	posted_card source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). posted rate card (vauld.com/rates), per borrowed token, set by the desk. Borrowing rates for non-institutional borrowers were published per token on vauld.com/rates and shown in the app when the loan was taken; the desk set them by reference to market rates. Institutional borrowing was outside the card. Evidence: "You can check the interest rate for borrowing different tokens" — vauld.com site FAQ (text carried in the site's application bundle), Wayback snapshot 2022-07-05, 2022-07-05 (http://web.archive.org/web/20220705054147/https://www.vauld.com/878-es2017.a6735339536977b35b4a.js); 2 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.
Term structure	open_ended source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). No maturity is stated to the borrower: the help article and FAQ say the loan can be repaid at any time, in any number of instalments, with interest for the period used. Against that, the terms call them 'short term loans' and the company told creditors its loans to institutions and customers had a 3-11 month maturity profile that could not be recalled early (which may describe the institutional book). No clause giving the desk a call right was found. Evidence: "You can pay back the loan at any time and in any number of installments" — Vauld Help Center, 'What are the Process and Terms of a Loan?', Wayback snapshot 2022-07-07, 2022-07-07 (http://web.archive.org/web/20220707150348/https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/4758081-what-are-the-process-and-terms-of-a-loan); 2 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.
Rate certainty	variable source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). The terms say loan rates follow dynamic market rates and are subject to change (they do not say whether a change reaches a loan already drawn; fixed deposits, by contrast, are expressly locked). Posted borrow rates in the desk's public rates API: 13% APR to borrow USDT, USDC or DAI and 7.5% APR to borrow BTC on 2022-07-07, and the same 13% / 7.5% on 2021-05-06. Evidence: "You agree and acknowledge that the interest rates at which the loans are granted are based upon the dynamic market rates and fluctuations and the same are subject to change." — Vauld User Terms and Conditions, June 2022 (print of vauld.com/legal/terms-and-conditions dated 2022-06-21), exhibited to the 1st Affidavit of Darshan Bathija, HC/OA 330/2022; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479333-affidavits (signed download link), 2022-06-21 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083932745/c52b38cb130bebd4e7c9b659/2022_07_08+-+1st+Affidavit+of+Darshan+Bathija.pdf); 3 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.

Quality

What stands behind a position, and what can change under the reader?

Oracle dependency	undisclosed source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). No price source is named in the terms, the help article or the site FAQ. The terms say only that thresholds vary with volatility 'in applicable markets' and that liquidations fill at the best available price. Evidence: "liquidations are filled at the best price that is available, and in volatile markets this can lead to increased losses" — Vauld User Terms and Conditions, June 2022 (print of vauld.com/legal/terms-and-conditions dated 2022-06-21), exhibited to the 1st Affidavit of Darshan Bathija, HC/OA 330/2022; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479333-affidavits (signed download link), 2022-06-21 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083932745/c52b38cb130bebd4e7c9b659/2022_07_08+-+1st+Affidavit+of+Darshan+Bathija.pdf); 1 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.
Default & liquidation	threshold source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). Origination at a collateralisation ratio of 150% or more (LTV up to 66.7%; the app pre-filled 199%). Margin call at about 125% collateralisation (80% LTV), notified by email but not guaranteed. Automated liquidation by the desk at about 110% collateralisation (about 91% LTV), which cannot be stopped once started; the terms also authorise the desk to liquidate at its discretion once the ratio is below the margin-call level. No cure period is stated. Evidence: "We give loans at a collateralization ratio of above 150% and liquidate the collateral if the ratio reaches 110%." — Vauld Help Center, 'What are the Process and Terms of a Loan?', Wayback snapshot 2022-07-07, 2022-07-07 (http://web.archive.org/web/20220707150348/https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/4758081-what-are-the-process-and-terms-of-a-loan); 5 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.
Custody & backing	custodial_with_reuse source custodial_with_reuse (criteria v1.2): the desk held the collateral and, by its own statements, pooled deposits and allocated them to lending and trading. Its terms have no clause either way. As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). Collateral stayed in the user's Vauld wallet 'as security for the Loan', i.e. in the desk's hands. The desk's FAQ says all deposited funds were swept from the user's wallet into a centralised lending pool held at BitGo from which loans were made, and the restructuring FAQ says the pool was allocated to lending and trading; the CEO's affidavit describes holdings as self-custody with Defi Payments managing the private keys. So customer assets, including loan collateral, were pooled and re-used. The June 2022 terms contain no clause on title, rehypothecation or segregation of collateral. Evidence: "You understand and acknowledge that the Digital Assets in the Vauld Wallet shall be held as security for the Loan." — Vauld User Terms and Conditions, June 2022 (print of vauld.com/legal/terms-and-conditions dated 2022-06-21), exhibited to the 1st Affidavit of Darshan Bathija, HC/OA 330/2022; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479333-affidavits (signed download link), 2022-06-21 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083932745/c52b38cb130bebd4e7c9b659/2022_07_08+-+1st+Affidavit+of+Darshan+Bathija.pdf); 4 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.
Recourse	undisclosed source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). The June 2022 terms have no deficiency or shortfall clause for loans and none limiting the borrower's liability to the collateral; the help article is silent. In the scheme the loan and the collateral are simply set off against each other at market value. Evidence: "the value of the cryptocurrency deposited with the Company as security as determined at the Effective Scheme Date and apply it towards repayment of the loan" — Order of Court HC/ORC 3682/2023 (HC/OA 378/2023, SUM 1914/2023) sanctioning the Defi Payments Scheme of Arrangement, enclosing the Scheme, clause 2.9; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479348-notice-and-scheme-documentation (signed download link), 2023-08-10 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083936435/4fb6dda58e7d911046ec22ff/5%29+2023_08_10+-+Order+of+Court+3682_2023+%28SUM+1914%29+%28encl+Scheme%29.pdf).
Track record	unknown (this dataset postdates the venue. The venue is defunct and carries a terminal_date but no first_date, because it was never observed while trading. A span inferred from the terminal date would be a guess, and would understate exactly the history this dataset exists to measure.)

Composition

Who and what makes up this market?

Collateral accepted	Borrower-chosen tokens including BTC (pooled at the desk) source As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). The borrower chose 'the desired token to collateralize' from the crypto in the Vauld wallet; the desk's own bitcoin-loan article markets borrowing against bitcoin held on the platform from USD 1,000. No list of eligible collateral tokens was found. In the insolvency collateral was not returned in kind: under the scheme sanctioned on 10 August 2023 (effective 16 August 2023) each platform loan is terminated, the collateral is valued at market and applied to the loan, and any excess becomes an unsecured scheme claim (USD 1.3m of scheme debt in aggregate). Evidence: "once you select the desired token to collateralize, the amount will be automatically filled in at 199% collateralization ratio" — Vauld Help Center, 'What are the Process and Terms of a Loan?', Wayback snapshot 2022-07-07, 2022-07-07 (http://web.archive.org/web/20220707150348/https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/4758081-what-are-the-process-and-terms-of-a-loan); 5 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json. Loan book at failure: Two figures, from different dates and bases. (1) CEO's first affidavit, liabilities as at 28 June 2022: collateral held for retail customers' loans USD 22.19m, out of total liabilities of USD 402.6m (about 10% of liabilities were described as collateralised loans). (2) Draft explanatory statement, valued as at 4 July 2022: platform loan receivables not yet closed out USD 1,653,347 against collateral of USD 2,974,786, a net USD 1,321,439 owed to those customers. The per-asset split of collateral (how much was BTC) is not given. What failed: Defi Payments ran a pooled book: customer deposits funded proprietary trading, TerraUSD staking and term loans of 3-11 months, and mark-to-market losses on long BTC, ETH and MATIC positions plus about US$28m of UST exposure opened an asset shortfall (estimated net liability about US$115m). After Celsius paused withdrawals customers pulled more than US$197.7m between 12 June and 4 July 2022, which the illiquid book could not meet; Vauld suspended withdrawals on 4 July and applied for a moratorium on 8 July 2022.
Book depth & concentration	unknown (no per-venue counterparty count exists in this registry or in the comparison payload, so depth and concentration cannot be established. This is a gap in THIS DATASET, not in the venue, and is a different value from `undisclosed`, which would mean the venue does not publish it.)
Observability	price: partial — Posted rates recoverable from Internet Archive snapshots as archived_card. NOT YET INGESTED. quantity: partial — Singapore restructuring record only, as dated snapshots. Absent from US federal dockets entirely. NOT YET INGESTED. composition: none — Loan-level composition unobtainable for a wound-up custodial desk.

What the loans are denominated in

other — as the venue's filings state itAssets: stablecoin (type not named). "The Company also holds cryptocurrencies as collateral against loans to Vauld customers provided in stablecoin" — Vauld restructuring FAQs (31 Jul 2022), https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/6382973-faqs-on-vauld-group-restructuring-as-of-31-july-22, read 2026-10-05

Each currency is a separate book; the dollar equivalents compare sizes and are never added together.

Backing chain

Each link from what this venue takes as collateral down to the bitcoin it rests on, in order, with how each link was established.

How a chain is read, and what it does not claim

backing_chain: the ordered claims standing between a creditor and the coins, each link derived from a sourced fact already held and carrying it in `derived_from` — the custody cell, the venue's borrow card, or wrapper_registry.yaml for who holds the bitcoin behind a token. A `representation` link has one branch per token the venue takes; branches are alternatives, not a sequence. A link nobody has established is shown with status `incomplete` and names what is missing — it is never dropped, because a missing link omitted makes a long chain look short. `undisclosed` means the party does not publish it; `incomplete` means this dataset has not established it. NEVER SCORED AND NEVER COUNTED: no length, link count or ranking is published, and none should be derived — chain length and link transparency are orthogonal (ETP-backed margin is the longest chain here and every link of it is regulated). `recourse` is what the creditor holds beyond the chain. ⚠ Tokens are identified BY SYMBOL: the wrapper registry is not keyed by chain or address, so every `representation` link carries a `deployment` step that is incomplete — whether a token is native to the chain of the venue or a bridge receipt (one more link) is not established — and a symbol the registry knows to name a different token on a venue is shown unresolved, not given that wrapper's holders.

desk established — the desk · custodial_with_reuse
source
attribute · custody_model = custodial_with_reuse
custodial_with_reuse (criteria v1.2): the desk held the collateral and, by its own statements, pooled deposits and allocated them to lending and trading. Its terms have no clause either way. As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). Collateral stayed in the user's Vauld wallet 'as security for the Loan', i.e. in the desk's hands. The desk's FAQ says all deposited funds were swept from the user's wallet into a centralised lending pool held at BitGo from which loans were made, and the restructuring FAQ says the pool was allocated to lending and trading; the CEO's affidavit describes holdings as self-custody with Defi Payments managing the private keys. So customer assets, including loan collateral, were pooled and re-used. The June 2022 terms contain no clause on title, rehypothecation or segregation of collateral. Evidence: "You understand and acknowledge that the Digital Assets in the Vauld Wallet shall be held as security for the Loan." — Vauld User Terms and Conditions, June 2022 (print of vauld.com/legal/terms-and-conditions dated 2022-06-21), exhibited to the 1st Affidavit of Darshan Bathija, HC/OA 330/2022; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479333-affidavits (signed download link), 2022-06-21 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083932745/c52b38cb130bebd4e7c9b659/2022_07_08+-+1st+Affidavit+of+Darshan+Bathija.pdf); 4 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.
sub_custodian incomplete
no borrow card for this venue names one
reuse established — the desk
the desk may lend, pledge, sell or take title to the collateral — from its terms or its own statements
source
attribute · custody_model = custodial_with_reuse
custodial_with_reuse (criteria v1.2): the desk held the collateral and, by its own statements, pooled deposits and allocated them to lending and trading. Its terms have no clause either way. As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). Collateral stayed in the user's Vauld wallet 'as security for the Loan', i.e. in the desk's hands. The desk's FAQ says all deposited funds were swept from the user's wallet into a centralised lending pool held at BitGo from which loans were made, and the restructuring FAQ says the pool was allocated to lending and trading; the CEO's affidavit describes holdings as self-custody with Defi Payments managing the private keys. So customer assets, including loan collateral, were pooled and re-used. The June 2022 terms contain no clause on title, rehypothecation or segregation of collateral. Evidence: "You understand and acknowledge that the Digital Assets in the Vauld Wallet shall be held as security for the Loan." — Vauld User Terms and Conditions, June 2022 (print of vauld.com/legal/terms-and-conditions dated 2022-06-21), exhibited to the 1st Affidavit of Darshan Bathija, HC/OA 330/2022; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479333-affidavits (signed download link), 2022-06-21 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083932745/c52b38cb130bebd4e7c9b659/2022_07_08+-+1st+Affidavit+of+Darshan+Bathija.pdf); 4 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_other.json.

Recourse: undisclosed

source

attribute · recourse

As the desk operated before it failed (2022-06-21). The June 2022 terms have no deficiency or shortfall clause for loans and none limiting the borrower's liability to the collateral; the help article is silent. In the scheme the loan and the collateral are simply set off against each other at market value. Evidence: "the value of the cryptocurrency deposited with the Company as security as determined at the Effective Scheme Date and apply it towards repayment of the loan" — Order of Court HC/ORC 3682/2023 (HC/OA 378/2023, SUM 1914/2023) sanctioning the Defi Payments Scheme of Arrangement, enclosing the Scheme, clause 2.9; linked from https://support.vauld.com/en/articles/9479348-notice-and-scheme-documentation (signed download link), 2023-08-10 (https://vauld.intercom-attachments-1.com/i/o/1083936435/4fb6dda58e7d911046ec22ff/5%29+2023_08_10+-+Order+of+Court+3682_2023+%28SUM+1914%29+%28encl+Scheme%29.pdf).

The generic axis set

Identical for every venue, identically computed. An axis that cannot be computed here renders its reason — never silently omitted, because an omitted axis says it was not considered. A figure that covers only part of what the axis asks is marked, with what it leaves out beneath it. Collateral, debt and the borrow and lend rates are the tiles at the top of this page.

Utilisation (venue roll-up)	not applicable — there is no pool of deposits here to be drawn
Intermediation margin	not applicable — needs both a borrow and a lend rate; the borrow rate is not served here
Trailing realised average (7/30/90d)	unknown (not published by the venue) — a posted or filed rate has no daily series here
Rate volatility (30/90d)	unknown (not published by the venue) — a posted or filed rate has no daily series here
Spread to the pair aggregate	not applicable — this venue has no borrow rate to compare
Spread to matched Treasuries	not applicable — this venue has no borrow rate to compare
Origination flow	unknown (not published by the venue) — the venue publishes no loan-by-loan flow
Repayment flow	unknown (not published by the venue) — the venue publishes no loan-by-loan flow
Aggregate and distributional LTV	not applicable — the venue is defunct: it no longer lends, and this tile describes a live book
Residence distribution	unknown (not published by the venue) — the venue publishes no loan durations
Liquidation incidence	unknown (not published by the venue) — the venue publishes no liquidations
Top-10 concentration share	unknown (not published by the venue) — the venue publishes no borrower distribution

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (H.15, H.4.1, H.6).

There is no score on this page and none will be added. The criteria are published and versioned before any venue is measured against them, and this venue's row is produced by the same pipeline as every other.

Access routes

Unknown (not surveyed yet). No one has looked for an MCP server for this venue. That is not the same as having looked and found none, and this row will not say the second while meaning the first. The listing criteria are published.

Ask for this by machine

REST	GET https://api.bitcoincreditstack.com/v1/market/venues/cefi_vauld
MCP	get_venue({ venue_id: "cefi_vauld" }) get_venue({ venue_id: "cefi_vauld", include: ["axes", "headline"] })

The same figures, the same names and dates. Connect your AI →

Ask your own question about this venue

read-only MCP · zero write tools · no account

How this venue compares depends on what you'd borrow, for how long, against what. That's a question for your AI, with this data behind it.

Orientation · VauldHolder · VauldTreasurer · VauldAnalyst · VauldRisk · Vauld

Add to Claude ↗Connect in Cursor ↗Connect in VS Code ↗Add to ChatGPT ↗Add to Grok ↗or copy the MCP URLhttps://mcp.bitcoincreditstack.com/mcp

Every client, the config snippet, and what the server will not do →