Voyager Digital
Takes as collateral: bitcoin
Events for this venue: dated moves past a published rule and levels crossed.
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.
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_cardsourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). not_applicable. No retail collateralised loan product. Rates on Voyager's outbound institutional loans were pre-negotiated bilaterally. Evidence: "To provide customers with PIK Interest, Voyager lends cryptocurrency deposited on its platform to third parties. Such third parties pay Voyager a pre-negotiated interest rate" — Declaration of Stephen Ehrlich in support of Chapter 11 petitions and first day motions, In re Voyager Digital Holdings, Inc., 22-10943 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), Doc 15, paras 4-5, 20, 29, 53-56, 2022-07-06 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840.15.0.pdf). |
|---|---|
| Term structure | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No retail collateralised loan product; see oracle_dependency. |
| Rate certainty | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No retail collateralised loan product; see oracle_dependency. Institutional borrowers paid pre-negotiated rates. |
Quality
What stands behind a position, and what can change under the reader?
| Oracle dependency | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No retail bitcoin-backed loan product is described in Voyager's first-day declaration: it lists the company's operations as brokerage, custodial/rewards services and 'lending programs', and describes the lending programme as Voyager lending customers' deposited crypto OUT to third-party counterparties. Voyager was a lender of customers' coins, not a lender of dollars against customers' bitcoin. This is an inference from the declaration's enumeration of the business; no source fetched says in terms that Voyager offered no customer loans, hence medium confidence. Evidence: "Voyager's primary operations consist of (i) brokerage services, (ii) custodial services through which customers earn interest and other rewards on stored cryptocurrency assets, and (iii) lending programs." — Declaration of Stephen Ehrlich in support of Chapter 11 petitions and first day motions, In re Voyager Digital Holdings, Inc., 22-10943 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), Doc 15, paras 4-5, 20, 29, 53-56, 2022-07-06 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840.15.0.pdf); 1 further quote(s) in registry/resolution/2026-09/defunct_desks_us.json. |
|---|---|
| Default & liquidation | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No retail collateralised loan product; see oracle_dependency. (Its institutional loan to Three Arrows was callable on demand and went unpaid when called.) Evidence: "The 3AC Loan was callable at any time by the Company." — Declaration of Stephen Ehrlich in support of Chapter 11 petitions and first day motions, In re Voyager Digital Holdings, Inc., 22-10943 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), Doc 15, paras 4-5, 20, 29, 53-56, 2022-07-06 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840.15.0.pdf). |
| Custody & backing | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No borrower collateral was held under a retail loan product. For context: customer deposits were pooled, and customers acknowledged in the customer agreement that Voyager could lend them to third parties. Evidence: "expressly acknowledge that Voyager may loan the customer's deposited assets (which are pooled with all other retail investors' deposited assets) to third parties when they agree to the Voyager customer agreement" — Declaration of Stephen Ehrlich in support of Chapter 11 petitions and first day motions, In re Voyager Digital Holdings, Inc., 22-10943 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), Doc 15, paras 4-5, 20, 29, 53-56, 2022-07-06 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840.15.0.pdf). |
| Recourse | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No retail collateralised loan product; see oracle_dependency. |
| 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 | not_applicablesourceAs the desk operated before it failed (2022-07-05). No product in which BTC was accepted from customers as loan collateral. BTC appears on the other side: Voyager lent 15,250 BTC (with 350 million USDC) to Three Arrows Capital. Evidence: "Pursuant to the 3AC Loan, the Company agreed to lend 15,250 Bitcoins and 350 million USDC to 3AC." — Declaration of Stephen Ehrlich in support of Chapter 11 petitions and first day motions, In re Voyager Digital Holdings, Inc., 22-10943 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), Doc 15, paras 4-5, 20, 29, 53-56, 2022-07-06 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840/gov.uscourts.nysb.312840.15.0.pdf). Loan book at failure: no retail BTC-backed loan book. Outbound institutional loans outstanding at the petition date: $1,124,825 thousand in total, of which Three Arrows Capital $654,195 thousand. What failed: Three Arrows Capital failed to repay a loan of 15,250 BTC and 350 million USDC when Voyager called it in June 2022; Voyager issued a default notice on 2022-06-27. The declaration says non-payment of that loan, with severe industry headwinds, strained the company's ability to operate; it filed on 2022-07-05. |
|---|---|
| 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 source_type archived_card; each snapshot dated and citable, irregular cadence a registered property. Voyager also published rates in TSX-listed filings across its life, the deepest of the era.2. NOT YET INGESTED. quantity: partial — Listed-company filings (TSX, quarterly) plus the bankruptcy docket, as dated snapshots rather than a running total. NOT YET INGESTED. composition: none — Loan-level composition unobtainable for a wound-up custodial desk. |
What the loans are denominated in
US dollars, bitcoin (borrowed against bitcoin) — as the venue's filings state itAssets: BTC; USDC. "Pursuant to the 3AC Loan, the Company agreed to lend 15,250 Bitcoins and 350 million USDC to 3AC." — Ehrlich First Day Declaration, Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 22-10943 Doc 15, https://cases.stretto.com/public/x193/11753/PLEADINGS/1175307062280000000036.pdf, read 2026-10-05 WARNING: the BTC here is bitcoin the desk LENT; the filing does not say those loans were secured by bitcoin, so it is not evidence of bitcoin-against-bitcoin credit.
Each currency is a separate book; the dollar equivalents compare sizes and are never added together.
Backing chain
source
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 |
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_voyager |
|---|---|
| MCP | get_venue({ venue_id: "cefi_voyager" }) get_venue({ venue_id: "cefi_voyager", include: ["axes", "headline"] }) |
The same figures, the same names and dates. Connect your AI →
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.
https://mcp.bitcoincreditstack.com/mcp