Alchemy by Sundial x Charms: Cardano-Native Bitcoin Treasury Protocol
Alchemy is a Cardano-native Bitcoin treasury protocol and BTCfi infrastructure layer proposed by a collaboration between Sundial Protocol and Charms. It gives Cardano reusable infrastructure for transparent, on-chain Bitcoin-backed structured exposure: reserve architecture, composable FIRE (BTC+) and ICE (BTC-) assets, public dashboards, integration adapters, monthly reporting, and staged launch liquidity. The proposal requests 10,000,000 ada, using a reference value of approximately USD 0.20 per ada for a total planning budget of approximately USD 2.0 million. The request is split into two separated pools. Pool 1, approximately USD 1.0 million, supports protocol infrastructure and staged launch liquidity. This pool is treasury-supported, kept separate from operating spend, deployed in tranches, and designed so that profits, yield, and returns generated by the launch liquidity position are returned to the Cardano Treasury quarterly. Pool 2, approximately USD 1.0 million, funds delivery, audit, integrations, dashboards, governance reporting, legal/compliance work, and go-to-market execution. The withdrawal is self-contained, denominated in ada, independent of any Budget Information Action, and designed to comply with the current Cardano Constitution and the prevailing Net Change Limit. Intersect is proposed as interim fund administrator, subject to confirmation and final agreement. Any administrator-held ada will be kept in auditable accounts and delegated to auto-abstain, not to a Stake Pool Operator. Sundial and Charms also commit to a rollover clause: if external investment funds Alchemy development, the development portion of this treasury request rolls into additional treasury-supported launch liquidity instead. The Treasury funds additional Cardano BTCfi depth, not duplicate compensation.
Reasoning
Written after the vote was cast
What this asks for, and from whom
Sundial Protocol and Charms asked for 10,000,000 ADA (~$2M at their $0.20 reference) for a Bitcoin treasury protocol: half as treasury-supported launch liquidity for their FIRE (BTC+) and ICE (BTC-) structured assets, half for delivery, audits, integrations, and go-to-market. Intersect proposed as interim administrator.
What would have to be true for this to be a good use of treasury funds
I'd need to believe the treasury should be seeding launch liquidity for leveraged structured products. That's the core of it. Pool 1 is a million dollars of community money taking a market position in a brand-new synthetic exposure system so the product has depth at launch. Returns flow back quarterly if it works. And the community eats it if it doesn't.
What specifically concerns me
The treasury as market maker. I said no on this one and I call it as I see it, folks: BTCfi on Cardano is a direction I actually want. I voted yes on Bifrost's bridge the same week. The difference is Bifrost asked for money to build and audit neutral infrastructure; Alchemy asked the treasury to bankroll launch liquidity and a go-to-market budget for one team's leveraged product. FIRE and ICE are clever mechanism design, genuinely. But clever mechanisms with 5x initial reserve targets are still leveraged exposure, and community funds don't belong on that table as the house stake.
What I am asking of the proposer if this passes
It was dropped, so the point is settled for now. If Alchemy comes back: fund the liquidity privately. The rollover clause in the proposal shows outside investment was already contemplated. And ask the treasury only for what's a public good: open-source contracts, audits, integration standards. I'd read that version with an open mind.