Onboarding Assets, Collateral and Otherwise

I think there has been some miscommunication and misunderstanding around onboarding assets. I believe the misunderstanding stems from the ‘collateral’ in the CODEC acronym detailed here:

I also misunderstood this for some time but it has been clear to me that we need to refine the language and discussion around asset onboarding.

The important distinction is that an onboarded asset will not necessarily be available as collateral.

Every asset onboarded to the Jet platform has a collateral weight. This parameter is currently set by the Jet Core team. Eventually the collateral weight parameter should be set by governance consensus. Whether that consensus is found via vote or a specialized committee is a discussion for another day.

In the future I would encourage the community to let this distinction inform their votes around onboarding assets. It’s possible that an asset would be beneficial to be on the Jet platform but would not be appropriate to have a collateral weight greater than 0.

Please also feel encouraged to express your opinion of an assets appropriate collateral weight at anytime before and after an asset has been onboarded.

If you would like to know a particular asset’s collateral weight at any time you may do so in the Jet Protocol web UI here:


Thanks Adam for bringing this up! I totally agree that asset onboarding has a wider meaning than just the collateral usage of tokens. The terms and definitions used by the community are also being shaped with time for a better DAO internal communication.

1 Like

Great thread, thank you! I believe some new wording is in the works to emphasise that tokens are onboarded for trading, lending, and borrowing, and that serving as collateral is a discretionary cherry on top that to be decided by Risk core unit when it exists.