
$GRVT On October 7, 2026, Moody’s Ratings scored Sky Protocol a B3 issuer rating with a stable outlook.
This happens to be the first-ever rating the agency has assigned to a stablecoin protocol. This is an important move to institutional investors who may be sitting on the fence as regards USDS, because it gives the dollar stablecoin issuer a score from a second major agency.
The only protocol scored by two major agencies
Sky announced that the B3 score by Moody’s means it’s the only stablecoin protocol rated by Moody’s and S&P Global. The B3 grade is on par with the “B-“that S&P scored Sky in August 2025. B3 is a non-investment-grade mark.
The protocol saw the rating as a pat on the back rather than a warning about any future occurrence.
Greg Feibus, who serves as the Global Head of Capital Markets at the firm, stated that “The value of independent credit ratings is that they allow institutional investors to assess Sky through frameworks they already use across global markets.”
He opined that Sky attaining multiple assessments only serves to strengthen Sky’s credit profile in the eyes of institutional investors.
What S&P flagged a year prior
The latest rating by Moody’s comes with some familiar narratives. S&P rated Sky a B- in August last year, and when it did so, it noted Sky’s high depositor concentration, highly centralized governance, and weak risk-adjusted capitalization.
In fact, Sky’s founder, Rune Christensen, had up to 9% of the protocol’s governance tokens, which S&P felt gave him enormous influence over Sky’s future, especially with extremely low voter turnout.
Also, Sky’s 0.4% risk-adjusted capital ratio and thin surplus buffer were flagged by S&P as a “noteworthy weakness,” and predicted an upgrade wasn’t realistic in the next 12 months.
Reports framed the grade in blunter terms: a B- rating makes USDS and DAI somewhat on the same level as government bonds from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Any debt with a rating below BBB- is pretty much high-yield or junk.
Why institutions are interested anyway
The ratings come at a good time; they come as institutional investors strengthen their bond with Sky.
Galaxy Digital saw that $100 million of sUSDS (the savings version of USDS) was added to its corporate treasury. It went on to approve USDS as collateral throughout its institutional lending desk and purchased an unknown amount of the SKY governance token. All of this happened in late September.
Feibus linked the interest from Galaxy to the S&P rating from 2025. Standard Chartered’s projection for Sky’s USDS is a favorable one, with the bank predicting 5x returns for token holders by 2028.
The reserve problem Sky is looking to fix
Sky seems to have a challenge with its reserves, as both Moody’s and S&P noted in their scorecards. The protocol seems to be taking action; however.
In March of this year, there was a vote by the governing cooperative of the protocol to slash its daily buyback program by 87% and to redistribute funds towards its backstop buffer.
It remains to be seen if such a move will move the needle with both agencies. S&P plans to increase Sky’s rating if it sees improvement in governance concentration, thin capital, and depositor concentration. Until then, we wait.
If you're reading this, you’re already ahead. Stay there with our newsletter.

Where Did $MKR Go? Maker Is Now $SKY, and Most Holders Don't Know It
If you search for the MKR price today, you'll find a token trading below $0.10 instead of $2,000+. Did Maker crash 99.99%? No. Maker ($MKR) has been rebranded and redenominated as Sky ($SKY). Here is what changed and why it matters.
What Is the MKR to SKY Rebrand?
In August 2024, MakerDAO, the protocol behind the DAI stablecoin, rebranded as Sky Protocol. Its governance token $MKR was upgraded to $SKY, which is now the only governance token of the Sky ecosystem. The stablecoin was upgraded as well, with DAI converting to USDS at a 1:1 ratio.
1 MKR = 24,000 SKY: The Ratio That Explains Everything:
Every MKR converts into 24,000 SKY tokens. This is a redenomination, the same way a company stock split works. Holders receive more units, each unit is worth less, and the total value stays the same.
SKY price $0.093 × 24,000 = $2,232 per MKR-equivalent
So SKY at $0.093 is effectively MKR at $2,232. That's why the price looks dramatically lower. No value was lost in the conversion.
Supply Check: The Numbers Add Up
About 977K MKR × 24,000 = about 23.4 billion SKY
SKY's total supply of roughly 23.46B matches this calculation. The market cap carried over directly from MKR to SKY.
How to Calculate the Real SKY Price in MKR Terms:
To compare today's SKY price with historical MKR charts, multiply by 24,000:
SKY at $0.093 = about $2,232 MKR-equivalent
SKY ATH at $0.1014 = about $2,434 MKR-equivalent
SKY is currently trading only about 8% below its ATH. In MKR terms, that puts it back above the $2,200 level.
Still Holding MKR? Read This Before You Upgrade:
The full-value upgrade window closed in September 2025. If you still hold MKR in a self-custody wallet, late upgrades now carry a delayed-upgrade penalty that increases every quarter. The longer you wait, the less SKY you receive.
If your MKR was held on an exchange, most platforms converted balances automatically, so check your SKY balance.
Use only the official Sky upgrade portal. Fake migration sites target confused MKR holders.
Myth vs Reality: "SKY Is Under $0.10, It Can 100x"
This is the most common mistake retail investors make with SKY. A $0.093 price does not mean the token is undervalued. SKY's market cap is about $2.17B, and that number is what determines its potential. A 100x from here would mean a $217B market cap, larger than most of the crypto market. Always value tokens by market cap, not by price per token.
Key Takeaways:
➤ MKR is now SKY, and Maker is now Sky Protocol
➤ 1 MKR = 24,000 SKY, which is a redenomination and not a crash
➤ SKY at $0.093 equals about $2,232 per MKR
➤ SKY is trading about 8% below its ATH of $0.1014
➤ DAI has been upgraded to USDS at a 1:1 ratio
➤ Late MKR upgrades lose value to a quarterly-growing penalty
➤ Use only the official Sky portal to upgrade
Note: Don't fall for the biggest myth that $SKY is "cheap" compared to $MKR: at $0.093, SKY equals $2,232 per MKR (1 MKR = 24,000 SKY), which puts it about 10,500% above MKR's 2017 low of $21.
DYOR | Not Financial Advice

$GRVT Compound’s $COMP holders are voting on Proposal 612, which would extend treasury withdrawal delays from two days to ten and give the protocol’s Governor Timelock power to cancel treasury transactions before they execute. The voting opened on Sunday and will close on Wednesday (October 7), according to the proposal page.
Though the changes may seem technical in nature, the major concern is actually who would take charge of Compound’s treasury. The voting also leads to a much bigger question in DeFi: How much control can be added to a protocol before the better protection begins to indicate centralization?
What Proposal 612 changes
Proposal 612, submitted by delegate Ugur Mersin on October 2, increases the Treasury Escrow withdrawal cooldown and the minimum delay of the Treasury Timelock from 2 to 10 days. Furthermore, it establishes the period for Escrow expiration at 17 days, which means that there is a 7-day withdrawal period after the cooldown.
The proposal says that two of the five actions will assign EXECUTOR_ROLE and CANCELLER_ROLE to the Governor Timelock in relation to the Treasury Timelock. This means that governance can prevent the treasury from performing any operations rather than just reacting after the fact.
According to the latest vote count, there are 1.75 million votes in favor of the proposal, compared to 921,000 votes against it, far beyond the quorum of 400,000.
The reserve movements that prompted the vote
The proposal refers to actions by Compound’s treasury on September 29. The Treasury Management Committee transferred around $3 million in stablecoins to a separate Safe, which then used $2 million in USDC in a single-sided Uniswap V3 $COMP position. Advocates of Proposal 612 claim that the incident demonstrates the need for an enforceable pause in governance, not just a voluntary request.
The conflict existed before the action was taken. Cryptopolitan reported that a delegate has made allegations against the Compound Foundation of converting the amount of 8.42 million DAI stored in the DAO reserves into 344,780 $COMP. The delegate also claimed that the resulting voting power was used to influence treasury control and a $52 million V4 program. It is stated that the $COMP was subsequently sent back to its Safe 58 minutes prior to the closing of votes for Proposals 580 and 582.
Compound Proposal 612 vote highlights treasury controls and DeFi governance risks

$GRVT TL;DR:
8.42 million DAI allocated under Proposal 536 were allegedly converted into 344,780 COMP tokens through exchange transactions.
58 minutes before voting closed on Proposals 580 and 582, the assets were transferred back to the Safe multisig wallet to delegate voting power.
$1.6 billion represents the total value locked (TVL) recorded by Compound Finance on DefiLlama metrics at the time of the complaint.
The Compound Foundation was formally accused by delegate Ugurmersin of misappropriating 8.42 million DAI from the Compound DAO reserves to purchase COMP tokens and influence key governance decisions during September 2026.
Alleged Misappropriation and Vote Manipulation
The formal accusation was published on the decentralized protocol’s official governance forum. The complainant asserts that the funds allocated under Proposal 536 were intended to be safeguarded as operational capital for the community. According to a market report, the approved terms explicitly prohibited speculative use of these assets and mandated that they remain under the exclusive ownership of the decentralized autonomous organization.
On-chain records presented by the delegate detail that the 8.42 million DAI were swapped on an exchange for 344,780 COMP tokens. According to Ugurmersin’s analysis, these assets were transferred back to the Safe wallet 58 minutes before voting closed on Proposals 580 and 582. The signers of the multisig treasury allegedly delegated that voting power immediately to the Foundation’s address.
The information submitted by the delegate suggests that this technical maneuver enabled the approval of handing over treasury control to the Treasury Management Committee (TMC). It also facilitated the ratification of a Version 4 (V4) development program valued at $52 million.
The complaint also mentions the alleged involvement of collaborating entities, including the Compound Growth Working Group, audit firm ChainSecurity, and security provider Certora. The source noted that it has not yet been able to independently verify the transaction records referenced in the allegation, while the Compound Foundation has not released an official statement on the matter.
Governance Friction in the DeFi Ecosystem
Conflicts surrounding treasury control reflect a persistent challenge within decentralized lending protocols. DefiLlama market data places Compound Finance at approximately $1.6 billion in total value locked and a market capitalization near $230 million, with the COMP token trading around $23 and a direct treasury of $8.26 million as of late September 2026. By comparison, Aave V3 holds more than $18 billion in locked assets.
The situation shares direct parallels with the governance dispute seen in Aave in late 2025. During that episode, Aave Chain Initiative founder Marc Zeller claimed that wallets tied to Aave Labs intervened to tip the balance in favor of the “Aave Will Win” proposal, which initially passed with 52.58% support.
While the Foundation has not addressed the misappropriation claims, representatives from the implicated groups have recently defended the legitimacy of their operational processes. In a forum post dated September 24, 2026, delegate AranaDigital argued that Snapshot votes serve as a fully legitimate tool for operational efficiency when resolving matters that do not require direct on-chain execution.
The complainant confirmed that all on-chain traces and forum screenshots have been preserved publicly, pending formal responses to the delegate community from the technical teams at Certora, ChainSecurity, and the Compound Foundation.