Most of the time we see tokenomics that run on either a single, or dual-token model with one for utility and one for governance. However, Common Wealth's Tokenomics interestingly plays around with an NFT and a utility token for value accrual. The utility token, $WLTH is used as typical utiloity token functions - payment of transaction fees, earning of rewards as well as passive income generated. However what's interesting is how the NFT comes into play. Their NFTs, representing stakes in the fund, can be transacted on their marketplace either fully or in parts (I am impressed), and stakers of their NFTs also get rewarded with $WLTH tokens (similar to how stakers of KaijuKingz get rewarded with $SCALE). In the current era of utility-governance tokenomics, it is rare to see a project that utilises the NFT-utility concepts especially in a fund.
It is also interesting to see that their token economics and revenue flow is extremely circular, and it is quite clear how value is flowed into the economy and flowed out of the economy to holders, and every holder of the NFT is able to accrue value via buy-back and burn mechanisms, investment return payouts and also rewards for staking.
The token distribution of their 1billion $WLTH also seems healthy, and although I had initial concerns with the team having 14%, team tokens having a 4 year linear unlock shows confidence in the project instead of providing dumping pressure.
I would only wonder how the specifics of fund governance works in regards to investments in projects - such as due dilligence, allocation/ticket size, and if either $WLTH or the NFT has to be staked for a certain number of days before having voting power. Show Less
