KaspaCom Dex
Rejected venues wait the longest for re-review; a rejection has to earn another look before the scheduled date.
KaspaCom is a decentralized exchange and token launchpad for the Kaspa community, deployed on Kasplex. Its liquidity pools carry the standard AMM trade: providers earn fees and eat the rebalancing loss whenever the paired assets diverge. The class rule rejects the entire AMM category on that mechanism, and Kasplex itself has no registry verdict, which would block the file even without the IL problem. The 2026-08-16 survey reported only about $74K split between Igra and Kasplex.
- Ships a product line without impermanent-loss exposure that merits its own review
The research file
Mechanism applicability
KaspaCom documents a Uniswap V2-style AMM. Swaps execute against pooled token reserves and pool liquidity determines price impact and slippage; LPs supply the inventory counted by the survey. The client claim therefore bears the standard constant-product inventory transformation controlled by the AMM-LP dossier.
Control and exit applicability
The permissionless deployment and pool interfaces allow new ERC-20 assets and liquidity positions on Kaspa Layer-2 venues. LP outcome depends on paired token quality, pool contracts, routers, bridges and L2 settlement. Removing liquidity returns the provider’s current proportional reserves, crystallizing the post-trade mix rather than guaranteeing the deposit ratio.
Current observation and perimeter
The DefiLlama read on 2026-08-16 classified KaspaCom as a DEX and reported approximately $74K: about $56K on Kasplex and $18K on Igra. The registry corrects its stale Kasplex-only chain list to both live survey deployments. Neither L2 currently has an approved chain disposition.
Why the class rule decides
KaspaCom LP yield requires constant-product market-making inventory, so the AMM-LP dossier is more product-specific than the independent chain and size barriers. Reopen only for a separately measured non-LP product on an approved chain; a new deployment or higher TVL alone would not cure the LP classification.
Sources
The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.
- KaspaCom docs — AMM swap mechanism · primary · accessed 2026-08-16
Supports: Uniswap V2, AMM, pool liquidity, slippage - KaspaCom — current DEX application · primary · accessed 2026-08-16
Supports: Kasplex, swap, pools, current lifecycle - KaspaCom docs — token and liquidity deployment · primary · accessed 2026-08-16
Supports: ERC-20 deployment, Kaspa Layer-2, add liquidity, permissionless assets - KaspaCom docs — documentation root · primary · accessed 2026-08-16
Supports: DEX, KaspaCom, product perimeter, current documentation - DefiLlama — KaspaCom DEX survey record · secondary · accessed 2026-08-16
Supports: current TVL, Igra, Kasplex, DEX category
Inherited controls
The verdict above grades the protocol layer. Every position also inherits the asset it holds and the chain it settles on. The least safe layer sets the position’s grade, and the position table names which one that is.
| Chain | Verdict | Grade | Control constraint |
|---|