Vaulta

• Vaulta is the rebranded EOS network, repositioned as a Web3 banking platform.

• The A token replaced EOS as the network's primary asset in May 2025.

• It targets on-chain wealth management, payments and tokenised asset services.

• A replaced EOS on a one-to-one basis.

• EOS cut annual inflation from 5% to 1% in 2019, and in 2024 capped maximum supply at 2.1 billion with a four-year halving schedule; that framework carries into Vaulta.

• Staking secures the network and provides resource access.

Pros:

• One-second transaction finality with a long production operating record.

• The rebrand gives a clear focus after years without a defined direction.

• Existing infrastructure and validator set rather than a cold start.

Cons:

• EOS raised roughly $4 billion in its 2017–2018 token sale and never delivered an ecosystem proportionate to that, which is the defining fact of its history.

• The SEC settled with Block.one in 2019 over an unregistered securities offering.

• Rebrands rarely change developer perception of a chain with this history.

• Exposure to an established chain repositioned around a specific financial use case.

• Technical performance is genuinely strong and long-proven.

• The funding-to-delivery gap over the chain's history is the central consideration.

• Sub-second finality on a chain with years of continuous production operation, now aimed specifically at banking-style services.

• On-chain financial services need settlement fast enough for consumer payments.

• One-second finality makes point-of-sale and remittance workflows practical.

• Originally developed by Block.one, led by Dan Larimer and Brendan Blumer; Larimer resigned at the end of 2020 and announced his departure in January 2021.

• Now directed by the ENF and Vaulta leadership rather than the original founding company.

• EOS conducted a year-long token sale from June 2017 to June 2018, raising approximately $4.1 billion. Block.one later settled with the SEC over the offering.

• Reputational overhang from the original raise and its outcome.

• Developer ecosystem is small relative to comparable chains.

• Rebranding does not by itself attract applications.

• Competition from chains purpose-built for payments.