They don't have a list of board members/investors or a mailing address anywhere that I can find
If it doesn’t function as intended then complain about that and launch a competitor.
I know of dozens of high profile hacks over the last year that left entire communities scrambling where some members and users had previously opened policies on one of the various insurance protocols and got paid out the same day as the hack. They were often recipients of the recovery path the communities took too.
There is more than just Nexus Mutual. You can ask in their respective communities if they have stats on that, or perhaps run a query on dune analytics to see what actions their associated smart contracts have taken, isolate a claim payout and tell the query to count
What I envision is the insurance choices being shown at the wallet level or opening policies is concatenated in other coverable smart contract transactions.
Insurance where you can't be certain the company will be around (or actually pay out) when the shit hits the fan is completely useless as insurance, and it's either naïve or disingenuous to suggest that the solution to that is to "complain". And suggesting launching a competitor is just an extra special kind of stupid: if you have enough capital to start an insurance company, you're obviously not in the market for buying insurance.
Its not the same as the highly capitalized opaque insurance company you need to be skeptical about, the analogy from a lived experience almost doesnt work at all. it does have the function of derisking things though.
So it exists, I know it exists, you dont know it exists, I’m not the encyclopedia of the specific nuances of each protocol, so go check it out
But anyway, I went ahead and checked out the white paper of nexus mutual [1], because I was curious. It appears to have a serious amount of hand-waving on one of the most important topics: the risk correlation between offered insurance products. They do reference the correlation matrix, but the only mention of how the value of the matrix is determined is to say that if independence between cells can be assumed, the math is very simple. Doing a quick search through their website and code, it looks like they are indeed just assuming that products aren't correlated, instead of trying to estimate real correlation values. This means that their minimum capital requirements (and thus the implied risk of default) are incorrectly calculated if that assumption is violated--which it certainly is.
This seems to be by design, and baked into the incentive structure of the whole concept. There's just no practical way to crowdsource proper correlation evaluation and adjustment, and the economics stop being remotely competitive if you just guess at correlations and treat it as another risk to be hedged. You can see this later on in the white paper (appendix A), where they point out that the economic viability of the project depends on lowered labour costs because product creation, assessment, and policy issuance are crowdsourced or automated. Their game theory/tokenomics are focused on providing incentives for individual products to price risk accurately, however: they do not propose any mechanism for adjusting or calculating MCR based on correlation risk when new products/coverage are offered. This is further evidence that they're just assuming independence without any real justification, and thus being chronically undercapitalized.
[1] https://nexusmutual.io/assets/docs/nmx_white_paperv2_3.pdf
You’ll be better off asking around in their community or using the product to see what the current state is, usually they diverge far from the white paper such that analyzing it that was is a waste of energy. Sorry about your dissertation. You can branch the chain onto localhost to prod at it if you don’t want to spend any money.
KARP, Hugh DANILA, Ionela Roxana MELBARDIS, Reinis MUNOZ-MCDONALD, Nicolas THURGOOD, Graeme George
This matches the company and director information registered in the UK since 2017. Company mailing address is here as well:
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...
I think Nexus Lexus is legit. They had to in order to get UK clearance. But I understand that they want to demutualize now and become a DAO. DAO is the gold standard for no corporate oversight.
Fake profiles on Twitter and Linkedin. Thousand of fake followers. Incorporated in banana countries. And if they are incorporated at all. If the plan is a rug pull, then bypass incorporation, of course.
There are some opportunities that can be a meaningful demonstration of credibility, like registration with the FCA, but I don't see any evidence of that for this company. I would consider their incorporation (as a cic, not a for-profit company) meaningless in determining if they're credible.