MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416028825 · doi:10.1016/j.jfds.2025.100171

The economic impact of DeFi crime events on decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs)

2025· article· en· W4416028825 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Finance and Data Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsCegep Edouard Montpetit
FundersÖsterreichische Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft
KeywordsCounterfactual thinkingCorporate governanceEconomic impact analysisVotingEvent studyAsset (computer security)DelegationEconomic cost

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Decentralized Finance (DeFi) ecosystem has experienced over $10 billion in direct losses due to crime events. Beyond these immediate losses, such events often trigger broader market reactions, including price declines, trading activity changes, and reductions in market capitalization. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) govern DeFi applications through tradable governance assets that function like corporate shares for voting and decision-making. Leveraging DeFi’s granular trading data, we conduct an event study on 22 crime events between 2020 and 2022 to assess their economic impact on governance asset prices, trading volumes, and market capitalization. Using a dynamic difference-in-differences (DiD) framework with counterfactual governance assets, we aim for causal inference of intraday temporal effects. Our results show that 55% of crime events lead to significant negative price impacts, with an average decline of about 14%. Additionally, 68% of crime events lead to increased governance asset trading volume. Based on these impacts, we estimate indirect economic losses of over $1.3 billion in DAO market capitalization, far exceeding direct victim costs and accounting for 74% of total losses. Our study provides valuable insights into how crime events shape market dynamics and affect DAOs. Moreover, our methodological approach is reproducible and applicable beyond DAOs, offering a framework to assess the indirect economic impact on other cryptoassets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it