---
type: entity
entity_type: decision_market
name: "Cloak: Futardio Fundraise"
domain: internet-finance
status: failed
parent_entity: "[[cloak]]"
platform: futardio
proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/launch/9MqyiXXJUAXQ1Uy5j2EV8hq21UeR3ruukWkZ1XGNhg3R"
proposal_date: 2026-03-03
resolution_date: 2026-03-04
category: fundraise
summary: "Cloak attempted to raise $300K for privacy DCA infrastructure on Solana but attracted only $1,455 in commitments before automatic refund"
key_metrics:
  raise_target: "$300,000"
  total_committed: "$1,455"
  success_rate: "0.49%"
  token_offered: "10,000,000 8RS (62.9% of supply)"
  ico_price: "$0.03"
  team_monthly_allowance: "$10,000"
  runway_target: "24 months"
tracked_by: rio
created: 2026-03-11
---

# Cloak: Futardio Fundraise

## Summary
Cloak launched a futarchy-governed fundraise on Futardio seeking $300K to build privacy-focused DCA infrastructure on Solana. The protocol promised ZK-proof privacy pools, unlinkable session wallets, and integration with Jupiter for anonymous asset accumulation. Despite technical sophistication and first-mover positioning in private DCA, the raise attracted only $1,455 in 24 hours (0.49% of target), triggering automatic refund under Futardio's all-or-nothing mechanism.

## Market Data
- **Outcome:** Failed (refunded)
- **Raise Target:** $300,000
- **Total Committed:** $1,455
- **Success Rate:** 0.49%
- **Duration:** 24 hours (2026-03-03 to 2026-03-04)
- **Token Economics:** 15.9M total supply, 10M offered at $0.03 (62.9% allocation), $477K FDV
- **Team Structure:** 2 founders, $10K/month allowance, 3M performance-locked tokens (18.9%)

## Significance
This represents one of the most severe fundraise failures on Futardio's platform — raising less than 0.5% of target despite:
- Clear technical execution (live mainnet beta)
- Legitimate privacy use case (MEV protection, surveillance resistance)
- First-mover advantage in privacy DCA category
- Credible team (repeat builders, Superteam contributors)
- Reasonable valuation ($477K FDV)

The failure suggests either:
1. Privacy DCA market demand is far smaller than assumed
2. Futardio's 24-hour window is insufficient for complex infrastructure raises
3. The $300K target was misaligned with demonstrated traction ($1,455 suggests ~$50K realistic ceiling)
4. Retail-focused privacy narrative doesn't resonate when institutional clients (the actual market) aren't visible

Notably, Cloak had shipped product, integrated multiple protocols (Privacy.cash, Jupiter, Oro), and achieved technical milestones that typically signal fundability. The disconnect between execution and capital attraction is significant for understanding futarchy-governed fundraising dynamics.

## Relationship to KB
- [[cloak]] — parent entity
- [[futardio]] — fundraising platform
- [[MetaDAO]] — futarchy infrastructure provider
- [[futarchy-governed-permissionless-launches-require-brand-separation-to-manage-reputational-liability-because-failed-projects-on-a-curated-platform-damage-the-platforms-credibility]] — this failure tests Futardio's brand resilience
- [[internet-capital-markets-compress-fundraising-timelines]] — 24-hour window may be too compressed for infrastructure raises
- Demonstrates limits of [[ownership-coin-treasuries-should-be-actively-managed-through-buybacks-and-token-sales-as-continuous-capital-calibration-not-treated-as-static-war-chests]] when initial raise fails entirely