Introducing Syron: A Bitcoin-native stablecoin metaprotocol powered by ICP
What?
Syron is a Bitcoin-native metaprotocol for decentralized stablecoins. It enables users to mint and use BTC-backed stablecoins, such as Syron SUSD, with no wrapped tokens or third-party custody. Every user maintains full control over their Bitcoin collateral through a personal Safety Deposit ₿ox, a smart contract wallet running on the Internet Computer Protocol (ICP).
How?
Decentralized custody: Each user gets a smart wallet managed on ICP to securely hold BTC natively on Bitcoin Layer 1.
Overcollateralized minting: Users mint Syron using BTC with a minimum collateral ratio of 150%.
Liquidation: If the collateral ratio drops below 120%, anyone can trigger a liquidation and receive BTC in return.
Burning: Syron can be burned at any time to withdraw BTC back to the user’s self-custodial wallet.
Fast transfers: Native stablecoin transfers and BTC purchases with low latency.
Bitcoin native: Designed to support both the BRC-20 and Bitcoin Runes token standards.
Why?
Self-sovereignty: Enables financial access without centralized custody.
Capital efficiency: Unlocks liquidity from BTC without selling it.
Transparency & security: No pooled risks, each user has their own smart contract wallet.
DeFi interoperability: Built to integrate with decentralized finance infrastructure across blockchains.
TL;DR
Syron allows users to:
Lock native BTC in their own vault (Safety Deposit ₿ox).
Mint stablecoins like SUSD (150% collateral).
Send, or pay with SUSD instantly.
Burn Syron to reclaim BTC. All while retaining full sovereignty over your funds.
What problems are we solving?
Reliance on fiat-backed stablecoins or centralized custodians.
Poor UX and risks from BTC wrapping solutions.
Inability to access BTC liquidity without selling.
Lack of native integration between Bitcoin and smart contract platforms.
Why is a great question and i feel like Why points are still weak. At user point, its not needed, there are many stablecoins, top ones are the safest ones. For project owners, if its adopted, it can generate lot of money.
Lets say person thinks BTC goes up big, he borrows 100k, than buys BTC with it, issue becomes when there is not much liquidity on SUSD pair. BTC can go up 20%, but selling at that point can return only 110k or 105k. This is why its better to have stable coin what has loads of liquidity (if 10 people sell at 20%, it can crash).
Risks, to get 1BTC worth of usd (100k), person has to hold 1.5BTC (150k), if price drops below 120% (80k) than it is liquidated. With huge wick down, the returned usd (20k minus 5%-10% platform fee) can be 16k as sold amount might be filled at 70k. So you start with 150k, after liquidation at best case you end with 100k+18to19k.
You need to have lot of liquidity for this system, own stable coin might be bad idea. Can get more users if collateral can be 200%+ and liquidation at 120%. If can set up so that one people lend USDT and USDC, others put collateral as BTC, this can increase stable coins amount on ICP a lot.
Thank you very much for your comments and interest — I’m also collaborating on the project.
Your thoughts are perfectly reasonable; the idea is for SUSD to have utility on its own. Here are some examples of how you could benefit:
Create a pool with the ckBTC / SUSD pair — when SUSD is below market value, you could buy more SUSD with ckBTC and then use that SUSD to purchase Bitcoin from the DAO.
Create a USDT / SUSD pool — if SUSD loses its peg to USDT, for example, you could buy 12 SUSD with 10 USDT and then use those 12 SUSD to buy Bitcoin directly from the DAO. (The DAO could have a BTC reserve specifically for purchases with SUSD.)
Repay liquidated positions from other users — by doing so, you’d instantly earn a percentage in BTC as a reward for covering their debt.
If the project is launched through a DAO, the treasury could be used to hold reserves in BTC / ckBTC / SUSD / ckUSDT to serve as arbitrage incentives.
The key is that each SUSD will be over-collateralized with BTC, and you’ll always be able to buy SUSD directly from the DAO.
Additionally, SUSD will have intrinsic value, since it will be the key to accessing BTC from liquidated positions.
Really interested in what you’re building. You’ve explained the liquidation mechanics well, but I have some concerns about practical execution.
You mentioned creating SUSD pools and using DAO reserves for arbitrage. Can you get more specific about the bootstrap? Are you seeding initial liquidity pools with treasury funds? What’s the minimum liquidity target before mainnet launch? Which DEXs are you targeting first?
Why would someone mint SUSD instead of just using existing stablecoins like USDT or USDC for their USD liquidity needs? What’s the compelling advantage that justifies the complexity and risk of your collateralized system?
You explained the liquidation system, but what happens during extreme BTC volatility? May 2022 saw 50%+ drops in days. Have you modeled how your system performs when liquidations cascade during major market crashes?
You mentioned ICP’s Exchange Rate Canister for pricing. What’s your backup plan if that fails or gets manipulated during crucial liquidation events?
What’s your honest assessment of failure modes? Every DeFi protocol has ways it can break. I want to hear you acknowledge the risks rather than just pitch the upside.
We’re building Syron in a modular way, so it’s possible to separate the BTC collateral logic from the actual stablecoin. And yes, using ckUSDC or ckUSDT could have liquidity advantages… so we’re thinking of something like “Syron ckUSDT” for the global hackathon — wdyt? For this first proof of concept, a new dollar like SUSD has been the most straightforward implementation, but we’re keen to explore alternatives that could bring us closer to a Buy Now Pay Later system for Latam (where I believe we could work toward product-market fit).
Regarding liquidations, the current model lets any user liquidate another account that falls below the 120% over-collateralization threshold. So the DAO could have a way to automate liquidations by treating that debt as a kind of “sovereign”/DAO-held debt and accruing the profits in BTC. Then that bitcoin would need to be made available for users to buy with their stablecoin. This could create an interesting loop, but it’s mostly theoretical at this point. And you’re right about the liquidity and BTC price constraints.
About the Exchange Rate Canister — potential vulnerabilities aren’t within our current scope of work, but we consider it safe enough for now given that it’s an official Dfinity canister. That said, we’ll definitely need to assess this more deeply before moving to production.
The main idea behind Syron is bootstrapping idle BTC liquidity — so instead of just holding bitcoin, we can have a decentralized way to retain control over it while leveraging it for extra liquidity, whether in SUSD or other assets.
