Product Researches Initiatives - Grants

Which Proposals got funded?

• RFP09 - Tokenfrastructure - ADA 76,000
• RFP02/05 - ELK Consortium - ADA 110,000
• RFP05 - UNDP AltFinLab - ADA 41,400
• RFP04 - Wada Global - ADA 22,500
• RFP05 - PRISMA - ADA 58,000
• RFP05 - ASISA - ADA 32,500
• RFP07 - NexTrium - ADA 25,000

See full report here

CPC-prod-research-public-report.md

31KB

Open

---

Grants Key Dates

1. Submission and clarification window opens on Wednesday, 20th May 2026, 12PM UTC
2. Clarification window closes on Wednesday, 27th May 2026
3. Submission window closes on Wednesday, 3rd June 2026, 12PM UTC
4. Results will be shared on Wednesday, 10th June 2026

---

Depending on the amount and quality of applications following submission windows might be opened after this one

Application info & How to apply

• Proposers can apply to any of the open research initiatives

  • If they believe it appropriate they can also propose to combine multiple research initiatives in one (however if a proposer simply wants to apply to multiple research initiatives applications should be sent separately)
• To apply the proposer should send an email to [e-mail] with:

  • Subject: Product Research Grants - [related RFP number] (e.g. Product Research Grants - RFP8)
  • Please include the following information in the body of your submission email:

    • Proposer / organization name
    • Primary contact name and email address
    • RFP number(s) being applied for
    • Proposal title
    • Confirmation of whether the proposal is for a single research initiative or combines multiple research initiatives
    • Confirmation that the attached PDF includes all required information listed in Appendix A of the RFP details
    • Declaration of any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest, or confirmation that there are none
  • PDF attachment containing all the information required in Point 22 - Appendix A of the RFP details

Overall budget

These 9 RFPs have an overall budget of ADA 373,000.

There is no specific budget assigned to each of the 9 RFPs, so proposers, based on the scope, can define an adequate budget, considering also that "Cost Efficiency" it's a key criteria of evaluation.

Introduction

The Cardano Product Committee (CPC) is the Intersect committee responsible for shaping Cardano's product direction and informing its long-term strategy. As part of the 2025 budget approved by Cardano DReps, the CPC has been allocated approximately 380,000 ADA to commission a portfolio of product research initiatives that will help answer the most important open questions about Cardano's adoption, positioning, and ecosystem development.

The first phase of this work focused on identifying and prioritising those questions, resulting in the nine research areas described below. Each one is designed to close a specific evidence gap and enable a concrete product or adoption decision. They are not academic exercises: each initiative is expected to produce findings that lead directly to action, whether that is a pilot programme, a funding mechanism, a partner engagement, or a shift in strategic direction.

Each of the nine areas will shortly be published as an open Request for Proposals (RFP), inviting qualified researchers, consultants, and teams from across the Cardano community and beyond to submit bids. Proposals will be evaluated and awarded by the CPC through a transparent process. This page provides a preview of the nine initiatives and what each is designed to deliver.

Research Initiatives

RFP 01: Customer Segmentation & Profiling

RFP 01: Customer Segmentation and Profiling

This initiative seeks to establish who Cardano's target customers are, what each segment values, and what it takes for each to choose Cardano over a competing L1. It should also look beyond the current crypto-native audience: the work should include hypothesis-driven demand discovery in adjacent sectors and verticals where blockchain solves a genuine problem, not just among existing Cardano users.

Key questions:

• Who are Cardano's named customer segments and what is each segment's job-to-be-done?
• What value proposition does each segment require to choose Cardano over a peer L1?
• Which segments should be prioritised for activation first, through which channels and partners?
• Which customer segments exist outside the current crypto-native audience, and what vertical-specific entry points would make Cardano relevant to them?

Decision outputs:

• Validated segment map with population estimates and sizing assumptions
• Persona briefs per segment: job-to-be-done, decision criteria, current alternatives, and switching conditions
• Segment-specific value proposition tests and activation logic per segment
• Segment x vertical x channel matrix: whether each segment is best reached through direct adoption, distribution partners, liquidity providers, or retail and community activation
• Reusable segmentation framework the CPC can run on a 12-18 month cadence

RFP 02: Use-Case Landscape & Competitive Positioning

RFP 02: Use Case Landscape and Competitive Positioning

This initiative maps where Cardano's use cases actually stand today and where Cardano wins and loses against peer blockchains at the product and operator level. Both questions are answered together because combining them allows the same operator interviews to produce both the use-case audit and the competitive benchmark. The goal is to identify where Cardano has a genuine and defensible advantage, where it is wasting effort, and where it should invest more aggressively. The output is a defensible basis for vertical investment decisions over the next 24 months.

Key questions:

• Which Cardano use cases are live and growing, flat, dormant, or failed, with operator-level attribution?
• Where does Cardano win and lose vs. Solana, Ethereum L2s, and other competitors, and what is the operator-attributed reason in each case?
• Which verticals (RWA, humanitarian, IoT, digital product passports, stablecoin infrastructure) have the strongest product-market fit signal for priority investment?
• Which verticals represent defensible Cardano advantages, and which should be deprioritised because Cardano lacks a credible edge or meaningful market pull?

Decision outputs:

• Use-case map classified by status with on-chain signal and operator attribution
• Competitive benchmark: Cardano vs. peer L1s per named vertical, scored against a repeatable rubric
• Win/loss register of at least 15 named operator decisions with attributed reasons
• Vertical wedge analysis: where Cardano should attack, where it should partner, where it should wait, and where it should stop competing
• Differentiation strategy: where Cardano credibly wins and where it must invest to compete

RFP 03: Stablecoin Liquidity Incentive & Activation Strategy

RFP 03: Stablecoin Liquidity Incentive and Activation Strategy

Cardano has a growing stablecoin stack, including USDC, USDM, USDA, DJED, and iUSD. Across all of them, liquidity depth is thin and slippage at meaningful trade sizes remains a barrier for DeFi users, enterprise settlement, and payments in emerging markets. The question is not whether Cardano needs more liquidity; that is already clear. The question is what the ecosystem should actually pay for, in which venues (DeFi pools, centralised exchange order books, market-maker arrangements), and how to ensure that any incentive produces durable depth rather than short-term capital that exits as soon as rewards stop.

Key questions:

• What stablecoin liquidity depth is required for priority Cardano use cases (DeFi, enterprise settlement, emerging-market payments, RWA), and where is that depth missing today across major assets and venues?
• Are the main bottlenecks in on-chain pool design, centralised exchange access, market-maker participation, or insufficient demand, and does the answer differ by asset?
• What incentive model should Cardano use: TVL targets, slippage reduction at defined trade sizes, quoted spread availability, transaction volume, or outcome-based milestones, and which model is least gameable?
• Which liquidity interventions are most likely to produce sustained usage rather than short-term inflows that exit once incentives stop?
• What 6, 12, and 24-month roadmap would create measurable and verifiable depth, with clear budgets, KPIs, and monitoring methodology?

Decision outputs:

• Stablecoin liquidity baseline across major assets, pools, and venues, with slippage and depth benchmarks against peer ecosystems
• DeFi vs centralised exchange vs market-maker gap analysis: which constraints are on-chain problems, which require commercial deals, and which require demand-side work
• Incentive model comparison with cost estimates, risk of gaming, and a recommended KPI the committee should pay for
• Liquidity incentive scorecard: recommended incentive type by venue, with target KPI, risk of mercenary behaviour, monitoring method, and funding trigger
• Demand-side validation: which user segments and use cases actually require stablecoin liquidity at what depth and in which venue
• Implementation roadmap: 6, 12, and 24-month depth targets, budget scenarios, candidate activation pathways, minimum KPI thresholds, and anti-gaming safeguards
• Decision memo: what the Product Committee should fund next and on what conditions

RFP 04: Brand Awareness & Perception

RFP 04: Brand Awareness and Perception

Cardano lacks a clear baseline on how different external audiences evaluate it as a place to build, invest, partner, or deploy capital. Enterprise buyers, developers, analysts, investors, institutions, and retail users do not evaluate a blockchain the same way, and generic sentiment measurement will not produce useful positioning decisions. This initiative goes beyond awareness and sentiment to identify the specific evaluation mechanisms each audience uses: what claims they find credible, what evidence they require before taking Cardano seriously, and what objections are blocking engagement. The output is a positioning playbook grounded in how each audience actually makes decisions, not in how Cardano describes itself.

Key questions:

• What is awareness and perception of Cardano vs. Solana, Ethereum L2s, and other competitors across enterprise, developer, analyst, institutional, and general audiences?
• Where is the gap between Cardano's own narrative and how external audiences actually perceive it?
• What evidence does each audience segment require before considering Cardano credible as a place to build, invest, or deploy?
• Which messages, use-case framings, and brand partnerships would most credibly shift perception in each target segment?

Decision outputs:

• Perception baseline: awareness and sentiment scores per audience and per named peer chain
• Audience evaluation map: decision criteria, trust signals, objections, and evidence requirements per audience segment
• Positioning gap analysis: where Cardano's narrative diverges from external perception
• Positioning playbook: recommended messages per segment, use-case framings to lead with, and brand associations to pursue or avoid

RFP 05: Government & Emerging Markets Entry Strategy

RFP 05: Government and Emerging Markets Entry Strategy

LATAM, Africa, and East Asia each require different entry conditions: different use cases, different partner types, different regulatory dependencies, and in several markets a functional stablecoin layer as a prerequisite for any payment or settlement application. The strategic question is how to sequence these markets and what each regional playbook actually requires. Rather than treating emerging markets as generic geographies, this initiative should identify vertical-specific entry plays where Cardano can coordinate multiple ecosystem actors around a concrete use case, such as agriculture, microfinance, payments, identity, or supply-chain verification.

Key questions:

• Which regions and use cases should be prioritised first, based on regulatory readiness, infrastructure fit, and realistic counterparty access?
• What does the regulatory landscape look like per priority region, and which government, humanitarian, and multilateral counterparties are reachable on a 12-24 month horizon?
• What does each regional playbook require: entry use case, partner archetype, regulatory dependencies, and realistic milestones?

Decision outputs:

• Market prioritisation matrix: regions by candidate use cases, maturity, and sequencing rationale
• Vertical-led regional entry map: priority region x use case x partner archetype x ecosystem actors required to execute
• Regional strategy playbooks: one per priority region with named entry use case, partner archetype, regulatory dependencies, and milestones
• Regulatory landscape summaries per priority region
• Research-to-action pathway: recommended next-step pilots, incentive mechanisms, or partner actions per region, distinguishing cosmetic activity (event attendance, letters of intent) from measurable adoption (signed pilots, on-chain transactions, recurring usage)

RFP 06: Enterprise & RWA Readiness Assessment

RFP 06: Enterprise and RWA Readiness Assessment

Cardano now has infrastructure relevant to enterprise and regulated industries, including privacy and compliance capabilities and live tokenisation deployments. The strategic question is whether the surrounding conditions for production-scale deployment are in place: maintenance SLAs, per-jurisdiction compliance documentation, and a delivery partner channel capable of executing. This initiative produces a structured readiness assessment, identifies the gaps that need to close for early-stage deals to reach production, and evaluates which enterprise verticals have the ROI and scalable demand to justify that path.

Key questions:

• What is Cardano's readiness score across SLA commitments, compliance documentation, and partner onboarding capability, and where are the most blocking gaps?
• Which enterprise and RWA verticals have credible ROI, scalable demand, and realistic production pathways rather than isolated proof-of-concept potential?
• What specifically needs to be resolved for enterprise pilots to convert from proof-of-concept to production?

Decision outputs:

• Enterprise readiness scorecard across technical, commercial, and compliance dimensions
• Vertical prioritisation for RWA: ranked shortlist with rationale and evidence basis
• Production conversion framework: required buyer ROI, compliance readiness, delivery capacity, and on-chain usage potential per vertical
• Gap closure plan: specific dependencies and sequencing to move from early pilots to production
• Research-to-action pathway: recommended next-step pilots, partner engagements, or compliance investments, with impact tiers from proof-of-concept through to recurring on-chain transactions and durable value locked

RFP 07: L2 Adoption & Interoperability Demand Study

RFP 07: L2 Adoption and Interoperability Demand Study

Several applications are being held back pending the availability of Layer 2 infrastructure on Cardano, which confirms that demand exists. What has not been studied is what specifically is blocking deployment and what interoperability features operators and builders actually need, as opposed to what the technical roadmap assumes. This initiative also addresses a subtler question: interoperability can create value, but it can also enable value to flow out of the ecosystem rather than into it. The research should distinguish between pathways that bring net-new users and activity to Cardano and those that primarily create dependency on larger or more liquid ecosystems.

Key questions:

• What technical and commercial barriers are stalling L2 deployment, and what would unlock the most immediate value?
• Which applications and use cases are waiting for L2 availability, and at what scale?
• What interoperability features are operators and builders requesting most, and what is preventing bridge and partnership solutions from prioritising Cardano?
• Which interoperability pathways would bring net-new value into Cardano versus primarily enabling value leakage or dependency on stronger ecosystems?

Decision outputs:

• L2 barrier analysis: technical, commercial, and ecosystem gaps ranked by impact
• Demand map: applications and use cases waiting on L2, with scale estimates and priority scoring
• Interoperability value-flow assessment: source, sink, or mutual-value classification for priority bridge, partner-chain, and cross-chain opportunities
• Interoperability requirements register: features requested, frequency, and blocking status
• Investment sequencing recommendation based on where validated demand sits and where value flows benefit the Cardano ecosystem

RFP 08: Enterprise Delivery Partner Network

RFP 08: Enterprise Delivery Partner Network

One of the most consistently cited barriers to enterprise adoption of Cardano is the absence of a certified channel of system integrators capable of delivering solutions for external clients. A small number of firms globally have the depth to do this work, most are concentrated in Europe, and coverage in North America, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East is limited. This initiative defines what a certified partner network should look like and benchmarks delivery-partner models from peer ecosystems, including co-funded implementation structures where the cost is shared between the target enterprise and the network, to adapt proven approaches rather than build from scratch.

Key questions:

• What does the global system integrator and delivery partner landscape capable of delivering Cardano solutions look like today, by firm, capability, sector, and geography?
• What certification framework and go-to-market model would credibly attract the 10-50 person delivery teams enterprise procurement requires?
• What delivery-partner and co-funded implementation models from peer ecosystems can Cardano adapt rather than invent from scratch?
• What is preventing larger consultancies from building a Cardano practice, and what intervention would change that?

Decision outputs:

• Partner landscape map: current firms by capability, sector, geography, and enterprise delivery readiness
• Reference model benchmark: relevant peer ecosystem models, including certification structure, co-funding arrangement, implementation pathway, and governance requirements
• Certification framework recommendation: structure, criteria, and governance for a Cardano partner programme
• Go-to-market model: incentives, training pathways, and co-selling arrangements to recruit and retain partner firms
• Gap analysis: priority geographies and sectors where new partner development is most urgent
• Research-to-action pathway: recommended pilot engagements, co-funding structures, and partner recruitment actions, with impact tiers from certified firm through to signed enterprise deployment and recurring on-chain usage

RFP 09: AI Commercial Positioning

RFP 09: AI Commercial Positioning

AI is an active commercial area on Cardano, with enterprise deployments already running. Cardano's technical properties, including formal methods, deterministic transaction processing, and privacy infrastructure, have theoretical fit for AI-agent integrity and auditability. Whether that fit translates into a credible and competitive market position relative to specialised AI blockchains is the question this initiative is designed to answer. The test is not whether Cardano can tell an AI story, but whether AI can become a real adoption vertical with identifiable buyers, delivery partners, revenue pathways, and on-chain activity.

Key questions:

• Where does Cardano's technical fit translate into actual competitive market position vs. specialised AI chains, and where does it not?
• What does the enterprise AI demand pipeline look like, and which sectors are the most credible next targets?
• What would make AI a real Cardano adoption vertical rather than a narrative layer attached to isolated deployments?
• Which narrative options exist for Cardano's AI positioning, which hold up best per audience segment, and what is the go/no-go recommendation for AI as a Cardano strategic vertical?

Decision outputs:

• AI commercial positioning assessment: where Cardano has a credible story and where it does not
• Audience-specific credibility map: which claims land with which stakeholders
• AI adoption pathway: buyer segment, use case, technical requirement, delivery partner, revenue and transaction pathway, and evidence threshold for go/no-go
• Narrative options and stress-tests: positioning statements tested against enterprise, developer, and ecosystem audiences
• Go/no-go recommendation for AI as a Cardano strategic vertical, with conditions attached where the recommendation is conditional
• Research-to-action pathway: recommended next engagements, partner development actions, and pilot structures, with impact tiers from narrative credibility through to signed deployments and sustained on-chain activity

A note on scope

Several topics were considered during the committee's deliberations but were not retained as standalone research areas for this cycle. Developer tooling and experience overlaps with active work already underway. Network economics and fee parameters are being addressed through internal technical workstreams. Governance participation falls primarily within Civics Committee scope. Ecosystem funding mechanisms are partially covered by existing work. Quantum readiness requires separate technical scoping before it can be structured as an open research commission.

The nine areas above represent the strongest portfolio of decision-ready, market-facing research the committee can commission in this cycle. Other topics remain documented and can be brought forward in a future cycle.