Different Token Release Schedules

Kajetan Olas

15 Mar 2024
Different Token Release Schedules

As simple as it may sound, the decision on the release schedule of tokens is anything but that. It's a strategic choice that can have significant consequences. A well-thought-out token release schedule can prevent market flooding, encourage steady growth, and foster trust in the project. Conversely, a poorly designed schedule may lead to rapid devaluation or loss of investor confidence.

In this article, we will explore the various token release schedules that blockchain projects may adopt. Each type comes with its own set of characteristics, challenges, and strategic benefits. From the straightforwardness of linear schedules to the incentive-driven dynamic releases, understanding these mechanisms is crucial for all crypto founders.

Linear Token Release Schedule

The linear token release schedule is perhaps the most straightforward approach to token distribution. As the name suggests, tokens are released at a constant rate over a specified period until all tokens are fully vested. This approach is favored for its simplicity and ease of understanding, which can be an attractive feature for investors and project teams alike.


  • Predictability: The linear model provides a clear and predictable schedule that stakeholders can rely on. This transparency is often appreciated as it removes any uncertainty regarding when tokens will be available.
  • Implementation Simplicity: With no complex rules or conditions, a linear release schedule is relatively easy to implement and manage. It avoids the need for intricate smart contract programming or ongoing adjustments.
  • Neutral Incentives: There is no explicit incentive for early investment or late participation. Each stakeholder is treated equally, regardless of when they enter the project. This can be perceived as a fair distribution method, as it does not disproportionately reward any particular group.


  • Capital Dilution Risk: Since tokens are released continuously at the same rate, there's a potential risk that the influx of new tokens into the market could dilute the value, particularly if demand doesn't keep pace with the supply.
  • Attracting Continuous Capital Inflow: A linear schedule may face challenges in attracting new investors over time. Without the incentive of increasing rewards or scarcity over time, sustaining investor interest solely based on project performance can be a test of the project's inherent value and market demand.
  • Neutral Impact on Project Commitment: The lack of timing-based incentives means that commitment to the project may not be influenced by the release schedule. The focus is instead placed on the project's progress and delivery on its roadmap.

In summary, a linear token release schedule offers a no-frills, equal-footing approach to token distribution. While its simplicity is a strength, it can also be a limitation, lacking the strategic incentives that other models offer. In the next sections, we will compare this to other, more dynamic schedules that aim to provide additional strategic advantages.

Growing Token Release Schedule

A growing token release schedule turns the dial up on token distribution as time progresses. This schedule is designed to increase the number of tokens released to the market or to stakeholders with each passing period. This approach can often be associated with incentivizing the sustained growth of the project by rewarding long-term holders.


  • Incentivized Patience: A growing token release schedule encourages stakeholders to remain invested in the project for longer periods, as the reward increases over time. This can be particularly appealing to long-term investors who are looking to maximize their gains.
  • Community Reaction: Such a schedule may draw criticism from those who prefer immediate, high rewards and may be viewed as unfairly penalizing early adopters who receive fewer tokens compared to those who join later. The challenge is to balance the narrative to maintain community support.
  • Delayed Advantage: There is a delayed gratification aspect to this schedule. Early investors might not see an immediate substantial benefit, but they are part of a strategy that aims to increase value over time, aligning with the project’s growth.


  • Sustained Capital Inflow: By offering higher rewards later, a project can potentially sustain and even increase its capital inflow as the project matures. This can be especially useful in supporting long-term development and operational goals.
  • Potential for Late-Stage Interest: As the reward for holding tokens grows over time, it may attract new investors down the line, drawn by the prospect of higher yields. This can help to maintain a steady interest in the project throughout its lifecycle.
  • Balancing Perception and Reality: Managing the community's expectations is vital. The notion that early participants are at a disadvantage must be addressed through clear communication about the long-term vision and benefits.

In contrast to a linear schedule, a growing token release schedule adds a strategic twist that favors the longevity of stakeholder engagement. It's a model that can create a solid foundation for future growth but requires careful communication and management to keep stakeholders satisfied. Up next, we will look at the shrinking token release schedule, which applies an opposite approach to distribution.

Shrinking Token Release Schedule

The shrinking token release schedule is characterized by a decrease in the number of tokens released as time goes on. This type of schedule is intended to create a sense of urgency and reward early participants with higher initial payouts.


  • Early Bird Incentives: The shrinking schedule is crafted to reward the earliest adopters the most, offering them a larger share of tokens initially. This creates a compelling case for getting involved early in the project's lifecycle.
  • Fear of Missing Out (FOMO): This approach capitalizes on the FOMO effect, incentivizing potential investors to buy in early to maximize their rewards before the release rate decreases.
  • Decreased Inflation Over Time: As fewer tokens are released into circulation later on, the potential inflationary pressure on the token's value is reduced. This can be an attractive feature for investors concerned about long-term value erosion.


  • Stimulating Early Adoption: By offering more tokens earlier, projects may see a surge in initial capital inflow, providing the necessary funds to kickstart development and fuel early-stage growth.
  • Risk of Decreased Late-Stage Incentives: As the reward diminishes over time, there's a risk that new investors may be less inclined to participate, potentially impacting the project's ability to attract capital in its later stages.
  • Market Perception and Price Dynamics: The market must understand that the shrinking release rate is a deliberate strategy to encourage early investment and sustain the token's value over time. However, this can lead to challenges in maintaining interest as the release rate slows, requiring additional value propositions.

A shrinking token release schedule offers an interesting dynamic for projects seeking to capitalize on early market excitement. While it can generate significant early support, the challenge lies in maintaining momentum as the reward potential decreases. This necessitates a robust project foundation and continued delivery of milestones to retain stakeholder interest.

Dynamic Token Release Schedule

A dynamic token release schedule represents a flexible and adaptive approach to token distribution. Unlike static models, this schedule can adjust the rate of token release based on specific criteria. Example criteria are: project’s milestones, market conditions, or the behavior of token holders. This responsiveness is designed to offer a balanced strategy that can react to the project's needs in real-time.


  • Adaptability: The most significant advantage of a dynamic schedule is its ability to adapt to changing circumstances. This can include varying the release rate to match market demand, project development stages, or other critical factors.
  • Risk Management: By adjusting the flow of tokens in response to market conditions, a dynamic schedule can help mitigate certain risks. For example: inflation, token price volatility, and the impact of market manipulation.
  • Stakeholder Alignment: This schedule can be structured to align incentives with the project's goals. This means rewarding behaviors that contribute to project's longevity, such as holding tokens for certain periods or participating in governance.


  • Balancing Supply and Demand: A dynamic token release can fine-tune the supply to match demand, aiming to stabilize the token price. This can be particularly effective in avoiding the boom-and-bust cycles that plague many cryptocurrency projects.
  • Investor Engagement: The flexibility of a dynamic schedule keeps investors engaged, as the potential for reward can change in line with project milestones and success markers, maintaining a sense of involvement and investment in the project’s progression.
  • Complexity and Communication: The intricate nature of a dynamic schedule requires clear and transparent communication with stakeholders to ensure understanding of the system. The complexity also demands robust technical implementation to execute the varying release strategies effectively.

Dynamic token release schedule is a sophisticated tool that, when used judiciously, offers great flexibility in navigating unpredictable crypto markets. It requires a careful balance of anticipation, reaction, and communication but also gives opportunity to foster project’s growth.


A linear token release schedule is the epitome of simplicity and fairness, offering a steady and predictable path. The growing schedule promotes long-term investment and project loyalty, potentially leading to sustained growth. In contrast, the shrinking schedule seeks to capitalize on the enthusiasm of early adopters, fostering a vibrant initial ecosystem. Lastly, the dynamic schedule stands out for its intelligent adaptability, aiming to strike a balance between various stakeholder interests and market forces.

The choice of token release schedule should not be made in isolation; it must consider the project's goals, the nature of its community, the volatility of the market, and the overarching vision of the creators.


What are the different token release schedules?

  • Linear, growing, shrinking, and dynamic schedules.

How does a linear token release schedule work?

  • Releases tokens at a constant rate over a specified period.

What is the goal of a shrinking token release schedule?

  • Rewards early adopters with more tokens and decreases over time.

Most viewed

Never miss a story

Stay updated about Nextrope news as it happens.

You are subscribed

Token Engineering Process

Kajetan Olas

13 Apr 2024
Token Engineering Process

Token Engineering is an emerging field that addresses the systematic design and engineering of blockchain-based tokens. It applies rigorous mathematical methods from the Complex Systems Engineering discipline to tokenomics design.

In this article, we will walk through the Token Engineering Process and break it down into three key stages. Discovery Phase, Design Phase, and Deployment Phase.

Discovery Phase of Token Engineering Process

The first stage of the token engineering process is the Discovery Phase. It focuses on constructing high-level business plans, defining objectives, and identifying problems to be solved. That phase is also the time when token engineers first define key stakeholders in the project.

Defining the Problem

This may seem counterintuitive. Why would we start with the problem when designing tokenomics? Shouldn’t we start with more down-to-earth matters like token supply? The answer is No. Tokens are a medium for creating and exchanging value within a project’s ecosystem. Since crypto projects draw their value from solving problems that can’t be solved through TradFi mechanisms, their tokenomics should reflect that. 

The industry standard, developed by McKinsey & Co. and adapted to token engineering purposes by Outlier Ventures, is structuring the problem through a logic tree, following MECE.
MECE stands for Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive. Mutually Exclusive means that problems in the tree should not overlap. Collectively Exhaustive means that the tree should cover all issues.

In practice, the “Problem” should be replaced by a whole problem statement worksheet. The same will hold for some of the boxes.
A commonly used tool for designing these kinds of diagrams is the Miro whiteboard.

Identifying Stakeholders and Value Flows in Token Engineering

This part is about identifying all relevant actors in the ecosystem and how value flows between them. To illustrate what we mean let’s consider an example of NFT marketplace. In its case, relevant actors might be sellers, buyers, NFT creators, and a marketplace owner. Possible value flow when conducting a transaction might be: buyer gets rid of his tokens, seller gets some of them, marketplace owner gets some of them as fees, and NFT creators get some of them as royalties.

Incentive Mechanisms Canvas

The last part of what we consider to be in the Discovery Phase is filling the Incentive Mechanisms Canvas. After successfully identifying value flows in the previous stage, token engineers search for frictions to desired behaviors and point out the undesired behaviors. For example, friction to activity on an NFT marketplace might be respecting royalty fees by marketplace owners since it reduces value flowing to the seller.

source: https://www.canva.com/design/DAFDTNKsIJs/8Ky9EoJJI7p98qKLIu2XNw/view#7

Design Phase of Token Engineering Process

The second stage of the Token Engineering Process is the Design Phase in which you make use of high-level descriptions from the previous step to come up with a specific design of the project. This will include everything that can be usually found in crypto whitepapers (e.g. governance mechanisms, incentive mechanisms, token supply, etc). After finishing the design, token engineers should represent the whole value flow and transactional logic on detailed visual diagrams. These diagrams will be a basis for creating mathematical models in the Deployment Phase. 

Token Engineering Artonomous Design Diagram
Artonomous design diagram, source: Artonomous GitHub

Objective Function

Every crypto project has some objective. The objective can consist of many goals, such as decentralization or token price. The objective function is a mathematical function assigning weights to different factors that influence the main objective in the order of their importance. This function will be a reference for machine learning algorithms in the next steps. They will try to find quantitative parameters (e.g. network fees) that maximize the output of this function.
Modified Metcalfe’s Law can serve as an inspiration during that step. It’s a framework for valuing crypto projects, but we believe that after adjustments it can also be used in this context.

Deployment Phase of Token Engineering Process

The Deployment Phase is final, but also the most demanding step in the process. It involves the implementation of machine learning algorithms that test our assumptions and optimize quantitative parameters. Token Engineering draws from Nassim Taleb’s concept of Antifragility and extensively uses feedback loops to make a system that gains from arising shocks.

Agent-based Modelling 

In agent-based modeling, we describe a set of behaviors and goals displayed by each agent participating in the system (this is why previous steps focused so much on describing stakeholders). Each agent is controlled by an autonomous AI and continuously optimizes his strategy. He learns from his experience and can mimic the behavior of other agents if he finds it effective (Reinforced Learning). This approach allows for mimicking real users, who adapt their strategies with time. An example adaptive agent would be a cryptocurrency trader, who changes his trading strategy in response to experiencing a loss of money.

Monte Carlo Simulations

Token Engineers use the Monte Carlo method to simulate the consequences of various possible interactions while taking into account the probability of their occurrence. By running a large number of simulations it’s possible to stress-test the project in multiple scenarios and identify emergent risks.

Testnet Deployment

If possible, it's highly beneficial for projects to extend the testing phase even further by letting real users use the network. Idea is the same as in agent-based testing - continuous optimization based on provided metrics. Furthermore, in case the project considers airdropping its tokens, giving them to early users is a great strategy. Even though part of the activity will be disingenuine and airdrop-oriented, such strategy still works better than most.

Time Duration

Token engineering process may take from as little as 2 weeks to as much as 5 months. It depends on the project category (Layer 1 protocol will require more time, than a simple DApp), and security requirements. For example, a bank issuing its digital token will have a very low risk tolerance.

Required Skills for Token Engineering

Token engineering is a multidisciplinary field and requires a great amount of specialized knowledge. Key knowledge areas are:

  • Systems Engineering
  • Machine Learning
  • Market Research
  • Capital Markets
  • Current trends in Web3
  • Blockchain Engineering
  • Statistics


The token engineering process consists of 3 steps: Discovery Phase, Design Phase, and Deployment Phase. It’s utilized mostly by established blockchain projects, and financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund. Even though it’s a very resource-consuming process, we believe it’s worth it. Projects that went through scrupulous design and testing before launch are much more likely to receive VC funding and be in the 10% of crypto projects that survive the bear market. Going through that process also has a symbolic meaning - it shows that the project is long-term oriented.

If you're looking to create a robust tokenomics model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure your project’s resilience in the long term.


What does token engineering process look like?

  • Token engineering process is conducted in a 3-step methodical fashion. This includes Discovery Phase, Design Phase, and Deployment Phase. Each of these stages should be tailored to the specific needs of a project.

Is token engineering meant only for big projects?

  • We recommend that even small projects go through a simplified design and optimization process. This increases community's trust and makes sure that the tokenomics doesn't have any obvious flaws.

How long does the token engineering process take?

  • It depends on the project and may range from 2 weeks to 5 months.

What is Berachain? 🐻 ⛓️ + Proof-of-Liquidity Explained


18 Mar 2024
What is Berachain? 🐻 ⛓️ + Proof-of-Liquidity Explained

Enter Berachain: a high-performance, EVM-compatible blockchain that is set to redefine the landscape of decentralized applications (dApps) and blockchain services. Built on the innovative Proof-of-Liquidity consensus and leveraging the robust Polaris framework alongside the CometBFT consensus engine, Berachain is poised to offer an unprecedented blend of efficiency, security, and user-centric benefits. Let's dive into what makes it a groundbreaking development in the blockchain ecosystem.

What is Berachain?


Berachain is an EVM-compatible Layer 1 (L1) blockchain that stands out through its adoption of the Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) consensus mechanism. Designed to address the critical challenges faced by decentralized networks. It introduces a cutting-edge approach to blockchain governance and operations.

Key Features

  • High-performance Capabilities. Berachain is engineered for speed and scalability, catering to the growing demand for efficient blockchain solutions.
  • EVM Compatibility. It supports all Ethereum tooling, operations, and smart contract languages, making it a seamless transition for developers and projects from the Ethereum ecosystem.
  • Proof-of-Liquidity.This novel consensus mechanism focuses on building liquidity, decentralizing stake, and aligning the interests of validators and protocol developers.


EVM-Compatible vs EVM-Equivalent


EVM compatibility means a blockchain can interact with Ethereum's ecosystem to some extent. It can interact supporting its smart contracts and tools but not replicating the entire EVM environment.


An EVM-equivalent blockchain, on the other hand, aims to fully replicate Ethereum's environment. It ensures complete compatibility and a smooth transition for developers and users alike.

Berachain's Position

Berachain can be considered an "EVM-equivalent-plus" blockchain. It supports all Ethereum operations, tooling, and additional functionalities that optimize for its unique Proof-of-Liquidity and abstracted use cases.

Berachain Modular First Approach

At the heart of Berachain's development philosophy is the Polaris EVM framework. It's a testament to the blockchain's commitment to modularity and flexibility. This approach allows for the easy separation of the EVM runtime layer, ensuring that Berachain can adapt and evolve without compromising on performance or security.

Proof Of Liquidity Overview

High-Level Model Objectives

  • Systemically Build Liquidity. By enhancing trading efficiency, price stability, and network growth, Berachain aims to foster a thriving ecosystem of decentralized applications.
  • Solve Stake Centralization. The PoL consensus works to distribute stake more evenly across the network, preventing monopolization and ensuring a decentralized, secure blockchain.
  • Align Protocols and Validators. Berachain encourages a symbiotic relationship between validators and the broader protocol ecosystem.

Proof-of-Liquidity vs Proof-of-Stake

Unlike traditional Proof of Stake (PoS), which often leads to stake centralization and reduced liquidity, Proof of Liquidity (PoL) introduces mechanisms to incentivize liquidity provision and ensure a fairer, more decentralized network. Berachain separates the governance token (BGT) from the chain's gas token (BERA) and incentives liquidity through BEX pools. Berachain's PoL aims to overcome the limitations of PoS, fostering a more secure and user-centric blockchain.

Berachain EVM and Modular Approach

Polaris EVM

Polaris EVM is the cornerstone of Berachain's EVM compatibility, offering developers an enhanced environment for smart contract execution that includes stateful precompiles and custom modules. This framework ensures that Berachain not only meets but exceeds the capabilities of the traditional Ethereum Virtual Machine.


The CometBFT consensus engine underpins Berachain's network, providing a secure and efficient mechanism for transaction verification and block production. By leveraging the principles of Byzantine fault tolerance (BFT), CometBFT ensures the integrity and resilience of the Berachain blockchain.


Berachain represents a significant leap forward in blockchain technology, combining the best of Ethereum's ecosystem with innovative consensus mechanisms and a modular development approach. As the blockchain landscape continues to evolve, Berachain stands out as a promising platform for developers, users, and validators alike, offering a scalable, efficient, and inclusive environment for decentralized applications and services.


For those interested in exploring further, a wealth of resources is available, including the Berachain documentation, GitHub repository, and community forums. It offers a compelling vision for the future of blockchain technology, marked by efficiency, security, and community-driven innovation.


How is Berachain different?

  • It integrates Proof-of-Liquidity to address stake centralization and enhance liquidity, setting it apart from other blockchains.

Is Berachain EVM-compatible?

  • Yes, it supports Ethereum's tooling and smart contract languages, facilitating easy migration of dApps.

Can it handle high transaction volumes?

  • Yes, thanks to the Polaris framework and CometBFT consensus engine, it's built for scalability and high throughput.