Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026
155 DReps voted · 51 with a rationale
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes 592.3M ₳ Rationale
Summary
Yoroi DRep votes YES on “Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026.” This withdrawal represents a defined progression from foundational development toward production-grade readiness with embedded accountability safeguards.
Rationale
• Demonstrated delivery and treasury discipline
The team delivered tangible foundational progress in the prior funding cycle and returned unused funds, signaling responsible stewardship of treasury resources.
• Defined step toward production readiness
The 2026 plan focuses on relay completion, block production capability, and an external security audit, marking a clear progression toward mainnet-grade infrastructure.
• Resilience with governance safeguards
A second interoperable node enhances network resilience, while milestone-based controls and a volatility buffer with refund commitments maintain appropriate treasury protections.
Conclusion
Yoroi supports this structured and accountable continuation toward strengthening Cardano’s infrastructure. With demonstrated delivery in the prior cycle and defined safeguards around treasury usage and production readiness, Yoroi views this proposal as a responsible step forward and supports it.
- Yes 428.5M ₳ Rationale
I will vote YES on “Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026.”
I fully recognize that Cardano is currently in a bearish market environment, and treasury spending must be evaluated with particular caution. However, even under these conditions, I support this proposal because I believe Amaru represents a structural security investment for Cardano.
Amaru is expected to strengthen Cardano’s security from three key perspectives. At present, it is the most promising mechanism to achieve these goals.Strengthening Chain Security Through Node Implementation Diversity
Relying on a single node implementation creates structural risk.
Recent incidents have demonstrated that when the network depends on one implementation, any bug or design flaw can propagate across the entire ecosystem.
Multiple independent implementations provide:
・Removal of single points of failure
・Cross-verification between implementations
・Long-term technical resilience
Amaru introduces meaningful implementation diversity and therefore improves the overall robustness of the chain.Supporting Decentralization by Reducing SPO Burden
Looking ahead to Leios and other scaling upgrades, node requirements are likely to increase. At the same time:
・Staking rewards are gradually decreasing
・There is currently no major project expected to dramatically increase transaction volume
・ADA price remains under pressure
If this trend continues, we may see:
・Smaller SPOs exiting
・Reduced security investment
・Gradual centralization pressure
If Amaru can provide a lighter node implementation with lower hardware requirements, it may help reduce operational burdens for SPOs. This would support continued participation and preserve decentralization — which is itself a core component of network security.Introducing Healthy Competitive Pressure on Development Costs
The Haskell-based node is high quality, but it is also expensive to develop and maintain.
The issue is not that high-quality software costs money — that is expected. The issue is the absence of viable alternatives.
Without alternatives:
・The community faces a binary choice: fund it or halt development
・Cost scrutiny has limited practical leverage
・Long-term fiscal discipline becomes difficult
In 2025, even if parts of the budget seemed excessive, there was effectively no negotiating position because halting node development was not a realistic option.
By enabling a credible alternative implementation, Amaru creates the possibility of:
・Cost comparison
・Scope negotiation
・Long-term cost optimization
・Stronger fiscal discipline
This is not about short-term savings — it is about long-term sustainability.
ーーー
私は「Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026」に YES を投票します。
現在Cardanoは弱気相場にあり、トレジャリー支出はこれまで以上に慎重であるべきだと認識しています。その前提の上で、それでもなお本提案に賛成する理由は、AmaruがCardanoのセキュリティを構造的に強化する投資であると考えるからです。
Amaruは、次の3つの観点からセキュリティ向上に寄与すると期待されます。そして、現時点でこれらを実現する手段として最も有望なのがAmaruであると判断し、YESを投票します。ノード実装の多様化によるチェーンセキュリティの強化
単一のノード実装への依存は、構造的なリスクを伴います。 近年のインシデントからも明らかなように、単一実装にバグや設計上の問題が存在した場合、それはネットワーク全体に波及します。
複数実装の存在は、以下の効果を持ちます。
・単一障害点の排除
・実装間の相互検証
・技術的健全性の長期的担保
Amaruはその多様性を実現する具体的な選択肢であり、チェーンのレジリエンスを高める投資と位置付けられます。SPO負担軽減による分散化の維持・強化
今後Leiosなどの導入により、ノード要件の上昇が見込まれています。 一方で、
・ステーキング報酬は漸減傾向
・トランザクション数の急増は現時点で見込まれていない
・ADA価格は下落傾向
という環境にあります。
この状況が続けば、
・小規模SPOの撤退
・セキュリティ投資の削減
・分散化の低下
といったリスクが生じます。
Amaruがより軽量なノード実装を提供できれば、SPOの参入・維持コストを下げ、分散化を維持する補助線になり得ます。 これは直接的なセキュリティ強化です。開発費に対する健全な競争環境の形成
Haskellベースの現行ノード開発は高品質ですが、高コストであることも事実です。
問題は「高いこと」そのものではなく、代替選択肢が存在しないことです。
代替がなければ、
・開発停止か資金承認かの二択になる
・コスト精査の交渉余地が生まれにくい
・財務規律が働きにくい
2025年においては、たとえ一部に不要と感じる項目があったとしても、開発停止リスクを前に承認せざるを得ない状況でした。
Amaruという実行可能な代替実装が存在すれば、
・価格・スコープの比較が可能になる
・長期的なコスト最適化が期待できる
・持続可能な財務規律が形成される
これは短期の議論ではなく、長期的なエコシステム健全性に関わる問題です。
- Yes 297.4M ₳ Rationale
Summary
EMURGO as a DRep votes YES to fund the continued development and production-readiness of the Amaru node under the Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026, with rationale outlined below.
Rationale
Amaru demonstrated meaningful progress in 2025 across ledger, governance, and testing infrastructure, and returned unused funds to the treasury, reflecting fiscal discipline and responsible budget management. The 2026 roadmap represents a structured transition from foundational engineering to production readiness, including relay completion, block production capability, and completion of an external security audit prior to mainnet confidence.
EMURGO views node diversity as strategically important to reduce reliance on a single client and strengthen Cardano’s long-term resilience. With milestone-based disbursement, formal testing, and defined accountability mechanisms, this proposal reflects a disciplined continuation of previously funded work. For these reasons, EMURGO votes YES.
- Yes 240.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 221.8M ₳ Rationale
TL;DR: EDC votes YES on gov_action19uhuy5uame2s60yrh6n8cyds8ps5q7tkh05dqlzmpcfy429p9w4qq5ll3g0;
Node diversity is a necessary building block for Cardano's resilience. The team has made great progress and demonstrated transparent budget management. Let them cook.
- Yes 174.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 160.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 135.1M ₳ Rationale
The Cardano Foundation votes YES on this treasury withdrawal. Amaru advances Cardano 2030's node diversity goals. The team has a proven delivery record and set a benchmark by returning over 920,000 unspent ada.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
Our support for this proposal is driven by the following key factors:
Strategic Value & Node Diversity: Achieving client diversity is a cornerstone of network resilience and a key pillar of "Our Cardano." Funding the continued development of Amaru, a Rust-based node, provides a vital secondary perspective on the protocol. As noted in their retrospective, their work has already uncovered bugs that could have impacted Mainnet. This alone validates the need for a second-node implementation.
High Standard of Withdrawal Management: The Amaru maintainer committee returned over 920.4K ada in excess funding to the Cardano Treasury at the close of their 2025 budget. In an ecosystem with constraints like the Net Change Limit, voluntarily returning unused funds rather than artificially spending them sets a benchmark for integrity. Furthermore, their use of audited smart contracts and public financial journals ensures a high standard of traceability that all treasury-funded projects should emulate.
Roadmap Adjustments & Execution: We are comfortable with the roadmap adjustments made in 2025 (delaying P2P and mempool work to ensure ledger and consensus stability). The team has demonstrated they can build complex, functional software. We support this funding with the clear expectation that they will deliver the relay node wrap-up in Q1 2026 and achieve block production capabilities by Q2 2026 as outlined.
The Cardano Foundation votes YES. Building an alternative node is an expensive and highly complex endeavor, but it is necessary for Cardano's long-term security and success. The Amaru team has the technical capability to deliver and the financial integrity to manage a budget of this magnitude responsibly.
NOTE on 'Internal Voting':
The fields constitutional and unconstitutional below reflect the CF governance teams' individual opinions whether they are for or against the proposal. Reason for this inconsistency is, that CIP-136 is at the moment only applicable to CC rationales, but we want to record the internal opinions of our DRep assessment transparently as well. - Yes 93.3M ₳ Rationale
As a DRep, I decided to vote YES for the proposal: Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026
My rationale:
The team is well-established and respected within the Cardano community, with a strong track record.
I appreciate the detailed budget breakdown per activity and the comparison of the budget with similar proposals. Further, how the team plans to deal with volatility. I would like every proposal to include this.
In general, node diversity is critical for decentralization and network resilience. When multiple independent teams build node implementations, it reduces reliance on a single entity, such as IOG in the case of Cardano. It minimizes the systemic risks associated with monoculture software development.
IOG may require an extremely high budget for Haskell node development each year. In such a case, there must be an alternative.
One of the core promises of blockchain networks is high availability, including strong resistance to attacks and censorship. While no system can guarantee 100% uptime, having multiple node implementations increases the network's robustness. If a bug or vulnerability is present in one version, others may remain unaffected, limiting potential damage.
Unfortunately, we have experience with such an event. The November 2025 chain split on Cardano demonstrated the systemic risk of relying on a single node implementation. A malformed transaction triggered a validation inconsistency across node versions, resulting in a temporary fork that disrupted exchanges, explorers, and dApps until emergency patches were deployed and operators upgraded.
The incident exposed how monoculture amplifies software risk. When one codebase contains a critical bug, the entire ecosystem is vulnerable. Funding an alternative implementation, such as Amaru, would introduce client diversity, reducing the probability that a single defect could partition the network.
In a multi-implementation environment, an independent codebase can act as a fail-safe reference, improving resilience, accelerating fault detection, and strengthening Cardano's long-term success.
Encouraging additional node implementations also deepens understanding of the protocol. As more developers build and maintain nodes, they contribute to refining the protocol specification, surfacing ambiguities, and improving long-term maintainability. This also supports future clients by setting a clearer and more battle-tested standard.
Node diversity, however, comes with challenges. Divergent implementations can lead to consensus bugs or temporary chain splits if not carefully tested. Coordinated testnets and protocol-level specification clarity are essential to mitigate these risks.
Protocol upgrades may also take longer, as all implementations must integrate and validate changes, such as the upcoming Ouroboros Leios, which both IOG and Amaru nodes will need to support. The Amaru team needs to be well-funded to keep pace with the IOG development.
I appreciate that the team is thinking about integration with StarStream and Midgard.
Maintaining multiple full node implementations is resource-intensive and will likely require long-term support from the Cardano Treasury. However, the cost is justified by the increased decentralization, security, and community participation that such diversity brings.
The Amaru team's funding request is reasonable. The team includes respected developers from within the Cardano ecosystem and is supported by several reputable entities. Their Rust-based node implementation is a serious alternative to IOG's Haskell-based Cardano node.
The Amaru node strengthens decentralization, improves protocol robustness, and represents a healthy evolution of the Cardano network.
- Yes 92.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 89.8M ₳ Rationale
SIPO DRep votes YES on Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026.
I support this proposal because Amaru is a strategically important public-good investment for Cardano: it advances node diversity, strengthens network resilience, and expands the contributor base by providing a high-quality Rust implementation of a Cardano node—without compromising safety and security.
Why SIPO votes YES
1. Reducing single-implementation risk (systemic resilience)
Cardano’s long-term credibility as critical infrastructure depends on minimizing systemic risks. A second, fully interoperable block-producing node meaningfully reduces dependence on a single implementation and improves the network’s ability to withstand defects, operational incidents, and ecosystem bottlenecks.
2. Operational accessibility for SPOs (lower barriers, healthier decentralization)
Amaru’s explicit focus on low hardware requirements, observability, and smoother UX can reduce operational burden and broaden participation. Better operator experience and more diverse deployment environments support decentralization in practice, not just in theory.
3. Security posture and test discipline
I view the proposal’s emphasis on rigorous network-level testing and independent auditing as directionally correct for a component as critical as a block-producing node. Paying for high-assurance engineering and testing is not “nice to have”; it’s what keeps mainnet safe.
4. Ecosystem integration as a path to real adoption
The plan to integrate with key middleware (e.g., indexing / sync / data sources) and to collaborate across stakeholders increases the probability that Amaru becomes operationally useful—not just technically impressive.What SIPO expects as governance guardrails (YES with clear expectations)
My YES vote is based on the assumption that delivery and treasury usage will remain strictly accountable. In particular, I expect the following to be treated as explicit operational commitments:
• Q1 Relay Readiness (clear definition and evidence):
Provide a clear, public “relay-capable” definition and demonstrate it with reproducible evidence (release notes, PR references, test results, and operator-facing documentation).
• Q2 Block-Producing Gate (safety-first):
Publish clear gating criteria for enabling block production, including conservative risk controls and a “do not rush mainnet” posture.
• Independent security audit (scope, timing, and publication plan):
Disclose the audit scope, methodology, and an approach to publishing results responsibly, including a remediation timeline for any critical findings.
• Network-level testing outcomes (measurable results):
Report measurable outcomes from testing efforts: what categories of issues were found, remediation status, and improvements delivered to the broader ecosystem when applicable.
• Contingency / volatility buffer discipline:
The volatility buffer must remain a risk policy, not a discretionary expansion budget. I expect transparent usage criteria, public accounting of any contingency drawdowns, and a clear plan to return unused funds to the Cardano treasury.
• Quarterly reporting (stable format, KPI continuity):
Maintain consistent quarterly reports that include progress against milestones, KPI trends, delays with reasons, and the next quarter’s critical path.Closing
Overall, I consider Amaru’s direction aligned with Cardano’s constitutional values: strengthening security, decentralization, and long-term sustainability. This proposal is not about preference for one implementation over another—it is about building a more resilient and robust Cardano that can scale responsibly.
For these reasons, SIPO DRep votes YES.
⸻
SIPO DRepとして、本提案 「Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026」 に 賛成（YES） を投じます。
SIPOが本提案を支持する理由は、AmaruがCardanoにとって「単なる一実装」ではなく、ノード多様性（node diversity） を軸にした重要な公共財であり、ネットワークの強靭性・安全性・運用参加の裾野を同時に底上げしうるからです。Cardanoが“社会インフラ”として信頼されるためには、研究や設計だけでなく、実運用を支える基盤そのものの分散と成熟が不可欠だと考えています。
SIPOがYESと判断するポイント
1. 単一実装リスクの低減（システミックリスク対策）
ブロック生成ノードが実質的に単一実装へ依存している状態は、長期的にはシステミックリスクになり得ます。Amaruが「完全互換のブロック生成ノード」として実用化されれば、特定実装の不具合や開発ボトルネックがネットワーク全体へ波及するリスクを下げ、Cardanoの基盤信頼を強化できます。
2. SPO運用の現実に効く（参加障壁を下げる）
低ハードウェア要件、観測性（ログ/メトリクス/トレース）、導入体験の改善など、提案が重視している方向性はSPOにとって実務的な価値があります。運用負荷やコストの低下は、結果として分散性の実態（多様な環境・多様な事業者の参加）を後押しします。
3. 安全保障としてのテストと監査（高信頼を買う）
ブロック生成ノードは最重要コンポーネントです。ここに対して、ネットワークレベルのテスト強化や外部監査を前提に置いている点は、方向性として適切だと見ています。高い保証水準のエンジニアリングは「あると良い」ではなく、メインネットを守るための必要条件です。
4. ミドルウェア統合が“実運用”への近道
Amaru単体が進むだけでは採用は広がりません。Kupo/Dolos/Mithril等の統合を含め、周辺インフラへ接続する設計は、実際に使われる確率を高めます。技術的な完成度と同時に、運用導線が整っていくことが重要です。SIPOのYESは「説明責任」とセットです（期待するガードレール）
SIPOの賛成は、成果とトレジャリー運用が明確に説明可能であることを前提にしています。特に以下は、実務上のコミットとして明文化・継続されることを期待します。
• Q1：Relay Readyの定義と証跡
「relay-capable」の要件定義を公開し、再現可能な形で達成を示してほしいです（リリースノート、PR参照、テスト結果、運用手順書など）。
• Q2：ブロック生成の解放ゲート（安全最優先）
ブロック生成の有効化には、保守的なゲート条件とリスク管理の方針を明確にしてほしいです。メインネットでの“拙速”は避けるべきです。
• 外部セキュリティ監査の明確化（範囲・時期・公開方針）
監査範囲、方法、責任ある公開と、重大所見が出た場合の是正スケジュールを示してほしいです。
• ネットワークレベルテストの成果を測定可能に
どんな種類の問題が見つかり、どう修正され、エコシステム全体にどう還元されたかを、測れる形で定期的に示してほしいです。
• ボラティリティ・バッファ（コンティンジェンシー）の規律
これはあくまで市場変動に対するリスクポリシーであり、裁量的な拡張予算であってはなりません。使用条件、使用額の公開、未使用分の返納方針を透明に維持してほしいです。
• 四半期レポートの継続（形式の固定とKPIの連続性）
マイルストーンの進捗、KPI推移、遅延理由、次四半期のクリティカルパスを、同じ形式で積み上げてほしいです。結び
SIPOは、Amaruの方向性がCardanoの長期価値（安全性・分散性・持続可能性）に合致していると判断します。本提案は「どの実装が好きか」という話ではなく、Cardanoをより強靭で堅牢なネットワークへ育てるためのインフラ投資だと捉えています。
以上の理由により、SIPO DRepとして本提案に 賛成（YES） を投じます。
- Yes 77.3M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 74.7M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 71.3M ₳ Rationale
I vote YES. Node diversity is crucial for Cardano's resilience and requires dedicated, ongoing funding for engineering. I've personally run Amaru and see the team's hard work. I am also impressed by their financial discipline in returning excess funds to the treasury. It's a strong YES from me.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I am voting YES on the Amaru 2026 Treasury Withdrawal.
I believe node diversity is crucial for Cardano's future and foundational to the long-term resilience of the blockchain. Building this level of core infrastructure requires dedicated focus, and I recognize it will inevitably require ongoing funding for maintenance and engineering advancements.
I strongly support these focused efforts. Having personally run an Amaru node, I can see firsthand the hard work the team has put into the codebase. Furthermore, I was highly impressed by their financial discipline when they recently returned excess funds to the Treasury. I am excited to watch Amaru progress into a fully adopted, mainnet block-producing node.
- Yes 70.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 68M ₳ Rationale
I support this proposal.
I believe Amaru addresses the long-term objective of strengthening node diversity within the Cardano ecosystem. At present, block production on mainnet is carried out by the Haskell-based cardano-node. From a long-term resilience and risk-distribution perspective, fostering an alternative full-node implementation carries meaningful strategic value.
The 2025 retrospective outlines not only achievements but also delays and unfinished components. I view this level of transparency positively. While technical risks remain regarding the path toward block production, the staged development approach—expanding functionality step by step from relay capabilities—is an understandable and structured strategy.
I also recognize the effort to ensure treasury accountability through milestone-based funding, on-chain treasury management, refund policies for unused funds, and external audits. Regarding the contingency allocation, I understand its intent as a safeguard against market price volatility and consider that intent to have a reasonable basis.
Node development is not a short-term initiative but a foundational investment tied to the long-term robustness and resilience of the network. Although uncertainties remain, I believe this initiative merits support, and therefore I vote in favor.
僕は本提案に賛成します。
Amaruは、Cardanoにおけるノード多様性の強化という長期的に重要な課題に取り組むプロジェクトであると考えています。現在、メインネットにおけるブロック生成はHaskell製のcardano-nodeによって担われており、将来的な技術的・運用的リスク分散の観点から、代替となるフルノード実装の育成には一定の意義があると判断しました。
2025年の回顧では、達成された成果だけでなく、遅延や未完了の領域についても明示されており、進捗状況を透明に開示しようとする姿勢は評価できると感じています。ブロック生成ノードへの到達計画については技術的リスクが残るものの、relay段階から段階的に機能を拡張していく構造自体は理解可能なアプローチであると受け止めています。
また、マイルストーンベースの支出管理、オンチェーンでの資金管理、未使用資金の返還方針、外部監査の実施など、トレジャリー運用における説明責任を意識した設計は評価に値すると考えています。コンティンジェンシーについては、市場価格変動リスクへの備えとしての意図は理解でき、一定の妥当性は認められると考えています。
ノード実装は短期的な成果を求める取り組みではなく、長期的なネットワークの健全性とレジリエンスに関わる基盤的投資です。不確実性は残りますが、Cardanoの将来にとって検討に値する挑戦であると考え、僕は本提案に賛成します。
- Yes 65.7M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 53.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 51.1M ₳ Rationale
Node diversification is critical to the long-term resilience and decentralization of Cardano. Relying on a single dominant node implementation creates systemic risk, where bugs, performance limits, or security vulnerabilities can impact the entire network. By supporting alternative implementations like Amaru, the ecosystem reduces single points of failure while encouraging innovation in performance, usability, and developer experience.
- Abstain 49.8M ₳ Rationale
I am voting Abstain on the 'Amaru 2026' treasury withdrawal, not because of the proposal itself, but due to concerns about the overall voting process.
At the moment, there is an approved total budget (350M), yet funding requests are being submitted independently as separate governance actions. This creates a fragmented and unclear landscape: it's difficult to understand the total number of proposals, the combined requested amount, or how close we are to exceeding the available budget.
Without this broader context, it becomes challenging to properly prioritize proposals, assess trade-offs, or compare similar initiatives. If the total requested funds exceed the budget, there is no clear framework for how decisions should be made across competing proposals.
For these reasons, I believe the current process lacks the structure needed for effective decision-making, and I am abstaining on that basis rather than on the merits of this specific proposal.
- No 49.7M ₳ Rationale
I am voting No on this treasury withdrawal proposal. While I support node diversity and appreciate Amaru's 2025 track record (returned ₳920k unused) and commitment to transparency, I have some concerns about the budget structure and governance process. Budget structure concerns: The proposal claims a $0.5/ADA conversion basis but effectively requests ₳10.14M for $3.04M (an effective $0.3-0.5 range). The $500k security audit cost ($31k/person-week for 8 weeks, 2 engineers) requires further justification. Additionally, while 2025 goals were achieved with a fraction of allocated funds, the rationale for requiring ₳10.14M in 2026 remains unclear. Fundamentally, I question whether this budget scale is appropriate for achieving node diversity under current market conditions. Process concerns: The core issue is governance process. Budgets should be negotiated through community deliberation, not presented as binary "approve this amount or we don't deliver" choices. Submitting large treasury withdrawals directly without an Info Action bypasses proper community input and forces a false dilemma. Claiming this approach is more efficient is short-sighted—true efficiency balances time management with cost-effectiveness through thorough deliberation. This concern extends beyond Amaru. For all budget proposals, I expect revised versions developed through Info Action processes with meaningful community deliberation. My No vote reflects support for the technical mission but opposition to the current budget structure and governance approach. I would welcome a revised proposal submitted via Info Action. [Japanese Version Follows] 私はこのトレジャリー出金提案に対してNoを投じます。 ノード多様性の開発自体は支持しており、Amaruの2025年実績(₳92万返金)や透明性へのコミットメントは評価していますが、予算構造とガバナンスプロセスにいくつかの懸念があります。予算構造の懸念: 本提案は$0.5/ADA換算をベースとしていると説明しながら、実質的には$3.04Mに対して₳1,014万を請求(実質$0.3-0.5の幅)しています。セキュリティ監査費用$50万(8週×2名=$31k/人週)についても、さらなる正当化が必要です。また、2025年は配分予算の一部で目標を達成したにもかかわらず、2026年に₳1,014万が必要な根拠が不明確です。根本的に、現在の市場状況において、この規模の予算でノード多様性を実現することが妥当なのかという疑問があります。 プロセスの懸念: 核心的な問題はガバナンスプロセスです。予算はコミュニティとの議論を通じて決めるべきであり、「この額を承認するか、さもなければ実行しない」という二者択一で提示されるべきではありません。大規模なトレジャリー出金をInfo Actionを経ずに直接提出することは、適切なコミュニティ意見収集を省略し、誤ったジレンマを強要することにつながります。この手法は実際には非効率的で、入念な議論を通じて時間管理と費用対効果のバランスを取ることが本当の意味での効率化につながると考えます。この懸念はAmaruに限りません。すべての予算提案について、Info Actionプロセスを経て、実質的なコミュニティ議論を反映した修正版が提出されることを期待します。私のNo票は、技術的使命への支持を示しつつも、現在の予算構造とガバナンス手法には反対するものです。Info Action経由で提出される修正版については、喜んで検討します。
- Yes 48.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 42.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 40M ₳ Rationale
It's quite a high ask but I believe Amaru to be very critical & the team has shown in the past that they react to rising ADA prices in the right way - by sending ADA back to the Treasury.
- Abstain 38.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 34.4M ₳ Rationale
この提案は、過去の実績と明確なコスト根拠に基づいており、現在の相場状況から見ても健全な提案だと感じられます。
特に昨年の余剰金を返還した、という実績は、現在のCardanoガバナンス（DRepによる審査）において、非常に強力な説得力があるように感じます。 - Yes 31M ₳ Rationale
I am voting Yes on this proposal.
Compared with other core development initiatives in the Cardano ecosystem, the overall budget and FTE cost assumptions appear reasonable and consistent with industry standards. The team has also demonstrated a strong commitment to transparency through clear reporting, on‑chain treasury management, and the return of unused funds in the previous cycle.
While I acknowledge that some parts of the 2025 roadmap experienced delays, I will continue to monitor the project’s delivery pace and technical progress closely. Even so, I believe the work Amaru is doing is strategically important for node diversity and long‑term network resilience, and I want to support their continued development.
I look forward to seeing the technical advancements they bring to Cardano in the coming year.
- Yes 30.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 28.2M ₳ Rationale
Cracked team. Modest ask. Enormous value. Zero drama. Easy YES.
- Yes 27.9M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 27.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 26.1M ₳ Rationale
Amuru has done nothing but provide real value in pushing our chain forward, this particular proposal is critical, quoting here "There’s no more doubt that Amaru contributes to the decentralization and resilience of the Cardano ecosystem." This is a understatement and we need more developers like this providing things that actually, functionally make our entire blockchain better.
- Yes 22.7M ₳ Rationale
The Amaru team is working through the complexity of building a node. Their prior proposal brought node developers together under one roof. This one does the same and includes a testing platform which will be used by IO, Amaru, and Dingo. Community building and keeping us aligned.
- Yes 22M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 22M ₳ Rationale
I agree.
- Yes 21.2M ₳ Rationale
I vote YES on the treasury withdrawal proposal “Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026” (gov_action19uhuy5uame2s60yrh6n8cyds8ps5q7tkh05dqlzmpcfy429p9w4qq5ll3g0).
It is great to see a return to professional, detailed and well-documented governance actions. This is a thorough proposal that outlines a new treasury withdrawal request as well as a detailed retrospective from the previous year of treasury funding. The Amaru team have acted with transparency and integrity while in receipt of treasury funds previously and have set a high standard that I imagine the community will soon hold other treasury proposals too, should other teams seek to apply for continued treasury funding, having received some in the past already. The end of the first Amaru treasury funding period culminated in the Amaru team returning 920,400 ada to the treasury prior to the submission of this proposal.
The event of November 2025 highlighted the importance and urgent need for node client diversity in the Cardano ecosystem and so far the Amaru node development appears to be the best shot at achieving this in a short to medium term time frame. The security risks of relying on a single node client have never been more evident to the Cardano ecosystem since November 2025, a situation where node version diversity may have saved the network from a catastrophic event. Node client diversity would help strengthen network security and resilience. Yes, there are trade-offs and it can make upgrades more complex in the future having to cater to multiple different node clients but having to choose between that and a potential single point of failure is a point where I would choose resilience over convenience.
The physical Amaru Pi node examples at the Cardano Summit were a nice touch, although sad to have missed out on one myself, they provided a great way to showcase a tangible output from a treasury funded project. While I appreciate that a lot of treasury funding goes toward research and tooling that may often feel abstract to end users of Cardano, tangible results can contribute greatly to ecosystem participants comprehending funding outcomes better.
Keep up the great work.
- Yes 21.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 21.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 20.3M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 17.1M ₳ Rationale
Amaru Treasury Withdrawal 2026
- Yes 16.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 14.2M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 14.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 12.2M ₳ Rationale
We vote yes on the Amaru Treasury Withdrawal proposal, recognising its strong alignment with Cardano’s long-term need for resilient, decentralised, and diverse core infrastructure. As the ecosystem matures, investments that expand beyond a single implementation of critical components particularly in node infrastructure and block production become increasingly important. Amaru’s focus on building and advancing alternative infrastructure pathways contributes meaningfully to reducing systemic risk while strengthening the network’s technical robustness.
The proposal presents an opportunity to deepen Cardano’s engineering stack through the development of independent tooling and capabilities that, if successfully delivered, could enhance performance, improve redundancy, and broaden participation in core protocol development. Such outcomes are not only technically valuable but also strategically significant, as they reinforce the ecosystem’s commitment to decentralisation at both the governance and infrastructure layers.
We also appreciate the continuity reflected in this proposal, as it builds on prior engineering efforts and seeks to extend them into more mature and production-oriented outcomes. Supporting this progression ensures that previously initiated work is not fragmented, but rather evolves into deliverables that can generate tangible ecosystem-wide benefits. In this regard, Amaru represents a forward-looking investment into foundational capabilities that may serve Cardano over the long term.
While certain elements of the proposal, particularly around cost structuring and specification of some operational components could benefit from further clarity and refinement, these considerations do not outweigh the broader strategic value embedded in the initiative. Instead, they highlight areas where future iterations can improve in transparency and cost attribution, thereby strengthening confidence and accountability as the work progresses.
On balance, we believe that the successful execution of this proposal would deliver meaningful infrastructure advancements and contribute to Cardano’s trajectory toward a more resilient and scalable network. Our support reflects confidence in the importance of the problem being addressed and the potential ecosystem benefits that could be realised if the proposal achieves its intended outcomes.
- Yes 11M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 10.5M ₳ Rationale
Amaru has been transparent with their funding and expenditure. Although I believe the ask is high, node diversity is a very important need in Cardano.
I encourage more treasury proposals that are transparent as this.
- Yes 8.8M ₳ Rationale
本提案に賛成票を投じます。Amaruは、Haskell実装に依存しないRust製ノードとしてCardanoのノード実装の多様性を高める重要な取り組みであり、ネットワークの分散性とレジリエンスの向上につながると考えます。\n\nI vote Yes on this proposal. Amaru is an important initiative that increases node implementation diversity in Cardano as a Rust-based node independent from the Haskell implementation, contributing to the network’s decentralization and resilience.
- Yes 8.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 7.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 7.1M ₳ Rationale
Easy yes. This team is taking care of a lot of critical, yet unsexy unfinished business for Cardano. Decentralization is the name of the game. Cardano should not risk its future on a single point-of-failure Haskell node. Attached documents are very well presented. Keep it up.