Governance
How Klovr separates protocol decisions, risk evaluation, and funded-account settlement.
Current status
Klovr is in private alpha today. The live product is simulated trading, points, leaderboard reputation, and Performance Passport progression.
DAO-governed funded accounts are part of the Klovr Proptocol roadmap. The governance model is designed around one principle: funding decisions should not depend on a centralized prop firm unilaterally controlling capital, payouts, or trader reputation.
Governance at a glance
Why governance matters
Traditional prop firms combine everything in one company: capital, rules, evaluation, execution, and payouts.
Klovr separates those roles. The DAO controls funding decisions. Klovr Labs provides evaluation and infrastructure as a replaceable service provider. The protocol is designed to enforce settlement without requiring Labs or the DAO to manually approve eligible withdrawals.
Klovr DAO
Klovr DAO is the planned governance layer for the Klovr Proptocol.
The DAO is intended to evaluate whether traders, risk services, and protocol parameters are acceptable for funding. It can decide which evaluation providers to use, which traders meet the required standard, and how protocol funding decisions should be made.
Klovr Labs
Klovr Labs is the operating and engineering contributor.
Labs builds the product, runs the private alpha, provides trader evaluations, maintains risk infrastructure, and submits evaluation outputs for the DAO to consider.
Labs provides
- Software
- Risk evaluation
- Risk infrastructure
- Trader evaluation reports
- Protocol and front-end development
Labs does not do
- Custody DAO funds
- Verify government identity
- Unilaterally allocate capital
- Manually block eligible withdrawals
- Redirect trader or DAO funds
Replaceable service providers
Labs should earn its role through better software, stronger risk evaluation, and reliable infrastructure, not through custody or locked-in admin power.
Over time, the protocol can support multiple evaluators or risk-service providers. Klovr Labs is the first contributor, not the permanent owner of the system.
Funding decisions
Funding decisions belong to governance, not to a centralized firm.
A trader's simulated performance, leaderboard history, risk discipline, and Performance Passport can inform DAO funding decisions. The DAO can decide whether an evaluation is strong enough for a funded account.
Settlement is not a vote
Governance should decide rules before funding, not rewrite outcomes after the trader succeeds.
Once a funded account is active, the protocol is designed to enforce the agreed rules. If a trader meets the protocol requirements, neither Klovr Labs nor the DAO should be able to manually block an eligible withdrawal.
That is the difference between governance and discretion.
Risk controls
Klovr Labs may provide risk controls that block trades violating account rules, protocol limits, or restricted behavior.
This is not the same as custody. Risk controls are designed to enforce the rules of the account, not to move funds for Labs or let Labs redirect capital.
Governance roadmap
Boundaries
Governance is not a shortcut around rules, law, or risk controls.
Jurisdiction restrictions, wallet-risk checks, sanctions controls, abuse prevention, and eligibility rules may still apply.
The goal is not “no rules.” The goal is a system where the rules are transparent, funding decisions are governed, and settlement is not controlled by a centralized prop firm.
The goal
Klovr governance exists to fund the trader, not the firm.
The DAO decides who is worth backing. Labs provides evaluation and infrastructure. The protocol enforces the outcome.