Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-00358
The report showed the fund's BTC holdings but provided no information on how gains were
IndeterminateCase description
A Bitcoin tokenised fund that had been operating since 2014 published its first—and only—NAV report in May 2016. The report showed the fund's BTC holdings but provided no information on how gains were calculated, what fees had been deducted, or how the fund's trading strategy had been executed. Investors attempting to verify the NAV against blockchain data found the addresses given in the report held much less than the reported amount.
Custody context
| Stress condition | Documentation absent |
| Custody system | Exchange custody |
| Outcome | Indeterminate |
| Documentation | Unknown |
| Year observed | 2016 |
| Country | Unknown |
Structural dependencies observed
What this illustrates
Nobody had written down how to get back in. That knowledge existed only in the owner's head. It's not clear whether anyone ever regained access.
Outcome interpretation
Not enough information is available to determine the outcome.
Source
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
Forum post
Evidence link
Related cases involving documentation absent
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents.
Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Where Bitcoin Custody Intersects Legal and Fiduciary Authority
Where custody creates gaps in estate planning, fiduciary duty, and professional responsibility.
Professional Scope Boundary Matrix
What each professional or product covers, what they do not, and where gaps form between them.
The Independent Assessment Layer in Bitcoin Custody
How independent diagnostic layers emerge when multiple parties depend on shared infrastructure.
Translate