ThreeFold Foundation Due Diligence

Run due diligence on ThreeFold Foundation: check compliance and get alerts when suppliers change.

Switzerland · threefold.io · 5 vendors

ThreeFold Foundation provides a decentralized Cloud and Internet infrastructure, building a peer-to-peer network that runs on bare metal. It leverages blockchain technology to offer scalable compute, data, and network solutions, aiming to create a more accessible and autonomous internet.

Resilience scores

Technology vendors

Services catalogue

3 services in catalogue across 2 categories; runs on 5 sub-vendors.

Insights

Last updated 2026-08-14 · revision 1

5 direct vendors, 81 subvendors

Direct vendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Subvendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Compliance

8 in-scope frameworks identified; showing 3.

SOC 2 (source) — No public evidence

Evidence: https://threefold.io/, https://threefold.io/our-journey

UAE VARA — No public evidence

Evidence: https://threefold.io/impressum/, https://threefold.io/our-journey

Blockchain — No public evidence

Evidence: https://threefold.io/, https://threefold.io/our-journey, https://threefold.io/project-mycelium

Financials

Three-year financials

Financial Resilience Score: 3/10

ThreeFold's financial resilience is difficult to assess due to complete opacity — no audited financials are publicly available, and the operating entity has migrated to a UAE free-zone jurisdiction (DMCC) with minimal disclosure requirements. The project has demonstrated technical longevity (nearly a decade since 2016) and continues to operate its Grid V3.18 across 40+ countries, suggesting some level of ongoing operational funding. However, the company's own retrospective acknowledgment that 'we couldn't protect the token' is a direct admission that its primary financing mechanism (the TFT token) failed to achieve sustainability. The apparent contraction from a peak of ~2,500+ nodes to ~750 active independent nodes signals material ecosystem shrinkage and likely reduced participant economics. The community/token-financed model spreads capex to distributed farmers, limiting entity-level infrastructure cost, but it also creates severe revenue volatility tied to crypto market conditions. The upcoming pivot to Project Mycelium with a new dual-token model (AUR/SPORE) targeted for 2026 introduces significant execution and adoption risk. Combined with leadership concentration (single named manager at DMCC entity) and no visibility into runway, burn rate, or solvency, resilience must be scored low despite technical persistence.

Key strengths: Nearly a decade of continuous technical development since 2016, Operational Grid V3.18 live across 40+ countries, Distributed farmer model shifts hardware capex away from the entity, Multi-jurisdiction footprint (Switzerland, Belgium, UAE) provides regulatory optionality, Same core team executing pivot to Project Mycelium with revised tokenomics

Risk factors: No audited financials publicly available — complete opacity on revenue, EBIT, equity, and runway, Company's own admission that 'we couldn't protect the token' — TFT tokenomics failed, Node attrition from ~2,500+ peak to ~750 active — material ecosystem contraction, Migration of operating entity to UAE DMCC reduces creditor/counterparty transparency, Product pivot to Project Mycelium (2026 launch) carries re-platforming and adoption risk, Leadership concentration risk — single manager (Adnan Fatayerji) named on DMCC entity, Token dependency exposes project to crypto market volatility

Signed-in users can see whether their own company is exposed to this vendor's disruption, plus the full sub-vendor list and country breakdowns, every in-scope compliance framework plus gaps and next steps, and alerts when any of it changes.

View the full interactive report