Every risk we know of, named.

We'd rather have you read this and not buy, than buy without reading it. Below is every risk we can think of, stated plainly. If you spot one we missed, tell us.

The PRE_POS line

gitlawb mainnet Proof-of-Stake isn't live yet. Until it is, the only yield engine running is the trade-tax harvest → $gitlawb → stakers loop. We never claim node-operator yield during PRE_POS. The dashboard's yellow chip is the bright social line: while it's up, no one — not us, not anyone tweeting about the token — should imply mainnet operator yield is live. If gitlawb's mainnet PoS never deploys (for whatever reason — audit issues, project decisions, regulatory), the second engine never turns on. You get only the trade-tax engine.

Volume risk

The trade-tax engine's output is directly proportional to $PIER trading volume. If no one trades $PIER, no fees accrue, no $gitlawb is harvested, no yield is routed. This is the protocol's primary economic dependency in PRE_POS. The flywheel works when $PIER has real activity; it stalls when it doesn't.

No slashing — both ways

gitlawb v1 has no slashing. The harshest penalty for a misbehaving or offline node is “earns zero rewards this epoch.” Your $PIER stake into PierStaking has even tighter guarantees — there is no “slash” codepath at all. The full upside of this is that your principal is safe. The downside is that the protocol can't punish bad operators on-chain. We compensate by making the keeper and factory wallets gas-only — a compromised hot wallet cannot move stake.

What the admin can't do

The treasury owner cannot:

• Withdraw $gitlawb to an arbitrary address. adminWithdraw reverts on the $gitlawb token unconditionally.
• Withdraw WETH to an arbitrary address. Same — reverts on the WETH token.
• Change the staking contract pier2pier's treasury uses. pierStaking is immutable.
• Change the swap adapter mid-flight. swapAdapter is immutable.
• Set the protocol fee above 20%. Hard-coded ceiling.
• Move funds out of PierStaking. Only claim() by the holder can move yield, and only unstake() by the holder can move staked principal.

What the owner can do: rotate the keeper, rotate the factory, rotate the fee sink, adjust the fee bps within the cap, sweep accidentally-sent tokens (non-protocol assets). Standard custodial-of-config controls. We surface ownership transfers as events.

Smart-contract risk

Our contracts are unaudited at the time of writing. The code is open source, the tests are comprehensive (67 passing including a Base mainnet fork test of the full revenue pipeline), and the surface area is small. But “small + tested” isn't “audited.” You bear the risk of a bug we missed. Before the protocol holds substantial value, we'll seek an external review.

Slippage risk on the swap

Every swapToGitlawb call has a slippage floor — if the Uniswap V3 pool would return less than the minimum, the call reverts. The keeper sets that floor at a configurable fraction of the input amount (currently 95% by default). In a thin market, a very large swap could fail. The pipeline retries on the next tick. Worst case: the war-chest accumulates as WETH instead of $gitlawb until a swap succeeds.

Keeper risk

If the keeper is offline, the harvest/swap/route loop stops. The pool fees still accrue in the Clanker FeeLocker; they're reclaimable any time. There's no expiration. Once the keeper comes back, it harvests everything that built up. So “keeper down” means “yield is briefly paused,” not “yield is lost.” We run two redundant keepers in different regions.

Counterparty risk on Clanker

pier2pier's LP lives inside the Clanker v4 system. If Clanker's FeeLocker contract is exploited, our fee bucket could be drained. We don't control Clanker; we're just a fee recipient. Clanker is open-source, deployed by a known team, and the FeeLocker we use is the same one many other tokens rely on.

$gitlawb price risk

Yield is paid in $gitlawb. If $gitlawb's USD value falls, the dollar value of your yield falls with it. The protocol doesn't hedge — we just route the asset. Stakers wanting dollar-stable yield should sell $gitlawb as they claim.

Regulatory risk

Token economics, staking-as-a-service, and yield distribution are all under active regulatory scrutiny in multiple jurisdictions. The protocol is deployed permissionlessly, but using it from a regulated jurisdiction is your own compliance call. Nothing here is financial advice; talk to your own counsel if it matters.

The honest bottom line

pier2pier is a real protocol with real on-chain mechanics, no slashing, no admin drain path, and a second yield engine that lights up when gitlawb mainnet PoS deploys. It's also early, unaudited, dependent on $PIER trading volume, and dependent on a gitlawb protocol upgrade that hasn't happened yet. Size your position accordingly. Don't put in money you can't afford to lock up while you think.