TL;DR – The Story Foundation evaluated 100+ validator applicants using a 1,000-point rubric and proposes delegations to 60 unlocked validators organized into 10 tiers, targeting 60,000,000 IP tokens in total. This total is lower than last year’s round, which increases the APY per token delegated due to the fixed reward rate per block. Locked validators are excluded going forward because of SIP-00009 emission and multiplier changes. The Foundation will coordinate transitions for operators moving from locked to unlocked validators.
Overview
The Story Foundation Delegation Program received applications from over 100 validator candidates seeking Foundation-backed delegations. After a thorough and rigorous evaluation process, 60 validators have been selected to receive delegations, organized into 10 tiers based on their composite scores.
This post outlines how the evaluation was conducted, the principles that guided scoring decisions, and the resulting delegation structure. We believe transparency in this process is essential to maintaining the credibility and trust that underpin Story’s validator ecosystem.
Unlocked Validators Only
All Foundation delegations under this program are directed exclusively to unlocked validator types. This decision follows the implementation of SIP-00009, which reduced the locked token staking reward multiplier from 0.5x to 0.025x and recalibrated annual emissions from approximately 25 million to 15,315,000 IP tokens. With locked validator rewards now near-zero, the Foundation’s delegation strategy is aligned with the unlocked validator model going forward.
For validators currently operating locked validators that received prior Foundation delegations, this transition involves additional coordination. We have reached out or are reaching out to affected validators to retire their existing locked validators with stakes only by the Foundation, to then register new unlocked validators to receive updated delegations. We recognize this adds operational complexity, and the team is working directly with impacted validators to ensure a smooth transition. Detailed instructions and support will be provided through validator support channels.
Network Parameter Updates
Two significant governance proposals have shaped the context for this delegation cycle:
SIP-00009 (Implemented): Emissions were recalibrated to account for faster-than-expected block production, and the locked staking multiplier was adjusted to 0.025x. These changes establish a more sustainable economic model and incentivize the transition from locked to unlocked staking as tokens vest. The full proposal is available on the Story Protocol SIPs repository.
SIP-00010 (Upcoming): This proposal reduces the minimum staking threshold from 1,024 IP to 32 IP, lowers the reward distribution threshold from 8 IP to 1 IP, and decreases staking operation fees from 1 IP to 0.1 IP. These changes are designed to lower the barrier to entry for retail participants, making it significantly easier for smaller token holders to participate in staking and contribute to network security.
Communicating these changes across the validator ecosystem, coordinating the technical implications, and ensuring all stakeholders understood the rationale behind them was a substantial effort. We appreciate the patience and engagement of the community throughout this process.
Evaluation Methodology
Every qualified applicant was evaluated against Story’s 1,000-point scoring rubric spanning three categories:
- Technical Excellence (400 pts) — infrastructure quality, uptime history, security posture, certifications, multi-chain experience, and testnet participation.
- Ecosystem Contributions (400 pts) — IP tooling, research and development, strategic partnerships, educational content, and community engagement.
- Business & Sustainability (200 pts) — team composition, legal standing, financial sustainability, reputation, and transparency practices.
The high-level category structure is public. The detailed point allocations within each subcategory remain confidential to prevent future applicants from gaming the rubric.
Reduced Maximum Score
It is important to note that because several subcategories were annulled (explained below), the effective maximum achievable score was reduced from the theoretical 1,000 points. This means the score ranges shown in the delegation table reflect a compressed scale. All applicants were evaluated under the same adjusted ceiling, ensuring fairness across the board.
Scoring Principles & Adjustments
The evaluation was designed to reward verifiable merit while penalizing misrepresentation. Several key principles guided the process:
Year-Round Performance, Not Snapshots
Validator uptime was assessed across the entirety of mainnet operations — not just recent performance. While every applicant self-reported 99.5%+ uptime, sustained year-round reliability at that level is difficult to achieve in practice. Validators whose historical records told a different story were scored accordingly.
Penalties for Misreported Data
Where self-reported information could not be corroborated by on-chain data, explorer records, or independent verification, scores were adjusted downward. Validators that were jailed at any point during mainnet or testnet operations received explicit penalties.
Genesis and Active Validator Preference
Validators that have been part of Story since genesis or are currently in the active mainnet set received bonus points. These operators have demonstrated sustained commitment to the network and have verifiable track records. Conversely, newcomers without prior Story participation faced a steeper path to qualification — they had no uptime history to evaluate, no testnet contributions to verify, and no organic ecosystem footprint. The rubric naturally reflects this, and additional penalties were applied where newcomers relied heavily on unverifiable claims.
Annulled (Zeroed-Out) Responses
Several rubric subcategories were annulled — meaning all applicants received zero points in those areas — because the responses could not be independently verified. These include:
- Infrastructure Type (2.2): Claims about bare metal vs. cloud hosting are not verifiable without physical audits.
- Key Management (2.4): Self-reported security practices such as HSM or MPC usage could not be confirmed externally.
- Disaster Recovery (2.8): Whether an applicant has a tested DR plan is inherently self-attested.
- CDR TEE Commitment (3.2): This relates to future work and cannot be evaluated on current evidence.
- Financial Sustainability (4.3): Revenue models and financial health are private and unverifiable.
- Reputation (4.4): Reputation scoring was zeroed to avoid subjective bias.
These annulments were applied uniformly across all applicants to ensure fairness and are what reduced the effective maximum score described above.
Certifications: Understanding the Distinction
A notable pattern emerged in certification claims. Some applicants reported holding SOC2 or ISO 27001 certifications but upon review had submitted their cloud provider’s certification (e.g., AWS or GCP compliance documentation) rather than their own organizational audit. Holding infrastructure on a certified cloud platform is not the same as the validator organization itself being certified. Scores were adjusted to reflect this distinction.
Partnerships: Relevance and Verifiability
The term “major partnerships” was interpreted strictly. A commercially signed agreement is a baseline requirement, but relevance to the Story ecosystem and the ability to bring institutional-grade partnerships into the network is what distinguished high scores from moderate ones. Only a small number of validators demonstrated partnerships at an institutional level that materially advance Story’s growth and adoption.
Content Quality and Document Submissions
Educational and community content was reviewed for substance, prioritizing material that showed genuine understanding of Story Protocol and provided real value to the community. Separately, some applicants submitted security policy documents claiming SOC2 readiness that were clearly AI-generated boilerplate rather than authentic organizational documentation. These submissions were scored accordingly.
Testnet Scrutiny
Validators who claimed testnet participation had those claims verified where possible. The current Aeneid testnet is treated with the same rigor as mainnet — validators jailed on Aeneid received penalties consistent with the mainnet jailing penalty framework. For the earlier Iliad and Odyssey testnets, historical data is more difficult to access and verify, so these were not scrutinized to the same degree.
Delegation Structure
The 60 selected validators are organized into 10 groups of 6, ranked by composite score. The highest-scoring group is proposed to receive 1,500,000 IP per validator, with each subsequent group receiving 100,000 IP less, down to 600,000 IP for the lowest qualifying group. The total proposed delegation is at most 60,000,000 IP across 60 unlocked validators.
This tight delegation range — from 1.5M to 600K per validator — is designed to keep each validator close to the median rewards amount rather than concentrating rewards at the top. Group 10 sits at the cut line and may not receive delegations if the Foundation elects to reduce the total delegation pool. An additional 6 validators have been placed on an extended waitlist and may receive delegations if slots open up or the program expands.
The total targeted tokens to delegate is significantly lower than total delegations from the Foundation, as tokens are reserved and better utilized for other purposes, such as enterprise-level custody and providing liquidity for exchanges. As a result, the staking rewards of a fixed rate result in a higher APY for unlocked validator delegations, which in turn rewards validators with a similar effect to prior delegation amounts.
Qualified Validators
The following 60 teams have currently qualified for Foundation delegations (listed alphabetically):
Atlas Staking, B-Harvest, BlackNodes, BlockPI, BwareLabs, CipherOwl, Coha05, ContributionDAO, Cosmic Validator, CroutonDigital, Cryptomolot, Cumulo Pro, (edit: Coinage) DAIC, Delight Labs, DeSpread Labs, DragonStake, DSRV, DTEAM, easeflow, Endorphine Stake, Enigma, Everstake, F5 Nodes, Figment, Grand Valley, HashKey Cloud, Informal Systems, ITRocket, J-Node, Kiln, KudasaiJP, KysenPool, KYVE, Lavender.Five, Luganodes, Mandragora, Meta Pool, Nethermind, Nodeinfra (ed: IPFiScan), NODERS, Nodes.Guru, NodeStake, OriginStake, P2P.org, P-OPS, Pier Two, PiperX, Polkachu, Republic, Sensei Node, Silent, Stake True (ed: Chainflow), Stakely, STAKEME, StakeUp, Stakin by The Tie, StakingCabin, TrustedPoint, TTT Labs (ed: Story Hub), Unity Nodes.
The following teams are on the waitlist (listed alphabetically): BlockHunters, CoinHunters, Nomis, QuantNode, SystemD, Validexis
Exceptions: Two late applicants were granted exceptions but received significant penalties — their scores were halved. Despite this, their strong infrastructure, certifications, ecosystem contributions, partnerships, and business operations were substantial enough that they still qualified within the rubric scale.
The Purpose of Foundation Delegations
Story Foundation delegations are short-to-midterm incentives by design. They exist to strengthen the foundational infrastructure of block production during the network’s early growth phase — much like training wheels that provide stability while the ecosystem matures.
Over time, Foundation delegations will gradually decrease as independent token holders take a more active role in staking toward validators that contribute to governing the development of the chain and advancing Story’s mission. The long-term vision is a validator ecosystem sustained by organic community participation, not by Foundation support.
The ultimate goal of this program is to incentivize actively involved validators to continue building on Story. Validators who contribute tools, educational resources, and infrastructure to the ecosystem — especially those that believe in the long term vision of Story — are exactly the operators we want to support and retain.
Building on Story Has Never Been Easier
With the advent of new AI models and highly available LLM providers, building on Story is becoming significantly more accessible. Story has recently launched Story Skills — a set of AI-powered development skills available on the skills.sh ecosystem and the Claude Code marketplace.
Story Skills provide contextual guidance for developers working with Story Protocol, covering SDK integration, IP asset registration, licensing, royalty flows, and Solidity smart contract development. These skills activate automatically when relevant keywords are mentioned in compatible AI coding tools, making it easier than ever for developers and validator teams to build applications, tools, and integrations on top of Story.
We encourage all validators — especially those looking to strengthen their ecosystem contributions — to explore Story Skills and leverage these resources to accelerate their development efforts.
What Comes Next
- Selected validators will receive delegation details and onboarding instructions directly, including guidance for those transitioning from locked to unlocked validators.
- The waitlist will be maintained and reviewed as the program evolves.
- We may revise this delegation list at mid-year based on updated performance data, ecosystem contributions, and network conditions.
- A revised questionnaire will be issued at the same time next year for the next full evaluation cycle.
- Delegation amounts and group placements may be adjusted in future cycles, so validators are encouraged to continue building, contributing, and operating at high standards.
We welcome questions and discussion in this thread. For specific inquiries about individual scores or evaluation details, please reach out through the appropriate validator support channels.
