Vesting disclosure
Every unlock, on the record.
Unlock Pad reads a token's vesting contract and publishes the release schedule for team and creator allocations: the cliff date, the size of each tranche, the cadence between them and the percent of total supply each one adds. The schedule already exists on deployment day. This is the part that makes it readable.
01 / The problem
Circulating supply is the number most buyers check, and it is the number that tells them the least about what happens next. The larger figure sitting behind it is the allocation reserved for the founding team, early contributors and the creator wallet, held under a vesting contract that releases it on a fixed timetable.
That timetable is not a plan or an intention. It is code. When the token deploys, the cliff date, the tranche size and the interval between releases are written into contract storage and become as public as the token balance itself. Anyone can read them. Almost nobody does, because they are stored as unix timestamps and raw integer token amounts across several functions, in a block explorer that was built for developers.
A vesting schedule that is technically available and practically unreadable produces a split audience. On one side are the people who wrote the contract, the people who audited it and the handful of readers who went through the storage slots by hand. They know the exact date. On the other side is everybody who bought on a chart, a timeline post or a friend's recommendation. They find out a tranche has released when the price tells them, which is to say after the selling has already started.
Fraud is rarely what produces this gap. In most cases the team published the schedule in a document somewhere and considered the matter closed. Format produces it. A fact that takes forty minutes and a developer's tooling to confirm is, for market purposes, a fact that has not been disclosed.
An unlock that the market has seen coming is absorbed gradually. Liquidity providers widen quotes ahead of the date, buyers who want the risk take the other side, and the adjustment is spread across the weeks leading up to the release. The supply still arrives. The repricing happens in daylight.
An unlock nobody was watching arrives as a shock instead. The new supply hits an order book that was positioned as if it did not exist, the move overshoots what the extra supply actually justifies, and the recovery takes longer than the event deserved. The buyer pays once for the dilution, which was always coming, and a second time for the surprise, which was avoidable. The second payment is the one that disclosure removes.
Unlock Pad has no opinion about how much supply a team should hold or how quickly it should release. A four year schedule with a one year cliff and a schedule that hands everything over in ninety days are both legitimate structures, and both are worth knowing about before buying rather than after. Publishing a schedule does not make a heavy one lighter. It makes it visible early enough to be a decision instead of a surprise.
The standard this product works toward is unremarkable in every other market: the terms under which insiders can sell are known to the people buying from them, in advance, in plain language, on a page that takes a minute to read.
02 / Reference
Six fields describe almost every schedule in use. Unlock Pad reads each one from the contract and states it in the same terms for every token it tracks, so two schedules can be compared without translating between them.
03 / Live
Unlock Pad publishes its own schedule through its own product. The bar fills as the current vesting window elapses, the countdown runs to the moment the next tranche becomes claimable, and every remaining release is listed below with its date and its share of total supply.
Team and creator allocation
4 scheduled releases remaining
last synced --:--:--
Schedule values are placeholders until the $UNLOCK vesting contract is deployed. Once it is, this panel reads from contract storage like every other schedule on the platform.
Take the second line of the schedule above. It says a team tranche releases on a fixed date and adds four percent of total supply. Four percent sounds small next to the supply figure it is measured against, and that is the wrong comparison. The number that decides how the release lands is four percent of total supply measured against the tokens actually available to trade that week, which on most young tokens is a far smaller pool.
Read that way, a routine monthly tranche can represent a large fraction of a week's float. The release stays routine. What changes is that it now carries a size and a date, both printed above rather than reconstructed afterward from a candle.
04 / Method
Four steps, none of which involve asking a project what its schedule is. The contract is the source and the only source.
Unlock Pad resolves the vesting contracts attached to a token and reads the terms out of storage: start timestamp, cliff duration, total allocated, amount released, and the revocation flag. The schedule is not estimated from past transfers. It is the one the deployer committed to.
Vesting is implemented a dozen different ways: linear streams, stepped tranches, merkle claim windows, custodial locks. Each is converted to the same structure, a list of dated releases with an amount, so schedules written by different teams can be read side by side without a translation step.
Each release stays on the list after it passes, marked with whether the tokens were actually claimed. A schedule that ran on time and a schedule with three unclaimed tranches sitting in the contract describe very different situations, and only a full history shows which one is in front of you.
The next release carries a live countdown and its share of total supply on a public page. Publication happens before the event, which is the entire point. A schedule published afterward is a record. Published beforehand it is a warning that anyone can act on.
05 / Questions
The questions that come up most often, answered at the length they deserve rather than in a sentence each.
None of it. Every figure Unlock Pad publishes is readable by anyone with a node and the contract address. The product is not access to hidden data. It is the work of locating the right contracts, decoding the terms and putting them in a consistent format, done once and published rather than repeated by every reader.
The supply arrives either way. What changes is when the market starts adjusting. A known date lets positioning spread across the weeks before it, which is why anticipated unlocks tend to move price less on the day than unanticipated ones of the same size. Disclosure moves the adjustment earlier and spreads it out. It does not remove it, and this site will not claim otherwise.
Then the schedule is an intention rather than a commitment, and that is exactly what gets reported. Unlock Pad reads the revocation and admin flags and states plainly whether the terms can be rewritten, by whom, and whether that power sits behind a timelock. A revocable schedule is not automatically a problem. A revocable schedule presented as a guarantee is.
Because unclaimed tranches are the part of the schedule with no date attached. Tokens that vested months ago and were never withdrawn can be claimed and moved in one transaction, at a time of the recipient's choosing. Counting them as future supply understates what can arrive today. Counting them as circulating overstates what is actually trading. Both figures are reported separately for that reason.
Coverage starts with Robinhood Chain, where $UNLOCK itself is deployed, and focuses on the two allocation classes that account for most unlock driven selling: the founding team and the creator wallet. Treasury and advisor schedules are read where the contracts expose them. Off chain agreements, side letters and anything held by a centralized custodian are outside what a contract reader can see, and the site says so rather than filling the gap with an estimate.
A vesting schedule is a small number of blocky, discrete steps on a timeline, which is close to the least complicated thing a chart can be. The pixel treatment matches the shape of the data instead of dressing it up as something more sophisticated. The numbers underneath are read from contract storage and are exactly as serious as any other source of them.
No. Published schedules are public pages with no token held anywhere in the path. Putting disclosure behind a paywall would undo the reason for building it.
By contract address. A token does not have to agree to be listed, and a team cannot have a schedule removed once it is published, because the contract it was read from stays public regardless. Corrections are accepted and shown with what changed, since a disclosure tool that quietly edits its own history is not one.
