Islamic Finance Principles Assessment
Riba — Does SOON involve interest?
SOON's base protocol does not describe interest-bearing treasury holdings or lending as its primary revenue source, which is a point in its favor. However, its staking mechanism pays a fixed, inflation-funded reward rather than a variable, performance-linked return, which raises a genuine riba concern that Muslim investors should weigh carefully. On balance, the fixed-yield staking design is the dominant riba-relevant feature here.
Assessment: Riba Dominant
Score: 48.6/100
Our methodology examines 10 criteria to evaluate how well SOON avoids interest-based mechanisms.
Sources do not detail a clear protocol revenue model beyond SOON's use for transaction fees and developer incentives; no explicit interest-bearing treasury instruments or debt-based income streams are described. The 6% foundation/treasury allocation is governance-gated with vesting cliffs, but its asset composition (cash, stablecoins, or otherwise) is undisclosed. A third-party lending dApp, LendWise, operates atop the SOON SVM chain, but as an external application built by other developers, it does not by itself determine the base protocol's own ruling under the misuse-is-not-determinative principle applied here.
SOON's native staking, launched May 2025, converts staked tokens into gSOON, a liquid, transferable staking-token representation. Critically, rewards are explicitly sourced from the protocol's fixed 3% annual inflation schedule rather than from trading fees, lending spreads, or other productive economic activity. A reward that is fixed and issuance-funded, uncoupled from the performance of underlying network activity, structurally resembles a guaranteed interest payment rather than a profit-sharing arrangement, making this staking design the most significant riba-adjacent feature of SOON.
Gharar — How much uncertainty does SOON involve?
SOON carries moderate uncertainty: strong team transparency reduces gharar, while thin financial and audit disclosure increases it. The overall picture is one of a legitimate but incompletely documented infrastructure project. Investors should treat undisclosed audit and treasury details as a real, unresolved uncertainty rather than a settled matter.
Assessment: Moderate Gharar (Material Uncertainty)
Score: 54/100
Our methodology examines 15 criteria including team transparency, audit quality, and governance.
SOON's founders and advisors are named and independently traceable, with verifiable career histories at firms like Citigroup, Coinbase, Optimism, and Aleo, and advisors drawn from Solana, Celestia, and Coinbase Ventures. This level of identifiable leadership substantially reduces gharar compared to anonymous projects. The NFT-mint fundraising involved thousands of participants alongside VC backing, and a MiCA whitepaper was filed with the Central Bank of Ireland, indicating some regulatory engagement. Governance nominally allows token-holder voting, though the practical extent and binding force of that governance remains undocumented.
Documentation exists in the form of a whitepaper and docs site, and SOON's own documentation references a BEOSIN audit report. However, no audit date, scope, methodology, or findings are given anywhere in available sources, meaning a fully verifiable audit trail cannot be confirmed. This absence of confirmable audit detail is a legitimate gharar concern and should be treated as one rather than assumed resolved. Staking terms such as lock-up periods, unstaking delays, and slashing conditions are likewise unspecified in available promotional materials, adding further uncertainty for participants.
Maysir — Does SOON involve gambling or speculation?
SOON is not designed as a gambling or meme instrument; it is infrastructure with staking, governance, and fee-payment utility. Its speculative risk is the ordinary secondary-market volatility common to most listed tokens, not a built-in wagering mechanic. The core design does not push this toward a maysir classification.
Assessment: Moderate Maysir (High Risk)
Score: 60.5/100
Our methodology examines 11 criteria to determine whether SOON is a gambling instrument or a genuine economic tool.
SOON functions as the operational token of an SVM-based Layer 2 stack, used for paying transaction fees, incentivizing developers, and participating in governance across SOON Mainnet, SOON Stack, and InterSOON cross-chain messaging. This gives the token a functional role tied to real network usage rather than a payoff structure dependent on chance. Reported growth in active addresses suggests genuine usage activity, distinguishing SOON's purpose from instruments whose sole function is speculative wagering.
Against this genuine utility, secondary-market trading of SOON will inevitably attract speculative behavior, as with virtually any listed token, and the liquid gSOON staking derivative could itself become a vehicle for short-term trading rather than genuine network participation. Such third-party speculative conduct does not, however, redefine the protocol's own designed purpose, which remains infrastructure-oriented. The more relevant caution for investors is less about gambling-like design and more about the fixed-yield staking structure and incomplete audit disclosure discussed above.
The Full 27-Point Screening
1. Legitimacy (4 criteria)
| Criterion | Score | Analysis |
|---|
| Team Transparency | 82/100 | Founders and CTO are named with verifiable professional histories and notable industry advisors are documented. |
| Fraud & Scam Risk | 75/100 | No fraud, hack or rug-pull allegations appear in sources and trust signals (VC backing, regulatory filing) exist, but absence of negative reports is not conclusive proof of clean conduct. |
| Use Case Legitimacy | 80/100 | Sources describe concrete infrastructure products (Mainnet, Stack, InterSOON) and growing on-chain activity rather than pure hype. |
| Ethical Practices | 78/100 | The base protocol is generic Layer-2 infrastructure with no inherent haram design; a third-party lending dApp exists on top but this does not reflect the protocol's own design intent. |
Summary: The team behind SOON is named, credentialed, and backed by recognisable industry figures and investors, with no fraud or rug-pull indicators found in the sources.
2. Project Operations (9 criteria)
| Criterion | Score | Analysis |
|---|
| Core Protocol Business | 82/100 | The core protocol is a rollup/infrastructure business, not a prohibited-sector enterprise. |
| Transaction Fees | 45/100 (low evidence) | Sources do not describe whether transaction fees are burned, retained, or distributed, so this cannot be established. |
| Treasury Assets | 45/100 (low evidence) | Treasury/foundation allocation and its use are mentioned but its actual asset composition (e.g., interest-bearing holdings) is not disclosed in these sources. |
| Revenue Model | 45/100 (low evidence) | No clear description of how the protocol itself generates revenue (fees, services, etc.) is given. |
| Transparency | 78/100 | A public whitepaper, documentation site, tokenomics disclosures, and vesting schedules are all published and accessible. |
| Governance | 50/100 | Token-holder voting is mentioned but governance scope, binding authority, and decentralisation levels are not detailed. |
| Launch Fairness | 55/100 | Launch combined a community-oriented NFT mint with participation by major VCs, mixing fair-distribution intent with insider access. |
| Token Distribution | 60/100 | Sources give explicit (though somewhat inconsistent across snapshots) allocation percentages showing a majority community share alongside team/foundation vesting. |
| Speculation/Utility Ratio | 55/100 | Activity growth and stated utility roles suggest some genuine use, but no revenue or usage-vs-speculation ratio data is given. |
Summary: SOON is a genuine SVM-based Layer 2 infrastructure project with public documentation, though fee-handling mechanics, treasury composition, and governance depth are not clearly disclosed.
3. Financial Health (4 criteria)
| Criterion | Score | Analysis |
|---|
| Protocol Revenue | 60/100 | Token utility descriptions mention fee payments and incentives rather than interest-based income, but revenue sources are not clearly itemised. |
| Financial Status | 52/100 | Growth metrics (active addresses) are cited but no balance-sheet or stability data is available. |
| Interest Assessment | 80/100 | The base protocol itself does not offer lending/borrowing; a lending dApp exists only as a third-party build on top of the SVM rollup. |
| Audit Quality | 32/100 | An audit report (BEOSIN) is referenced on SOON's documentation but without dates or findings, so a reputable, verifiable audit cannot be confirmed from these sources. |
Summary: Revenue sources and financial stability data are thin in the sources, the base protocol does not itself offer lending/borrowing, and no dated, reputable audit report specific to SOON could be confirmed.
4. Token Economics (5 criteria)
| Criterion | Score | Analysis |
|---|
| Token Purpose | 75/100 | The token is described with concrete utility functions (staking, governance, fees, incentives) rather than purely speculative purpose. |
| Governance Rights | 50/100 | Voting rights are mentioned but the practical scope of governance power is undocumented. |
| Rewards Distribution | 32/100 | Staking rewards are explicitly fixed at a 3% annual inflation rate rather than being tied to variable protocol performance. |
| Speculation Controls | 45/100 | Vesting cliffs exist for team/foundation tokens but no dedicated anti-speculation mechanism is described. |
| Asset Backing | 42/100 | The token's value rests on network utility and governance rather than any disclosed reserve or asset backing. |
Summary: SOON functions as a utility token for staking, governance, and fee payment, but carries continuous inflationary dilution and no disclosed anti-speculation controls or asset backing.
5. Staking Mechanism (5 criteria)
| Criterion | Score | Analysis |
|---|
| Mechanism Type | 72/100 | Staking is smart-contract based and produces a liquid, transferable staking token (gSOON), though full lock-up/withdrawal terms are undocumented. |
| Islamic Contract Classification | 30/100 | Rewards are a fixed inflationary distribution to stakers regardless of underlying economic activity, resembling a guaranteed increment rather than a clean profit-sharing contract. |
| Rewards Structure | 25/100 | Reward source is explicitly described as fixed annual token inflation, not variable income from real trading or lending activity. |
| Documentation | 40/100 | Basic mechanics are explained in promotional articles, but detailed terms, lock-up periods, and risk disclosures are not provided. |
| Shariah Alignment | 32/100 | The core structure of fixed, inflation-funded staking rewards raises an unresolved question resembling interest-like guaranteed increment, which is a live Shariah concern. |
Summary: SOON offers native, non-custodial liquid staking, but rewards are a fixed annual inflation payout rather than variable income from real economic activity, raising an unresolved contract-classification concern.
Overall Assessment: SOON appears to be a legitimately built and credibly led infrastructure project, but gaps in fee/treasury/audit disclosure and a fixed inflation-based staking reward structure leave open Shariah-relevant questions that the available sources do not resolve.
Written by ThanvirFounder, Ex Director S&P Global Energy
Reviewed by Imam Omar SiddiqiShariah Scholar