Vertexprotocol token migration tied INK eligibility to a historical VRTX snapshot

Last updated 13 Oct, 2026

Vertexprotocol token migration linked the announced INK airdrop to eligible VRTX holdings in the July 8, 2025 snapshot. The plan paired the VRTX sunset with the team’s agreement to join the Ink Foundation. Holding the old token, qualifying for an allocation and receiving INK were different states within the transition.

VRTX eligibility and INK delivery

For holders covered by the snapshot, the planned INK distribution depended on their eligible VRTX balance and the separate launch of the new token. A snapshot recorded holdings at a specified time. An allocation assigned a share of the airdrop. Distribution delivered that share through the applicable route.

The July 2025 agreement brought the exchange’s team and infrastructure into the Ink ecosystem. It paired the VRTX sunset with an INK airdrop and boosted participation in a separate incentives program.

The July 8 snapshot cutoff

The migration snapshot recorded VRTX holdings on July 8, 2025, at 14:00 UTC. Later purchases could not increase holdings recorded at that cutoff. The same distinction applied to a wallet’s later balance: it showed what the wallet held then, without establishing what it held at the snapshot. The cutoff fixed the historical input for eligibility; it did not establish the token’s delivery date.

Treasury exclusions and vesting status

The announced exclusions removed treasury holdings and non-vested VRTX from the airdrop, so an apparent token balance alone did not establish an eligible holding. The exclusion concerned VRTX vesting status; the July plan said INK would be fully vested and liquid at launch. The snapshot concerned the time at which holdings were recorded. A recorded holding could therefore remain excluded because of its treasury or vesting classification.

The planned burn applied to the excluded treasury and non-vested holdings. Eligible holders’ allocations depended on the qualifying snapshot balance, without a requirement to burn their VRTX.

View full-size image

The plan also included sybil deterrence measures to limit airdrop farming. Those measures concerned participation in the distribution, whereas the snapshot fixed the historical balance used for allocation.

The community pool and individual token quantities

The size of the announced community allocation described the combined pool for eligible holders, while an individual allocation concerned that holder’s share of the distribution. The July 2025 plan allocated 1% of the total INK supply to the VRTX holder airdrop. The denominator was the total INK supply. It was not the holder’s portfolio value or a percentage return on VRTX.

A token quantity also differed from a monetary value. An allocation denominated in INK established units of that token. It did not establish a cash payment, a redemption value or the value of the old VRTX holding. The July 2025 plan quoted approximately 0.018 INK per eligible VRTX.

Exchange custody and customer distribution

The July plan routed centralized-exchange allocations through participating exchanges. The Ink Foundation would send INK for customer distribution, conditional on launch and the exchange’s INK listing. Exchange custody changed who could establish the customer’s credit. A personal wallet balance and an exchange account balance were different records of control. Where an exchange held the tokens, a customer credit was the relevant account outcome. A distribution to the exchange alone did not demonstrate that every customer’s account had received its allocation.

Did the snapshot date start the INK claim window?

The July 2025 terms set a 90-day claim window beginning at INK launch, so the snapshot date did not start that period.

A calendar deadline therefore required the applicable launch date. Counting from the acquisition announcement or snapshot would use the wrong starting event.

Historical VRTX records after the sunset

Historical VRTX holding and reward records concerned units of the old token, even after its sunset. The July 2025 plan stated that VRTX would remain visible in wallets but lose all utility, including staking rewards and buybacks. A reward figure described VRTX rewards; a recorded holding described a VRTX balance. Neither record itself represented an INK distribution.

Trading-account assets and the move to Ink

The Ink agreement changed the exchange’s operating environment and token plan, while trading-account withdrawals concerned assets already held inside the exchange. The transition announced the cessation of trading across the existing EVM deployments and a new exchange planned for Ink. The new exchange plan and the holder airdrop belonged to the same transition, with separate conditions for availability and distribution.

Collateral returned through a withdrawal or account settlement concerned the existing trading account. The INK allocation depended on VRTX holdings at the snapshot. Account funding, closing positions and settling borrowed assets did not by themselves establish an INK receipt. An old account settlement could return collateral without delivering any INK.