Where attn Sits Next to Avici, Slash, Krak, Pye, Wildcat, Altitude, 3Jane, Xitadel, Colossus, and Klarna + Tempo

Avici.money is building a Solana-native, internet neobank aimed at replacing the traditional retail bank account:

• self-custodial Visa spend cards connected to stablecoin balances, usable at 150M+ merchants
• USD/EUR accounts via regulated partners for salary deposit and on-/off-ramp
• an “internet native” Trust Score designed as a credit primitive for unsecured lending
• a roadmap that explicitly includes unsecured loans, personal and business credit lines, and home mortgages funded from onchain investor pools

Their go-to-market emphasises a set of tightly coupled “network effect nodes”:

• Trust Score – a programmable, onchain credit identity and scoring primitive
• Payroll accounts (smart wallets) – where users receive paychecks in USD, EUR, or stablecoins
• Employers ⇆ employees – payroll networks where employers pay through Avici rails
• Visa spend card – the front-end to everyday spend and interchange
• Credit layer – unsecured loans, major credit lines, and eventually mortgages for users with strong Trust Scores

The intended loop is:

• users and employers adopt Avici for payroll and everyday spend,
• data from those flows and other signals feeds the Trust Score,
• the Trust Score unlocks unsecured loans and mortgages financed by onchain credit pools,
• those loans, in turn, further embed Avici as a primary financial home.

Governance and capital formation are designed to be DAO-driven:

• the ICO is structured with no team allocation and a monthly allowance from the treasury, gated by futarchy-style decision markets rather than a trusted multisig,
• the long-term goal is a distributed internet banking infrastructure that reduces dependence on central banks and fiat interest-rate policy.

Relative to attn.markets:

• Avici is where people bank:

  • receive salaries and income,
  • hold balances in stablecoins and fiat,
  • spend via Visa,
  • and, over time, access unsecured loans and mortgages using a Trust Score.

• attn.markets is where apps, DAOs, creators, and networks bank their revenue streams:

  • route protocol/creator fees into governed revenue accounts,
  • borrow against those revenues,
  • and pool revenue-backed PT/YT positions into attnUSD.

In a realistic stack:

• an employer or DAO might pay contributors into Avici accounts and cards,
• while the protocol or app’s own revenue PDAs are wired into attn.markets for advances and revolving credit.

Avici is an internet neobank and trust-score credit layer for people and payroll; attn.markets is a revenue-native credit engine for the entities and apps generating the income that flows into those personal rails.

Slash is a business banking and expense-management platform:

• FDIC-insured business checking via partner banks.
• Unlimited virtual and physical corporate cards with cashback and fine-grained controls (card groups, merchant limits, country restrictions, etc.).
• Stablecoin payments and on/off-ramps for major stablecoins.
• A Global USD Account where balances are represented by USDSL, Slash’s own USD-pegged stablecoin backed by high-quality liquid assets and issued on a modern L2 via a stablecoin infrastructure partner.

The card stack has two main components:

• A debit card tied directly to the business checking balance.
• A premium charge-style card (e.g. “Slash Platinum”) issued by a partner bank, where the outstanding balance is due in full on a very short cycle (often daily).

In other words:

• For day-to-day card usage, credit exposure is very short-term (charge-card style), with the issuing bank acting as lender of record.
• Limits and risk are managed through entity-level underwriting plus spend controls (card groups, merchant/country filters, real-time authorization hooks).

For longer-tenor credit, Slash offers Working Capital:

• Working-capital loans and lines are delivered in partnership with a specialist fintech lender and a chartered bank that originates the loans.
• Users apply via a flow embedded in the Slash dashboard; the lending partner underwrites and sets a line.
• Drawdowns are credited into a dedicated account inside Slash and can then be spent using the same cards and payment workflows as regular funds.
• Terms are typically structured around 30/60/90-day horizons to match business cash-flow cycles.

Global USD + USDSL add a cross-border and onchain dimension:

• Non-U.S. entities can access a USD account without needing a U.S. LLC, hold a USDSL-denominated balance, and send/receive stablecoins and fiat rails (wires, ACH, local transfers) from one place.
• USDSL is effectively a closed-loop stablecoin that underpins those balances; rewards on Global USD are structured as promotional rebates funded by Slash, not as onchain interest paid by the issuer.

Relative to attn.markets:

• Slash is where the entity banks and spends:

  • fiat and stablecoin accounts,
  • corporate cards,
  • wires/ACH/local transfers,
  • stablecoin rails.

• attn.markets is where onchain revenues are treated as collateral:

  • Solana-native revenue accounts,
  • revenue-backed advances and credit lines,
  • a pooled USD share token (attnUSD) backed by revenue PT/YT positions.

A Web3 protocol or creator can reasonably:

• funnel onchain revenues into an attn.markets revenue account for credit and yield,
• then move funds (via bridge/off-ramp) into a Slash account or Global USD,
• and use Slash cards and payments to cover fiat suppliers, ad spend, and operations.

In that stack, Slash is the regulated business-banking and card front end, while attn.markets is a revenue-backed credit engine for onchain-native clients.

Krak is a global money app from Kraken:

• A personal Everyday account that can hold and move 400+ fiat and crypto assets.
• Global, low-friction transfers to 160+ countries, often framed as “send like a message” using handles (Kraktags) instead of IBANs.
• Auto-earn on eligible balances (e.g. a base APY on holdings) plus vaults for higher, DeFi-like yields on selected assets.
• A cashback/refunds and rewards layer tied to usage and balances.

The centrepiece for everyday spending is Krak Card:

• A Mastercard debit card (virtual + physical) linked to the Krak Everyday account.
• Lets you spend from your balance of 400+ assets (fiat and crypto) at any Mastercard merchant worldwide, plus ATM withdrawals.
• Multi-asset spend: you set a spend order in-app; Krak converts assets in that order into your primary currency (GBP for UK, EUR for EEA) at the time of authorization, combining multiple assets if needed.
• No FX / foreign transaction fees on card spend, and no annual/monthly fee; a spread on conversion may apply but is built into the quoted rate.
• Cashback:
  • Up to around 1% base cashback on everyday spend, paid in either local fiat or Bitcoin.
  • Boosted cashback (e.g. higher rewards on travel booked via Krak’s concierge/partners).
  • Reward rate tiers that depend on the average assets you hold across Krak/Kraken/Kraken Pro.

Krak is explicitly positioned as a bank alternative:

• Salary deposits / direct deposit into the Krak Everyday account.
• Global transfers and P2P, including to non-crypto-native users, with a UX similar to neobanks.
• “Spend, send, grow” framing: card, transfers, and yields in a single consumer app.

Relative to attn.markets:

• Krak is where people hold and spend their money (fiat + crypto) and earn yield.
• attn.markets is where apps, creators, DAOs, and networks centralise and collateralise their revenue streams.

You can imagine a full loop:

• A creator or protocol routes its fees into an attn.markets revenue account, borrows against them, and/or issues PT/YT and attnUSD.
• That income pays out contributors or users who custody and spend via Krak.
• Krak is the personal front-end; attn.markets is the project-level revenue and credit engine behind some of the flows that land in it.

Pye.fi focuses on Solana staking yield:

• staked positions are decomposed into:
  • a principal component
  • a yield component
• and those pieces can be traded or structured separately

The underlying risk is:

• validator and protocol performance
• staking rewards and MEV
• stake mechanics

attn.markets uses a similar “principal / yield” mental model but with a different underlying:

• protocol and creator revenues, not validator rewards

Where Pye.fi enables positions around future staking income,
attn.markets enables positions around future protocol and creator income:

• revenue advances
• revenue-backed credit lines
• pooled revenue yield via a USD share token
• plus base-layer yield on idle balances in revenue accounts, where appropriate

In short:

• Pye.fi = slicing up stake yield
• attn.markets = slicing up business revenue

Wildcat.finance builds undercollateralised credit markets:

• vetted borrowers deploy their own loan “markets” with:
  • fixed terms
  • reserve requirements
  • withdrawal rules
• lenders deposit stablecoins into those markets and earn interest

Protection there comes from:

• market design (reserves, penalties, lockups)
• whitelists and screening
• optional off-chain legal agreements
• the borrower’s reputation

attn.markets is more prescriptive about what backs the loan:

• credit is explicitly backed by tokenised revenue streams:
  • revenues are routed into a dual-controlled vault (e.g. Squads 2/2)
  • those revenues mint PT (principal) and YT (future revenue) claims
  • advances and credit lines are written directly against those PT/YT/SY positions

At a high level:

• Wildcat.finance = structured undercollateralised credit where “collateral” is mostly reputation + market parameters
• attn.markets = undercollateralised credit anchored in concrete, wired revenue flows and their PT/YT tokens

Altitude (Squads.xyz) is a stablecoin-powered financial product for businesses:

• USD and EUR “accounts” backed by stablecoins, with local details for ACH, wire and SEPA transfers
• tools for sending and receiving bank transfers and stablecoin payments through the same interface
• yield on balances via short-term U.S. Treasuries, presented as an APY on idle cash
• multi-user controls, approvals, and workflows aimed at ops and finance teams
• roadmap features like corporate cards and a CFO tool suite (invoicing, bill pay, accounting)

It is positioned as:

• a replacement or complement to traditional business bank accounts
• with global availability and onchain settlement under the hood

attn.markets sits alongside this, rather than inside the same problem:

• Altitude (Squads.xyz) focuses on where your stablecoin cash lives, how it earns low-risk yield, and how you pay people
• attn.markets focuses on how your onchain revenues are routed, pledged, financed, and optionally put to work while idle

A single protocol or DAO could reasonably:

• hold operating cash, payroll, and vendors in an Altitude (Squads.xyz)-style account
• route protocol / creator revenues into an attn.markets revenue account for financing and base yield
• treat attnUSD as a separate credit-yield sleeve on top of its core treasury

Altitude (Squads.xyz) is treasury and payments; attn.markets is revenue-backed structuring, credit, and revenue-native yield.

3Jane.xyz is a credit-based money market on Ethereum:

• borrowers receive unsecured USDC credit lines with no onchain collateral posted,
• underwriting uses a multi-source credit engine:
  • onchain DeFi / CEX / RWA positions across many protocols and asset types,
  • offchain credit data (e.g. credit scores, income, bank balances) verified via secure attestations,
  • combined into a proprietary score and limits model.
• capital suppliers deposit USDC to mint USD3, a yield-bearing stablecoin that represents a share of the credit pool,
• USD3 can be staked into sUSD3 for levered exposure to the same credit book.

This implies a different trust and privacy model:

• 3Jane.xyz’s lines depend on linking wallets to real-world financial accounts and credit data.
• attn.markets does not require any of that. attn.markets underwrites strictly from onchain revenue routing into governed revenue accounts.

The core mechanics:

• Borrower side

  • target segment today is high-balance users and entities with substantial verified assets and strong scores,
  • credit lines are sized by aggregate verified assets and credit quality,
  • minimum payments and utilisation rules are enforced offchain via legal agreements and, if needed, collections.

• LP side

  • suppliers face a diversified pool of unsecured lines,
  • yield is driven by interest and fees on those lines,
  • loss protection uses an insurance / first-loss structure plus diversification and conservative caps on pool utilisation.

How this differs from attn.markets:

• Collateral type

  • 3Jane.xyz: lines are economically unsecured at the onchain level; protection relies on verified asset snapshots, credit scores, and enforceable legal recourse.
  • attn.markets: positions are explicitly secured by live revenue routing into governed revenue accounts (e.g. fee PDAs, creator rewards, machine income), with programmable waterfalls on those flows.

• Who it primarily serves

  • 3Jane.xyz: credit accounts for individuals and entities with substantial, verifiable asset footprints and credit histories.
  • attn.markets: revenue infrastructure for apps, DAOs, creators, and networks that want to fund work directly out of protocol or creator income, often natively pseudonymous and global.

• What the yield token represents

  • 3Jane.xyz’s USD3: a yield-bearing USDC-like asset whose backing is a pool of unsecured credit lines.
  • attnUSD: a USD share in a portfolio of revenue-backed PT/YT positions and stablecoins, where each position is tied to a specified revenue account and routing schedule.

You can think of it this way:

• 3Jane.xyz is building a future-yield credit account for asset-rich users, with unsecured lines mapped to a yield-bearing stablecoin.
• attn.markets is building revenue-native banking rails for apps and creators, where specific fee and reward streams sit in revenue accounts, support advances and credit lines, and roll up into a pooled revenue-backed USD token.

They share:

• the belief that future cashflows (not just static collateral) can back credit,
• the use of a yield-bearing USD token as an access point for LP capital.

They differ in:

• what they treat as primary collateral (multi-source balance sheets vs wired revenues),
• which users they optimise for,
• and how much they lean on offchain credit and legal enforcement versus onchain revenue routing.

Xitadel.fi focuses on project treasuries and native tokens:

• projects lock a portion of their treasury (typically native tokens) into a collateral vault,
• against that collateral they mint Liquid Treasury Tokens (LTTs), which are:
  • overcollateralised,
  • fixed-term,
  • designed to behave like onchain bond instruments for the project,
• investors buy LTTs with stablecoins and receive a defined return profile over the term.

The underlying object is:

• the token treasury and its market value,
• not the live revenue stream of the protocol or creator.

The protection stack includes:

• collateral ratios and coverage thresholds,
• automated monitoring and liquidation rules over the treasury backing,
• standardised issuance and reporting, so investors know what is backing each LTT.

attn.markets looks at a different part of the same balance sheet:

• Xitadel.fi: “How much capital can you raise against the tokens you already hold in your treasury?”
• attn.markets: “How much capital can you raise against the revenues your system produces over time?”

In practice, a project could:

• use Xitadel.fi to unlock a slice of its native-token treasury via LTTs,
• route protocol or app revenues into an attn.markets revenue account to back advances and credit lines,
• and let attnUSD or other credit LPs selectively hold LTTs as part of a broader revenue and credit book.

Xitadel.fi is a treasury-debt layer; attn.markets is a revenue-debt and revenue-yield layer.

Colossus.credit positions itself as a stablecoin credit-card and payments network built as an Ethereum L2. Public materials emphasize:

• compatibility with existing EMV card terminals,
• using account abstraction (ERC-4337) so card taps can authorize onchain transactions,
• very fast “preconfirmation” for card authorization,
• vertical integration of issuer, processor, and network to reduce fees.

There is limited detail available so far beyond the landing-page narrative. No full technical specification, developer documentation set, or public codebase is clearly exposed yet. The project appears early in its process, with many implementation and go-to-market specifics still undisclosed.

Colossus.credit is adjacent to attn.markets only at the highest level (both are financial infrastructure). It targets consumer/merchant payment rails; attn.markets targets revenue-collateralised credit and yield for onchain businesses.

Klarna is a large BNPL and checkout network that finances consumer purchases and collects instalments from shoppers on behalf of merchants. Its core risk book is consumer receivables and merchant performance, not protocol-level credit to other apps.

Recently, Klarna announced a USD-pegged stablecoin to reduce costs for international payments and FX, and to route more of its settlement flow over crypto rails. That stablecoin is planned to launch on Tempo, a dedicated payments Layer 1. Tempo is an EVM-compatible L1 incubated by Stripe and Paradigm, designed for high-volume, real-world payments with a strong focus on stablecoin transactions and low fees.

In that stack:

• Klarna handles:

  • consumer BNPL underwriting,
  • merchant integration and checkout UX,
  • collections on consumer instalments.

• Tempo provides:

  • payments-focused blockspace,
  • stablecoin settlement for Klarna and other partners,
  • an environment optimised for high-throughput, low-cost transactions.

Where attn.markets differs and could intersect:

• attn.markets does not take consumer risk or originate BNPL receivables.
• It could, however, lend to:
  • Klarna-style BNPL platforms as entities, against their net fee and interest revenue streams, or
  • merchants and platforms operating on Tempo that have predictable, onchain revenues.

In that setup:

• consumer instalments and credit risk stay on Klarna’s balance sheet (or similar BNPL providers),
• Tempo remains the payments and settlement L1,
• attn.markets is a separate revenue-backed credit engine that can fund BNPL providers or merchants at the entity level, without touching individual shoppers.

This keeps the boundary clear:

• Klarna/Tempo = consumer BNPL and payments rails,
• attn.markets = revenue-backed financing for businesses that happen to run over those rails.