Skip to content
Quantix Security Labs

Ashgrove Cover

Parametric cover pools for smart-contract risk.

Capital providers underwrite cover pools; buyers purchase time-bound cover. Claims are assessed by a committee vote against published parametric triggers.

Ecosystem
ARBArbitrum
Category
Insurance
Languages
Solidity
Launched
Jul 2025
77.4BBBModerate risk

Grade BBB · Moderate risk

Adequate posture with notable weaknesses in one or more areas.

+0.3 since Nov 2025 · ±0.0 since Jul 2026

Quantix Protocol Research · as of 24 Oct 2026 · About this data

Risk Index

How the score is built

Six weighted components, each scored 0–100 where higher means less risk. Points are the component value multiplied by its weight; the gap is what the component costs against a perfect score.
ComponentWeightValuePointsGap
Code Security30%8024.0−6.0
Operational Security20%7615.2−4.8
Governance Risk15%7210.8−4.2
Economic Security15%7611.4−3.6
Infrastructure Resilience10%787.8−2.2
Transparency10%828.2−1.8
Quantix Risk Index100%77.4−22.6
CodeOperationalGovernanceEconomicInfrastructureTransparencyAshgrove Cover, Code: 80Ashgrove Cover, Operational: 76Ashgrove Cover, Governance: 72Ashgrove Cover, Economic: 76Ashgrove Cover, Infrastructure: 78Ashgrove Cover, Transparency: 82
Risk Index components: Ashgrove Cover Code 80, Operational 76, Governance 72, Economic 76, Infrastructure 78, Transparency 82
ComponentAshgrove Cover
Code80
Operational76
Governance72
Economic76
Infrastructure78
Transparency82

Grade scale

  1. AAA90–100
  2. AA85–89.9
  3. A80–84.9
  4. BBB75–79.9
  5. BB70–74.9
  6. B65–69.9
  7. CCC60–64.9
  8. CC55–59.9
  9. C50–54.9
  10. D0–49.9

Score history

12 monthly snapshots

Each point is the Risk Index computed from that month’s component values. Markers below the chart show the events that moved a component.
Ashgrove Cover Quantix Risk Index by month
PeriodQuantix Risk Index
Nov ’2577.1
Dec ’2577.1
Jan ’2677.1
Feb ’2677.1
Mar ’2677.1
Apr ’2677.4
May ’2677.4
Jun ’2677.4
Jul ’2677.4
Aug ’2677.4
Sep ’2677.4
Oct ’2677.4
  1. 9 Apr 2026

    Disclosure

    Claims rationale published

    Each decision now ships with a written rationale.

    • Transparency+3

Risk factors

What keeps the score from being higher, most severe first.
  • MediumGovernance RiskProfile analysis

    Committee concentration

    Four members decide each claim; conflicts of interest would directly affect payouts.

  • MediumEconomic SecurityProfile analysis

    Correlated claims

    One widely used dependency failing can trigger many claims at once.

Recommendations

Each recommendation raises one component to a target value. The score effect is recomputed with the Risk Index model, holding every other component fixed.
  • Governance Risk: 72 → 80

    Committee rotation and recusal rules

    Rotate members and publish recusal decisions.

    +1.2

    → 78.6

  • Economic Security: 76 → 82

    Correlation-aware capacity

    Cap cover sold per shared dependency.

    +0.9

    → 78.3

Analysis

Contract, governance and operations

Contract analysis

Source
Verified
Upgradeability
Transparent proxy
Administrative control
Ashgrove timelock (48 h)
Enforced delay
48 hours
External dependencies
Claims committee; Parametric trigger data
  • PassSource verified. Pools, cover NFTs and committee verified.
  • CautionCommittee size. Seven members; four decide a claim.
  • PassTrigger data. Triggers reference published incident criteria.

Governance exposure

Moderate

A small committee decides claims; parameters pass a 48-hour timelock.

Operational resilience

Strong

Claims process documented with public rationale.

Monitoring

Monitoring history

1 recorded security events for Ashgrove Cover, most recent first.
  1. 20 Nov 2025InformationalCover purchases at 1.6× the usual rateContract Activity · CoverPoolResolved

Research assessment

No Quantix assessment of Ashgrove Cover has been published. Its security findings are represented by the contract-analysis signals above: 0 failed and 1 cautionary.

Continue with

Comparable protocols

Compare side by side

Research

Relevant research

Publications on the risks that matter most for a insurance protocol.

Architecture

System components

CoverPool
Underwriting capital and premiums
CoverNFT
Cover positions
ClaimsCommittee
Claim votes and payouts

Turn risk factors into a remediation plan.

A research assessment traces each weakness to code, configuration or process, and verifies the fix before the score moves.