About This Template
The vesting schedule is one of the most consequential documents a Web3 project creates. It determines when founders, team members, investors, and advisors can access their token allocations, and therefore shapes the sell pressure profile of the token for months and years after TGE. A poorly designed or poorly communicated vesting schedule creates three specific risks: it damages trust with the community if unlock events are not clearly disclosed in advance; it creates legal and governance disputes with team members or investors if the terms are ambiguous; and it makes it impossible to accurately forecast circulating supply, which is a fundamental input for any token price analysis or treasury management decision.
This template provides the infrastructure to model, manage, and communicate the complete vesting and unlock schedule across all stakeholder categories for the first 36 months post-TGE. It is designed to serve as both the internal record (updated as grants are made and vesting events occur) and the basis for the public-facing tokenomics disclosures that sophisticated communities increasingly expect. It is also the primary input for the IFRS 2 share-based payment accounting that applies when tokens are granted to employees and service providers.
The template covers four areas: the vesting schedule (every stakeholder, every cliff, every unlock); the circulating supply projection month by month; the treasury impact calendar showing when significant unlock events will occur and what action may be required; and guidance on the IFRS 2 accounting treatment for token grants.
What's Included
- Instructions sheet — Overview of vesting schedule design principles, why unlock management matters for market dynamics, and a reference guide to the template's four sheets
- Vesting Schedule sheet — Stakeholder-by-stakeholder vesting table with pre-populated rows for Team (individual entries), Advisors, Seed Investors, Series A Investors, Community, Ecosystem, and Foundation allocations. Columns include: Stakeholder Category, Name/Label, Total Allocation, TGE Unlock %, TGE Unlock Tokens, Cliff (months), Vest Duration (months), Monthly Unlock (after cliff), and Unlock Type (Linear/Milestone). A month-by-month column view shows unlocks for months 0–36. Total and cumulative rows sum all unlocks per month and show cumulative circulating supply
- Circulating Supply Schedule sheet — 36-row monthly projection showing New Unlocks (tokens), Cumulative Unlocked (tokens), Total Supply, Circulating %, and Notes. Highlighted markers for cliff dates and major unlock events
- Treasury Impact sheet — Calendar of unlock events sorted by date, showing for each event: the stakeholder category, quantity unlocking, percentage of total supply, implied market value at a reference token price, and treasury note or action required
How to Use This Template
- Enter the TGE date and total token supply. In the Vesting Schedule sheet, enter the TGE date in the input cell and the total token supply. All monthly unlock calculations reference the TGE date, so this is the most important single input in the model. If your TGE date changes, update this cell and all calculated dates and unlock amounts will update accordingly.
- Populate the stakeholder rows. For each stakeholder or stakeholder category, enter the total token allocation, the TGE unlock percentage (what they receive on day zero), the cliff period, the vesting duration, and the unlock type. For team members with individual grants, create a separate row for each named individual — this is important for IFRS 2 accounting purposes (grant date fair value must be determined per individual grant) and for governance (vesting should be tied to the individual, not the category). For community, ecosystem, and foundation allocations, a single row per category is typically sufficient.
- Review the month-by-month unlock columns. The Monthly Unlock (after cliff) column feeds into the month-by-month view. Review each month's total unlock row to identify any months where aggregate unlocks are unusually large — these are your key risk months for sell pressure. Any month where aggregate unlocks exceed 2–3% of total circulating supply at that time should be noted and planned for proactively.
- Populate the Circulating Supply Schedule. Once the Vesting Schedule is complete, the monthly new unlock figures feed into the Circulating Supply Schedule. Complete the Notes column with any relevant context for key months: major cliff dates (when team or investor vesting begins), planned exchange listings that coincide with large unlocks, or community initiatives that may affect demand at the same time as large supply events.
- Build the Treasury Impact calendar. For each significant unlock event (a cliff date releasing a large tranche, a full vesting completion, or any single-month unlock exceeding 1% of total supply), create a row in the Treasury Impact sheet. Calculate the implied GBP or USD value at a reference token price, and document any treasury action that may be required — for example, whether the treasury intends to use some of its own holdings to provide liquidity around a large unlock event, or whether a token buyback has been planned.
- Publish the schedule and communicate upcoming unlocks. The Vesting Schedule and Circulating Supply Schedule should be published in the project documentation and kept up to date as new grants are made. For each major unlock event — ideally 30 days and again 7 days in advance — publish a community update noting the upcoming unlock, the quantity, the category, and any relevant context. This proactive communication is the single most effective mechanism for managing community reaction to supply increases.
- Determine the IFRS 2 treatment for each individual grant. For each team or adviser grant, determine the grant date (the date on which the token grant was agreed), the fair value of the tokens at the grant date (typically the most recent transaction price or TGE price), and the vesting period. The annual IFRS 2 charge is: total tokens x grant date fair value, divided by vesting period in years (with the charge recognised on a straight-line basis over the vesting period for linear grants).
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a standard vesting schedule for founders?
The market standard for founder token vesting in a Web3 project is broadly analogous to equity vesting in a venture-backed startup: a total vesting period of four years with a one-year cliff, followed by monthly linear vesting over the remaining three years. The one-year cliff means that if a founder leaves within the first year, they receive no tokens — after the cliff, they have earned 25% of their allocation, and each subsequent month earns an additional 1/48th of the total. Some projects use a longer cliff (18 or 24 months) or a shorter vesting period (three years) — these are design choices that reflect the team's risk appetite and their investors' expectations. The key principle is that the schedule should create genuine long-term alignment: a founder who can access all their tokens within 12 months of TGE is not meaningfully aligned with the long-term value creation of the protocol. Investors conducting diligence will typically expect to see the founder vesting schedule and will scrutinise any deviations from the 4-year standard.
How should we communicate unlock events to the market?
Best practice for unlock communication involves a three-stage approach. First, the complete vesting schedule should be published before TGE in a public tokenomics document, ideally with a visual chart showing the circulating supply curve month by month. This sets expectations and demonstrates transparency. Second, as each significant unlock event approaches — typically defined as any single-month unlock exceeding 0.5–1% of circulating supply — publish a community update 30 days in advance. The update should state: the date of the unlock, the quantity, the category of beneficiary (Team/Investors/Ecosystem), the percentage of total supply it represents, and any context about whether the tokens are expected to be sold or locked. Third, on the day of the unlock, publish a confirmation note. This consistent communication rhythm builds trust and reduces the information asymmetry that causes market volatility around unlock events. What communities react most badly to is discovering a large unlock after it has happened — not the unlock itself.
What is the difference between cliff vesting and linear vesting?
Cliff vesting means that all vested tokens are released in a single tranche at a specific future date — for example, all team tokens unlock on the 12-month anniversary of TGE. Linear vesting means that tokens vest continuously over a period, with equal amounts becoming available each month or each day. In practice, most vesting schedules combine both: a cliff period (during which no tokens vest) followed by linear vesting (during which tokens vest monthly after the cliff is reached). The common shorthand "1-year cliff, 3-year linear" means: nothing vests for the first 12 months, then 1/36th of the remaining allocation vests each month for the following 36 months. Milestone vesting is a third approach where tokens vest upon achievement of specific deliverables rather than on a time basis — this is more common for adviser grants than for core team or investor allocations.
How do we account for token grants under IFRS 2?
Token grants to employees and service providers that are settled in tokens (equity-settled share-based payments in IFRS 2 terminology) are accounted for by measuring the fair value of the tokens at the grant date and recognising that fair value as an expense over the vesting period. The grant date is the date on which the grant is agreed and the recipient becomes entitled to vest — it is not the date the tokens are actually transferred. The fair value at grant date is fixed: subsequent movements in token price do not change the recognised expense. For a linear vesting grant, the annual expense is: (total tokens granted x fair value per token at grant date) divided by vesting period in years, recognised in each accounting period on a straight-line basis. The corresponding credit is to equity (not liabilities), since the obligation will be settled in tokens not cash. If tokens are granted before TGE when there is no market price, fair value must be estimated — typically using the last pre-TGE transaction price or a valuation methodology. Each individual grant should be tracked separately in this template because grants made at different dates will have different grant date fair values and different expense recognition profiles.
What happens if a team member leaves before their cliff date?
If a team member leaves before their cliff date and forfeits their unvested tokens, the IFRS 2 treatment depends on the terms of the grant. Where the unvested tokens are forfeited, the previously recognised expense is reversed in the period of forfeiture — the cumulative expense recognised to date is written back through P&L. This reversal reflects the principle that IFRS 2 expense should only be recognised for grants that actually vest. If the departing team member retains some tokens (for example, on a good leaver basis under the governance documents), then the portion retained is treated as fully vested at the departure date and the remaining unvested expense is recognised immediately. It is important to document the good leaver/bad leaver provisions in the token grant agreement clearly before any grants are made — ambiguity at the point of departure creates legal and accounting complications that are difficult to resolve after the fact.
Can vesting schedules be modified after TGE?
Vesting schedules can be modified, but modifications after TGE are complex from both a governance and accounting perspective. Under IFRS 2, a modification that increases the fair value of the grant (for example, extending the vesting period or reducing the cliff) is accounted for by recognising the incremental fair value of the modification as additional expense over the remaining vesting period. A modification that decreases the fair value (for example, increasing the number of tokens required to vest or extending the cliff) does not result in a reduction in the expense — the original grant expense continues to be recognised as if the modification had not occurred. From a governance perspective, modifications to major stakeholder vesting schedules (particularly founder or investor vesting) should require board or governance body approval, and any change that affects the circulating supply schedule should be disclosed to the community promptly. Changes to vesting terms that create sudden increases in circulating supply without disclosure are among the most reputationally damaging actions a protocol can take.
