TORQ
TORQ explains governed credit operations for digital and tokenized assets.
- 03 OCT 2026
- 5 min read
Who can change a credit facility?
The initial term sheet is only part of the decision. Trace who may propose, approve, execute, and disclose changes to collateral, valuation, limits, rates, and exits.
A facility can start with clear terms and become materially different if an authorized party changes collateral eligibility, pricing, valuation, capacity, or withdrawal settings.
A useful review asks who can make each change and how participants learn that it occurred.
Technical permission is only one layer. The applicable agreements decide contractual rights, required consent, and notice.
A wallet with execution authority does not automatically own the economic decision or the investors' rights.
Map authority by decision, not job title alone.
For each setting, record who proposes and approves a new value, who executes it, and what investors can inspect afterward.
The table below is a diligence template. It does not assign universal TORQ permissions or imply that all changes are available in every facility.
- Collateral eligibility
- Decision evidence to request: Who judged the asset and approved its limits?
- Execution and disclosure evidence: What changed onchain, when, and where is the approved asset list shown?
- Valuation source
- Decision evidence to request: Why is the new feed or NAV method acceptable?
- Execution and disclosure evidence: What stale-data checks and effective time apply?
- Borrowing rate model
- Decision evidence to request: Which mandate or policy permits the change?
- Execution and disclosure evidence: Which parameters changed, and what borrower notice applies?
- Exit policy
- Decision evidence to request: Whose consent is required to alter investor rights?
- Execution and disclosure evidence: Which requests are already outstanding, and how are they treated?
Replacing a valuation source.
Suppose a manager wants to replace a collateral price feed after repeated stale updates.
Before execution, the review should identify affected markets and loans, compare the old and new methodologies, test price divergence and outage behavior, and confirm who may authorize the replacement.
After an authorized change, the record should show the effective configuration and time. Borrower capacity and liquidation status should be recalculated through the approved data path.
If a feed is unavailable or unvalidated, the facility should follow its stated fail-closed policy rather than silently using a different price.
This example describes a review process, not a representation that a particular TORQ deployment has undergone such a change.
Five questions for the investment committee.
- Which settings can move without investor consent, and which require notice or a vote?
- Are proposal, approval, execution, and reporting powers held by the same party?
- What delay, emergency path, or pause applies to each high-impact change?
- What happens to existing loans and queued exits when a rule changes?
- Can the committee inspect both the decision record and the persisted post-change state?
