Compare digital asset treasury management agreements without flattening unlike contracts into one fee table.
The public market already contains materially different DAT manager structures. The comparison below keeps role, recurring fee, duration, exit path and currentness together so a Board or finance team can see why a headline percentage is not enough.
| Company / provider | Role | Recurring economics | Initial duration | Ordinary exit / termination structure | Currentness / realized evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forward Industries / Galaxy | Discretionary management of defined Treasury Assets | 0.60% annual AUM fee + documented account expenses | 3 years | Successive 1-year renewals; at least 90 days' notice of non-renewal | 2026 filings continued to disclose the relationship and accrued economics |
| AlphaTON / Alpha Sigma Capital | Discretionary management of designated Account Assets, principally long-only TON with staking / restaking | 1.00% annual fee on Account Assets | 1 year | Automatic renewal; company may terminate on 90 days' notice if it has decided to end the TON DAT strategy | 2026 annual report disclosed $80,918 paid for FY2026 and about $2.5m of digital assets managed at Mar. 31; CIO / Chairman also led the manager |
| AVAX One / Hivemind | Discretionary digital-asset management including AVAX staking, transfers, trades and sales | 1.25% annual Account Size fee + documented out-of-pocket expenses | 10 years | Cause-based termination: company 30 days, manager 60 days; immediate manager exit for regulatory-law issue | June 2026 filing: about $1.0m incurred in first half; fees paid in full; manager identified as related party |
| Enlivex / Elinnovation | RAIN-focused digital-asset management with trading / staking scope subject to investment guidelines and company controls | Generally 2.00% annually of total treasury value, calculated daily | 3 years | Beginning after first anniversary, either party may terminate for any reason on at least 30 days' notice | 2026 annual report continued to disclose manager / fee; March 2026 financing amendment added Lind rights over specified digital-asset collateral |
| Upexi / GSR | Discretionary crypto-treasury management, principally long-only Solana with staking / restaking | 1.75% annual AUM fee + disclosed warrants | 20 years | Company non-cause termination required a two-thirds common-stockholder vote and specified termination economics | Agreement later terminated; arbitration remained active in 2026 disclosures |
| Mango DAT / Cube | Platform + MPC-wallet layer plus discretionary management of Account Assets, initially Solana | Graduated 10–30 bps AUC charges + separate 2% execution-management economics + $2,500 monthly minimum | 1 year | Automatic 2-month renewals; at least 30 days' notice to stop renewal; breach termination with cure | Original terms are public; June 2026 10-Q did not repeat Cube / Solana / Mango DAT references, so active status requires confirmation |
This is not a fairness ranking and not a universal market-rate table. The contracts are only comparable after provider role, fee denominator, authority, duration, governance and current agreement status are normalized.
Five conclusions jump out before any “market rate” conclusion is attempted
1. Duration can dominate the fee rate
A lower recurring percentage can still represent a materially different commitment if the mandate is ten or twenty years rather than one to three years. The economic question is not just “what is the annual rate?” but “what is the expected and avoidable total relationship exposure?”
2. Exit conditions matter even when the initial term is short
AlphaTON / Alpha Sigma has a one-year initial term, but the company-side termination right disclosed in the 2026 annual report is tied to a decision to end the TON treasury strategy. A short term therefore does not automatically mean unrestricted replacement flexibility.
3. The word “management” does not define a comparable role
Forward, AlphaTON, AVAX One and Enlivex disclose discretionary digital-asset management mandates with different control frameworks. Mango / Cube combines infrastructure, wallet services and discretionary management in one stack. Role normalization must precede price comparison.
4. Exit structure can invert the apparent fee ranking
Enlivex's 2% rate sits inside a three-year agreement with a no-cause exit path beginning after the first anniversary. Upexi's lower 1.75% rate was embedded in a 20-year structure with restrictive company-side exit mechanics. Comparing only the percentages would miss the most important difference.
5. Currentness is a separate diligence field
AlphaTON shows why agreement families must be followed independently: its DWF treasury-management relationship settled and terminated while Alpha Sigma remained separately disclosed. Upexi shows why later termination filings matter; Enlivex shows how financing can amend the control stack without replacing the manager; Mango / Cube shows why later silence should be treated as an unresolved currentness question rather than guessed status.
What a Board-ready comparison should add beyond this public screen
- Current executed agreement and every material amendment
- Same-role peers selected for mandate, authority and asset scope
- Exact fee denominators and dollarized exposure at the target's scale
- Warrants, equity, minimum fees, success fees and reimbursable expenses
- Related-party ownership, Board relationships and financing links
- Earliest ordinary exit window and disclosed termination economics
- Realized renegotiations, internalizations, settlements or disputes
- Unknowns and non-comparability notes rather than forced averages
One target agreement family, currentness reconstruction, 5–7 verified public comparables, fee / exit normalization, relevant realized outcomes, source ledger and one revision.
Board / CFO review path → See scope and deliverables →Related research
Management agreement review guide →
Provider fee normalization →
Termination and exit economics →
Digital asset treasury companies →
Public-source factual commercial research only. No legal, fairness, fiduciary, accounting or investment opinion and no recommendation to retain or terminate any provider.