Onramp published a paper this week that examines Digital Credit — a structured financial product overcollateralized by corporate bitcoin holdings. But a source who reviewed the document claims much of it was generated by AI, and that a factual error slipped into the preface. The mistake? The paper describes a woman in a Strategy advertisement as a model. The ad itself shows she worked as an engineer.
The error in the preface
The preface of Onramp’s paper cites a Strategy ad to illustrate something about corporate credibility. But the source says the paper got the woman’s role wrong. She’s an engineer in the ad, not a model. It’s a small detail — but one that raises questions about how closely the text was vetted before publication. The source says the rest of the paper also reads like AI output, with little original analysis.
What Digital Credit is
Digital Credit, as the paper explains, is a credit instrument that sits on top of corporate bitcoin holdings. It’s overcollateralized, meaning the issuer commits assets beyond the loan value. That gives it external capital — something a plain portfolio of BTC and U.S. Treasuries lacks. The paper notes that Digital Credit offers flexibility in collateral management, and the security itself is fungible and liquid. It defines the “BTC Rating” metric as the ratio of Bitcoin NAV to the sum of the notional value of a credit series plus all more senior series.
The risk of mixing BTC and Treasuries
The paper also contrasts Digital Credit with a combined BTC-and-Treasuries portfolio. Treasuries come with the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, but the source notes a risk of default or policy shift influenced by modern monetary theory. Combining bitcoin with Treasuries introduces exposure to potential U.S. debt restructuring. Digital Credit avoids that exposure because its structure relies on overcollateralization, not sovereign credit.
The mistake in the preface may seem small, but it undercuts the paper’s credibility on a topic that demands precision. Onramp hasn’t publicly addressed the source’s claims.
