Status: RESEARCH / PRE-CAPTURE ONLY
Subject: FTX collapse, customer shortfall, Chapter 11 claim valuation, asset recovery, creditor distributions, regulatory enforcement, and criminal adjudication
Research date: 2026-08-09
Scope: source inventory, authority/posture, record-contradiction map, provisional five-claim matrix, capture hazards, reverse-source candidates
Explicit non-claims: This dossier creates no CaptureReceipt, SourceEdition, SRS receipt, custody, admission, final standing, article prose, or canonical Counterpedia identity.

A. SUBJECT / DISAMBIGUATION

Common name

FTX collapse

Exact event/entity scope

The November 2022 collapse and Chapter 11 bankruptcy of FTX Trading Ltd. and affiliated debtors; the relationship between FTX.com and Alameda Research; the customer-asset shortfall identified after the bankruptcy filing; the U.S. bankruptcy court's treatment and valuation of digital-asset claims; recovery and monetization of estate assets; Chapter 11 plan confirmation and distributions; federal securities/commodities enforcement; the criminal conviction, sentence, and direct appeal of Samuel Bankman-Fried; and the distinction between bankruptcy recovery percentages and the economic value of digital assets customers believed they held.

This dossier is not:

• a complete history of every FTX entity worldwide;

• a complete page on every FTX executive;

• an investment-performance page for Bitcoin or other tokens;

• a general crypto-regulation article;

• a final determination of every claimant's individual economic loss.

Important identifiers / terms

• FTX / FTX.com

• FTX Trading Ltd.

• West Realm Shires Inc. / FTX US

• Alameda Research LLC / Alameda Research Ltd.

• Samuel Bankman-Fried / SBF

• Caroline Ellison

• Zixiao "Gary" Wang

• Nishad Singh

• Chapter 11 Case No. 22-11068 (JTD/KBO), D. Del.

• Petition Date: November 11, 2022

• FTX Recovery Trust

• Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization

• D.I. 26404 / Plan Exhibit A D.I. 26404-1

• Digital Asset Conversion Table

• D.I. 7090

• Digital Asset Claims

• Customer Entitlement Claims

• Class 5A Dotcom Customer Entitlement Claims

• Class 5B U.S. Customer Entitlement Claims

• Classes 6A / 6B

• Class 7 Convenience Claims

• Allowed Claim / Disputed Claim

• post-petition interest / Consensus Rate

• FTX Digital Markets Ltd. / FTX DM / Bahamas

• FTT

• CFTC restitution / disgorgement

• criminal forfeiture

• U.S. v. Bankman-Fried, No. 22-cr-00673 (S.D.N.Y.)

• U.S. v. Bankman-Fried, No. 24-961-cr (2d Cir.)

Naming / semantic traps

1. "Customer balance" is not the same object as "Allowed Claim." Customer portal balances are reconstructed as of November 11, 2022; bankruptcy claims can be disputed, reconciled, converted, adjusted, transferred, or subjected to jurisdictional/process requirements.

2. A digital-asset quantity is not the same object as its bankruptcy USD claim value. The bankruptcy process adopted a Digital Asset Conversion Table for plan voting/distribution purposes.

3. "105% recovery" is not "105% of the current value of the crypto customers held." It is a cumulative distribution percentage against an allowed bankruptcy claim denominator, with post-petition interest mechanics.

4. "Paid back in crypto" is not the U.S. Recovery Trust distribution model. The Recovery Trust sends distributions to service providers in U.S. dollars; recipients may then choose services that permit purchases of digital assets where lawful.

5. "FTX customers got 105%" is overbroad. As of the July 31, 2026 fifth distribution, different classes had different cumulative percentages, and only allowed/eligible claims satisfying distribution requirements participate on a given distribution date.

6. "$8.7 billion" has multiple appearances in the record with different meanings. The Debtors reported approximately $8.7 billion owed to FTX.com customers as of the petition date; the CFTC later obtained $8.7 billion in restitution as one component of a $12.7 billion consent judgment. Same number ≠ same measurement object.

7. "$12.7 billion judgment" is not a measurement of customer-account shortfall. It comprises $8.7 billion restitution + $4 billion disgorgement under a CFTC consent order.

8. "$11 billion forfeiture" is not a bankruptcy customer-loss statistic. It is criminal forfeiture imposed on Bankman-Fried.

9. "$14.7–$16.5 billion available for distribution" is not what FTX held for customers at collapse. It is a later projected pool of recovered/monetized property for plan distributions.

10. "Insolvent" and "unable to meet withdrawals" should not be casually treated as identical balance-sheet propositions. The Second Circuit says FTX filed for bankruptcy because it was unable to meet customer withdrawal requests. Bankman-Fried's own defense argued assets could ultimately cover liabilities.

11. Later asset appreciation/recovery does not retroactively negate fraud. The Second Circuit expressly rejected ultimate repayment/value as a defense to fraudulent deprivation.

12. SEC/CFTC complaints ≠ criminal jury verdicts.

13. CFTC consent judgment ≠ criminal conviction.

14. FTX Debtors' investigative report ≠ independent regulator or judicial finding. It is post-bankruptcy management's investigative analysis.

15. Plan confirmation ≠ every claim allowed.

16. A distribution announcement ≠ proof that every eligible claimant actually received funds.

17. FTX.com / FTX US / FTX Digital Markets / FTX EU are different legal/process entities.

18. FTT treatment is exceptional. Under the U.S./Bahamas settlement framework, FTT interests are treated as equity and receive no recovery under that framework, unlike ordinary customer cash/digital-asset claims.

Temporal bounds

Core collapse: November 2022.
Investigation/enforcement: 2022–2026.
Bankruptcy recovery/distributions: 2022–2026 and ongoing.

Why fertile for Counterpedia

FTX is the corpus's strongest subject for changing valuation + denominator discipline + later recovery versus earlier deprivation.

A familiar narrative might say:

Customers lost about $8 billion, but later recovered more than 100%, so maybe they did not really lose money.

The governed record says those numbers answer different questions.

Counterpedia can preserve:

digital-asset quantity at petition date → court-approved USD claim valuation → Allowed Claim → post-petition interest → class-specific distribution percentage

while separately preserving:

customer-fund deprivation → criminal trial → guilty verdict → forfeiture → direct appeal affirmed

and:

estate asset recovery / monetization → larger later distribution pool

The later chain does not erase the earlier one.

B. SOURCE INVENTORY

FTX-S01 — John J. Ray III First-Day Declaration

Exact title: Declaration of John J. Ray III in Support of Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Pleadings
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware
Case: 22-11068
Docket: D.I. 24
Filed: November 17, 2022
Official case repository: https://restructuring.ra.kroll.com/FTX/

Exact child locator status: to be resolved from the Kroll docket during CAP1.

Authority / posture: sworn declaration by newly appointed post-petition CEO in support of bankruptcy proceedings; first-party debtor management testimony, not a final judicial finding.

May support

• immediate post-collapse corporate-control/accounting conditions observed by new management;

• debtor structure;

• first-day chronology.

Cannot establish

• every fraud element;

• the final amount of customer losses/recoveries;

• every assertion as a court-adjudicated fact.

Captureability: MEDIUM-HIGH
Hazard: Kroll child documents can use opaque download URLs and may return 403 to some automated clients. Preserve docket number/title as the stable discovery key and record any fetch failure honestly.
Priority: P1

FTX-S02 — January 17, 2023 Debtors asset-recovery presentation announcement

Exact title: FTX Debtors Provide Additional Information to Customers and Other Stakeholders
Issuer: FTX Debtors / post-bankruptcy management
Date: January 17, 2023
Locator: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-debtors-provide-additional-information-to-customers-and-other-stakeholders-301723770.html

Authority / posture: first-party debtor announcement summarizing preliminary asset-recovery analysis.

May support

• approximately $5.5 billion of liquid assets identified at that stage;

• material shortfalls at FTX.com and FTX US;

• preliminary description of assets associated with each exchange;

• statement that dollar values were based on preliminary petition-date pricing.

Important qualification These were preliminary recovery findings, not the final asset pool or final claim valuation.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S03 — FTX Debtors Second Investigative Report

Exact source announcement title: FTX Debtors Release Second Investigative Report
Issuer: FTX Debtors
Date: June 26, 2023
Locator: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-debtors-release-second-investigative-report-301863419.html
Underlying report: to be captured from the FTX bankruptcy docket / Kroll repository as its own artifact.

Authority / posture: post-bankruptcy debtor investigative report, prepared with legal, restructuring, forensic accounting, asset tracing, blockchain analytics and other advisers. It is not a jury verdict or regulator finding.

Key measurement The Debtors said FTX.com owed customers approximately $8.7 billion as of the petition date.

May support

• debtor reconstruction of customer shortfall/commingling;

• petition-date customer-obligation estimate;

• recovery/investigation chronology.

Cannot establish

• that $8.7 billion is the only valid measure of customer loss;

• that $8.7 billion equals CFTC restitution merely because the number later recurs;

• claimant-specific allowed amounts.

Captureability: HIGH for announcement / MEDIUM for exact underlying report until Kroll child resolved
Priority: P0

FTX-S04 — CFTC December 2022 complaint

Exact source: CFTC Charges Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX Trading and Alameda with Fraud and Material Misrepresentations
Issuer: Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Date: December 13, 2022
Locator: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8638-22

Authority / posture: federal civil enforcement complaint/charging posture.

May support

• CFTC alleged a fraudulent scheme;

• complaint asserted defendants' actions caused loss of over $8 billion in FTX customer deposits;

• exact CFTC theory at filing.

Cannot establish

• liability merely from filing;

• criminal guilt;

• that "over $8 billion" is interchangeable with later debtor/accounting or bankruptcy claim measurements.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S05 — CFTC August 2024 consent judgment against FTX / Alameda

Exact title: CFTC Obtains $12.7 Billion Judgment Against FTX and Alameda
Issuer: CFTC
Date: August 8, 2024
Locator: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8938-24
Underlying consent order: accessible through CFTC enforcement-action surface; capture exact court order as child artifact.

Authority / posture: federal court consent order/judgment, resolving CFTC litigation against FTX Trading and Alameda.

Monetary structure

• $8.7 billion restitution;

• $4 billion disgorgement;

• total $12.7 billion monetary relief.

Other posture The order finds FTX/Alameda violated CEA/CFTC regulations and made material misrepresentations/omissions; the bankruptcy settlement subordinated CFTC monetary claims to victim distributions.

Critical qualification $12.7 billion is not a direct measurement of the petition-date customer account deficit.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S06 — SEC Bankman-Fried civil complaint / charge

Exact source: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in Crypto Asset Trading Platform FTX
Issuer: SEC
Date: December 13, 2022
Locator: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022-219

Authority / posture: civil complaint allegations.

May support

• SEC allegation that Bankman-Fried concealed diversion of customer funds while raising equity capital;

• FTX raised >$1.8 billion from equity investors since May 2019, including about $1.1 billion from ~90 U.S. investors;

• exact investor-fraud enforcement theory.

Cannot establish

• criminal conviction merely from SEC complaint;

• final customer shortfall.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S07 — SEC Ellison / Wang civil record

Exact source: SEC Charges Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang with Defrauding Investors in Crypto Asset Trading Platform FTX
Issuer: SEC
Date: December 21, 2022
Locator: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022-234

Authority / posture: SEC complaint allegations and proposed/bifurcated settlement posture.

May support

• SEC's allegations concerning FTT price support/manipulation;

• FTT as collateral within the alleged Alameda/FTX risk structure;

• allegation of software/privilege mechanisms;

• defendant-specific civil posture.

Current later civil posture SEC announced final consent judgments for Ellison, Wang and Singh in December 2025; capture that later record separately if used.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P2

FTX-S08 — Bankman-Fried criminal sentence / verdict record

Exact title: Samuel Bankman-Fried Sentenced To 25 Years In Prison
Issuer: U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York
Date: March 28, 2024
Locator: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-prison
Case: United States v. Bankman-Fried, 22-cr-00673

Authority / posture: official report of criminal adjudication and sentence. Narrative descriptions of trial evidence should remain attributed unless bound to opinion/transcript/exhibits.

Adjudicated procedural facts

• jury convicted Bankman-Fried on all seven tried counts;

• 25-year imprisonment;

• three years supervised release;

• over $11 billion criminal forfeiture.

Important denominator Criminal forfeiture is a punitive/proceeds measure; it is not the same thing as customer restitution, debtor shortfall, or bankruptcy distributions.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P0

FTX-S09 — Second Circuit decision affirming Bankman-Fried conviction

Exact title/caption: United States of America v. Samuel Bankman-Fried
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Docket: No. 24-961-cr
Decided: June 12, 2026
Current public full-opinion recon copy:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/24-961/24-961-2026-06-12.html

Official-origin CAP1 requirement: resolve and capture the Second Circuit/PACER official opinion artifact; do not treat the Justia copy as origin.

Authority / posture: published federal appellate adjudication.

Key holdings/evidentiary value

• district-court judgment affirmed;

• opinion says FTX filed for bankruptcy because it could not meet customer withdrawal requests;

• opinion recounts trial evidence supporting misappropriation of billions;

• rejects Bankman-Fried's theory that ultimate asset value/repayment negated fraudulent intent;

• holds that fraudulent deprivation can be complete even if victims might later be repaid;

• rejects forfeiture challenge despite the prospect that many victims may be made whole.

Counterpedia value This is the critical bridge:

later recovery does not retroactively erase the fraud.

Captureability: PRIMARY ORIGIN TO RESOLVE; reliable public mirror available for reconnaissance
Priority: P0

FTX-S10 — Bankruptcy Court Digital Asset Estimation Opinion

Exact title: Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding Estimation of Digital Asset Claims
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware
Case: 22-11068
Judge: John T. Dorsey
Date: June 26, 2024
Official landing: https://www.deb.uscourts.gov/22-11068
Exact court PDF: https://www.deb.uscourts.gov/sites/deb/files/opinions//FTX%20Opinion%20and%20Order%20Digital%20Asset%20Estimation.pdf

Authority / posture: judicial bankruptcy valuation/claim-estimation opinion.

Core rule The court states claim value is determined as of the petition date under bankruptcy law for the estimation at issue.

Technical valuation value The opinion explains:

• Digital Asset Claims were asserted in token quantities;

• Debtors proposed a conversion table to convert assets into USD;

• spot prices and adjustments for illiquidity/lockups were contested;

• experts were at times valuing different things, making apparent numbers difficult to compare;

• the proceeding was a matter of first impression for cryptocurrency claim valuation.

Critical qualification This opinion includes judicial generalizations about cryptocurrency value. Use its legal valuation holding as authority; do not treat every economic aside as universal scientific truth.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P0

FTX-S11 — Digital Asset Conversion Table / D.I. 7090

Exact object: Order Granting Motion of Debtors to Estimate Claims Based on Digital Assets [Docket No. 7090], including Digital Asset Conversion Table
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court, D. Del.
Entered: February 7, 2024
FTX support explainer: https://support.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/24863020316948-Digital-Asset-Estimates
Direct Kroll child URL supplied by FTX:
https://restructuring.ra.kroll.com/FTX/Home-DownloadPDF?id1=MjYxNDg5Mw==&id2=-1

Authority / posture: bankruptcy court order + approved plan-estimation conversion table.

May support

• claim-conversion methodology by asset;

• exact petition-date USD estimates used for solicitation/voting/distribution purposes;

• distinction between token quantity and claim USD value.

Capture hazards

• Kroll may return 403 to some fetch clients;

• table spans many asset classes and includes special treatment for illiquid/locked/custom assets;

• claim valuation must be tied to exact table version/order.

Priority: P0

FTX-S12 — U.S./Bahamas Global Settlement valuation framework

Exact source announcement: FTX Digital Markets / FTX Debtors Global Settlement
Date: December 19, 2023
Locator:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-digital-markets-limited-ftx-digital-markets-has-successfully-negotiated-a-landmark-settlement-with-ftx-trading-ltd-and-its-affiliated-debtors-together-the-ftx-debtors-which-will-see-assets-combined-from-the-respectiv-302019058.html

Authority / posture: first-party announcement of negotiated cross-border settlement, subject at announcement to court approvals.

Key valuation agreements

• FTX.com cash/digital-asset claims to be valued in USD as of applicable petition dates;

• no differential payments based on post-petition asset-price fluctuations;

• FTT interests treated as equity and not receiving recovery under the framework.

Counterpedia value This makes explicit that post-petition token appreciation is not the distribution denominator.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P0

FTX-S13 — May 2024 proposed reorganization plan announcement

Exact title: FTX Files Consensus-Based Plan of Reorganization
Issuer: FTX Debtors
Date: May 7, 2024
Locator: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-files-consensus-based-plan-of-reorganization-302138948.html

Authority / posture: debtor proposal/forecast at filing stage, not yet confirmation.

Key provisional forecasts

• $14.5–$16.3 billion forecast property collected/converted/available;

• proposed payment of non-governmental creditors based on court-determined claim value;

• up to 9% Consensus Rate post-petition interest;

• approximately 118% projected convenience-class recovery;

• Debtors state that at collapse FTX.com held only a small fraction of Bitcoin/Ethereum customers believed it held, and later crypto appreciation therefore did not simply correspond to appreciation of those missing customer tokens.

Critical qualification Proposal forecast ≠ confirmed plan ≠ later actual distribution.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S14 — Confirmation Order and confirmed Plan

Exact judicial objects

• Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Confirming the Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan... — D.I. 26404

• confirmed Plan — Exhibit A / D.I. 26404-1

Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court, D. Del.
Order entered: October 8, 2024
Official docket repository: https://restructuring.ra.kroll.com/FTX/
Current FTX support deep-link to D.I. 26404: available from the Distribution Dashboard FAQ, but may return 403 to automated fetchers.

Related debtor announcement:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-receives-us-bankruptcy-court-confirmation-of-its-plan-of-reorganization-302269152.html

Authority / posture: confirmed bankruptcy plan / judicial confirmation order.

Plan-era projection FTX announced:

• 98% of creditors by number projected to receive approximately 119% of allowed claims within 60 days after effectiveness, subject to requirements;

• $14.7–$16.5 billion projected property available for distribution.

Important qualification 119% is against allowed claims, not current-market token value.

Captureability: MEDIUM-HIGH; Kroll child may need acquisition-client handling
Priority: P0

FTX-S15 — Plan Effective Date announcement

Exact title: FTX Announces Effective Date and Record Date of January 3, 2025 for its Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization
Issuer: FTX Debtors
Date: December 16, 2024
Locator: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-announces-effective-date-and-record-date-of-january-3-2025-for-its-chapter-11-plan-of-reorganization-302332816.html

Authority / posture: debtor announcement of plan effectiveness; underlying Notice of Effective Date should be captured from D.I. 29127.

May support

• Plan effective January 3, 2025;

• initial distribution record date;

• distribution process chronology.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S16 — Current distribution history / Fifth Distribution

Exact title: FTX Announces Fifth Distribution of Approximately $900 Million to Creditors on July 31, 2026
Issuer: FTX / FTX Recovery Trust
Date: July 17, 2026; distribution July 31, 2026
Locator: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-announces-fifth-distribution-of-approximately-900-million-to-creditors-on-july-31-2026-302828726.html

Authority / posture: first-party Plan Administrator/Recovery Trust distribution announcement.

Current cumulative percentages after fifth distribution

• Class 5A Dotcom Customer Entitlement Claims: 105%

• Class 5B U.S. Customer Entitlement Claims: 105%

• Classes 6A General Unsecured / 6B Digital Asset Loan: 103%

• Class 7 Convenience Claims: 120%

Critical qualification These are cumulative percentages of allowed claim entitlements under the Plan; not in-kind token recovery percentages.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P0 / time-sensitive

FTX-S17 — Current FTX Distribution Dashboard FAQ

Exact title: Distributions Dashboard FAQs
Issuer: FTX Recovery Trust / support.ftx.com
Current observed update: August 4, 2026
Locator: https://support.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/34522100742804-Distributions-Dashboard-FAQs

Authority / posture: current plan-administration operational guidance.

May support

• difference between Allowed and Disputed Claims;

• KYC/tax/service-provider/sanctions prerequisites;

• Bahamas opt-in distinctions;

• claim status can change from disputed to allowed;

• not every nominal claim holder participates in each distribution date.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P0 / time-sensitive

FTX-S18 — Distribution Service Provider guidance

Exact title: General Information on Distribution Service Providers
Issuer: FTX Recovery Trust
Current update: June 16, 2026
Locator: https://support.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/33190623459092-General-Information-on-Distribution-Service-Providers

Authority / posture: current operational distribution guidance.

Key fact FTX Recovery Trust sends distributions to distribution service providers in U.S. dollars (fiat). Providers may offer recipients the ability to purchase crypto afterward where permitted.

Counterpedia value Refuses:

"FTX returned everyone's original crypto."

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S19 — Account Balances and Transactions

Exact title: Account Balances and Transactions
Issuer: FTX claims support
Locator: https://support.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/16845301546004-Account-Balances-and-Transactions

Authority / posture: plan/claims administration explanation.

May support

• portal balances reflected as of November 11, 2022;

• USD values use D.I. 7090 Digital Asset Conversion Table;

• balances can be viewed by quantity or USD equivalent;

• customers can dispute/add adjustments through claims procedure.

Captureability: HIGH
Priority: P1

FTX-S20 — Wikipedia comparison surface — OPTIONAL

Title: FTX
Role: familiar secondary comparison only
Locator: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTX
Capture rule: pin exact oldid if used.
Authority / posture: secondary collaborative narrative; no automatic authority.
Priority: OPTIONAL

C. RECORD-CONTRADICTION / QUALIFICATION MAP

C-1 — Four large numbers that are not the same measurement

The record contains at least these headline-scale numbers:

~$8.7 billion

FTX Debtors said FTX.com owed customers approximately $8.7 billion as of the petition date.

>$8 billion

CFTC's 2022 complaint alleged defendants caused loss of over $8 billion in FTX customer deposits.

$12.7 billion

CFTC's 2024 consent judgment imposed:

• $8.7 billion restitution;

• $4 billion disgorgement.

>$11 billion

Criminal forfeiture imposed on Bankman-Fried.

$14.7–$16.5 billion

Later estimated property collected/converted to cash and available for plan distributions at confirmation.

These are: debtor shortfall estimate ≠ civil complaint loss allegation ≠ civil monetary relief ≠ criminal forfeiture ≠ later bankruptcy distribution pool.

Counterpedia rule Never put them in a single "how much money was lost?" field.

C-2 — 105% bankruptcy recovery ≠ 105% economic recovery of original crypto

As of July 31, 2026, allowed Class 5A and 5B claims had cumulative distributions of 105%.

But the claim denominator is governed by:

• November 11, 2022 account state;

• petition-date USD conversion/estimation rules;

• allowed-claim adjudication;

• post-petition interest.

The U.S./Bahamas settlement expressly says digital-asset claims are valued in USD as of applicable petition dates with no differential payment for later token-price changes.

And U.S. Recovery Trust payments are routed in fiat USD to distribution service providers.

Therefore:

105% of Allowed Claim

is not:

105% of the number of BTC/ETH/other tokens originally shown in the account

and not:

105% of those tokens' July 2026 market value.

C-3 — More than 100% is not mysterious once interest denominator is exposed

The Plan includes post-petition interest mechanics.

FTX's current FAQ explains:

• Convenience Claims accrue interest at the Consensus Rate through initial distribution;

• non-convenience classes may receive post-petition interest through applicable distribution dates, subject to Plan waterfall/pro-rata rules.

Thus a distribution percentage over 100 can represent: principal allowed claim + post-petition interest

rather than "FTX generated a 5% investment profit for the customer."

C-4 — Later asset appreciation/recovery ≠ no fraud

This is the strongest institutional distinction in the FTX corpus.

Bankman-Fried argued that:

• Alameda/FTX assets could eventually make customers whole;

• later investment appreciation supported that view.

The Second Circuit affirmed the conviction and explained that fraudulent deprivation can be complete even if the defendant believed victims would ultimately be repaid or if assets later appreciated.

The court also rejected the forfeiture argument even while acknowledging many victims may ultimately be made whole.

Counterpedia rule Later bankruptcy recovery cannot be used as a retroactive truth rewrite of:

• whether funds were taken/used without authorization;

• whether fraud occurred;

• the jury verdict.

C-5 — "FTX was insolvent" needs a defined sense and date

The Second Circuit says FTX filed for bankruptcy because it was unable to meet withdrawal requests on November 11, 2022.

The Debtors' later investigative report describes events leading to FTX's insolvency and a massive customer shortfall.

Bankman-Fried's trial defense argued Alameda had assets greater than liabilities and customer funds could eventually be repaid.

Therefore avoid unqualified use of "insolvent" where the intended proposition is:

• unable to meet withdrawals;

• balance-sheet liabilities > assets;

• cash-flow insolvency;

• legal bankruptcy status;

• exchange customer-asset shortfall.

Each is a different test.

C-6 — Petition-date valuation is a legal/administrative valuation object

The Bankruptcy Court held that claims must be valued as of the petition date for the estimation before it.

Digital-asset quantities were converted into USD through a court-approved table.

That does not mean:

• the court declared the petition-date price morally fair compensation;

• later price movements did not happen;

• the asset was economically equivalent to USD from the customer's perspective.

It means the bankruptcy claim has a governed legal valuation basis.

C-7 — The estate's later recoveries are not necessarily the customers' original assets

FTX's proposed plan announcement says recovery came from a diverse pool including:

• proprietary investments held by Alameda/FTX Ventures;

• litigation claims;

• other recovered/monetized assets.

It also stated that at bankruptcy FTX.com held only a tiny fraction of the Bitcoin/Ethereum customers believed it held.

So: estate recovered enough value to fund distributions does not imply the estate simply found and returned the exact missing customer tokens.

C-8 — "All customers were repaid" is procedurally false as a blanket statement

Current FTX support says:

• only Allowed Claims are eligible for distributions;

• some claims remain Disputed;

• jurisdiction review can affect timing;

• KYC, tax, provider onboarding and sanctions screening matter;

• Bahamas opt-ins and FTX EU/Australia processes create separate paths.

Therefore current class percentages do not prove every original account holder has received that percentage.

C-9 — Class percentages differ

After the fifth distribution:

• 5A = 105%

• 5B = 105%

• 6A/6B = 103%

• Convenience = 120%

A sentence like:

"FTX creditors have recovered 105%"

silently erases class structure.

C-10 — Complaint allegation vs consent judgment vs criminal verdict

SEC/CFTC 2022

Civil enforcement complaints alleged fraud/misuse.

CFTC 2024

FTX/Alameda consent order imposes findings/liability and monetary relief.

Bankman-Fried criminal case

Jury convicted Bankman-Fried on seven counts; direct appeal affirmed.

These postures differ.

Do not use:

• complaint allegation as if criminal verdict;

• consent judgment as if jury finding;

• Bankman-Fried conviction as a count-specific conviction of every FTX entity.

C-11 — FTT is not treated like ordinary customer crypto claims

The U.S./Bahamas settlement states FTT interests are treated as equity and receive no recovery under the agreed framework.

Therefore:

"all tokens are converted using the same customer-claim methodology"

is false at that scope.

C-12 — 118%, 119%, 120%, 105% are not contradictory if time/class is preserved

The record evolves:

• May 2024 proposal: roughly 118% projected for many convenience creditors;

• October 2024 confirmation-era announcement: approximately 119% projected for 98% of creditors by number;

• plan mechanics ultimately produced Class 7 cumulative 120%;

• by July 2026 Classes 5A/5B reached 105%.

Those numbers differ by:

• version/date;

• class;

• forecast vs actual cumulative distribution;

• interest period.

Counterpedia should render the trajectory rather than select one "recovery rate."

D. FIVE-CLAIM DEMONSTRATION MATRIX — PROVISIONAL ONLY

C1 — Observable / concrete event fact

Provisional wording

On November 11, 2022, FTX and affiliated debtors filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after FTX was unable to meet customer withdrawal requests, and John J. Ray III replaced Samuel Bankman-Fried as chief executive.

Candidate sources

• FTX-S09 Second Circuit

• FTX-S01 first-day declaration

• bankruptcy petition/docket

Can establish

• filing date;

• inability to meet withdrawals;

• CEO transition.

Cannot establish

• a specific balance-sheet insolvency ratio;

• exact customer shortfall.

Likely posture

• judicial procedural/factual background + bankruptcy record.

Qualification Prefer "unable to meet withdrawal requests" over an undefined "ran out of money."

C2 — Measurement / valuation fact

Provisional wording

FTX's post-bankruptcy management estimated that FTX.com owed customers about $8.7 billion as of the petition date, while the bankruptcy process separately converted digital-asset claims into U.S.-dollar claim values using court-approved petition-date estimation rules.

Candidate sources

• FTX-S03

• FTX-S10

• FTX-S11

• FTX-S19

Can establish

• debtor estimate;

• token-quantity-to-USD claim transformation;

• petition-date valuation basis.

Cannot establish

• current-market value of the same tokens;

• every claimant's allowed amount;

• one universal "loss" figure.

Likely posture

• debtor forensic estimate + judicial claim-valuation methodology.

Likely refusal

"$8.7 billion was the exact final amount customers lost."

Too strong.

Strengthening Final reconciled claim schedules plus claim-class/customer-scope definition would be needed for a different aggregate measurement.

C3 — Action / chronology

Provisional wording

The bankruptcy court confirmed FTX's reorganization plan in October 2024, the plan became effective January 3, 2025, and the Recovery Trust began successive distributions; after the July 31, 2026 fifth distribution, allowed Class 5A and 5B claims had received cumulative distributions equal to about 105% of their allowed claim amounts.

Candidate sources

• FTX-S14

• FTX-S15

• FTX-S16

• FTX-S17

Can establish

• plan/distribution chronology;

• current class-specific percentage.

Cannot establish

• that every former customer has been paid;

• in-kind crypto recovery;

• economic equivalence to current token holdings.

Likely posture

• confirmed-plan procedural fact + plan-administrator distribution fact.

Qualification Attach: class

• Allowed Claim

• cumulative

• distribution date

to the 105% figure.

C4 — Carefully bounded adjudicative / causal proposition

Provisional wording

A federal jury convicted Samuel Bankman-Fried on seven fraud, conspiracy, and money-laundering-related counts arising from FTX and Alameda, and the Second Circuit affirmed; the appellate court held that the possibility of eventual repayment or later appreciation of assets did not negate the fraud theory based on deceptive deprivation of customer property.

Candidate sources

• FTX-S08

• FTX-S09

Can establish

• conviction;

• sentence;

• direct appellate affirmance;

• legal irrelevance of ultimate repayment to the fraud defense presented.

Cannot establish

• that every FTX executive was convicted of the same counts;

• that every customer suffered identical net economic loss;

• that bankruptcy recovery is legally irrelevant for every other purpose such as damages/tax.

Likely posture

• criminal adjudication, defendant-specific.

Qualification Higher-court review status should be freshly checked before final publication; this dossier confirms the direct appeal was affirmed on June 12, 2026 but does not assert all possible Supreme Court review is exhausted.

C5 — Contested / commonly compressed proposition

Popular formulation

"FTX customers got 105% of their money back, so they were made whole and the collapse ultimately caused no real loss."

What the current record can establish

• allowed Class 5A and 5B claims reached 105% cumulative plan distributions after the July 31, 2026 fifth distribution;

• Class 6A/6B reached 103%, Class 7 120%;

• digital-asset/customer claims are valued under petition-date USD methodology;

• distributions are made in USD through service providers;

• the plan includes post-petition interest;

• some claims remain disputed or subject to distribution prerequisites;

• Bankman-Fried's criminal conviction remains affirmed on direct appeal.

What it cannot establish

• that every customer received 105%;

• that original tokens were returned in kind;

• that 105% equals the 2026 market value of the customer's original crypto;

• that all customers have been paid;

• that there was no deprivation, time-value cost, tax consequence, opportunity cost, or claimant-specific loss;

• that later recovery negates fraud.

Likely posture

• refusal / denominator correction.

Stronger admissible wording

By July 31, 2026, the FTX Recovery Trust reported cumulative distributions of 105% of allowed Class 5A and Class 5B bankruptcy claim amounts. Those claim amounts are governed by petition-date U.S.-dollar valuation and plan interest rules; the percentage is not a measure of recovery of the current market value of the original crypto holdings.

Reopening condition A claimant-specific "made whole economically" claim requires:

1. original asset quantities and rights;

2. exact allowed-claim valuation;

3. actual distribution receipts/dates;

4. token price path or appropriate comparator;

5. interest/time-value convention;

6. fees/taxes;

7. any disputed/withheld amounts;

8. a defined meaning of "made whole."

No aggregate class percentage can establish all of that by itself.

E. BEST "WHY NOT?" SPECIMEN

Strong popular formulation

"FTX customers were repaid with interest, proving the bankruptcy eventually made everyone whole."

Why the record does not justify it

The statement smuggles in at least four equivalences the record rejects.

1. Allowed claim ≠ original asset position

The bankruptcy claim is converted into a USD legal claim based on the petition-date methodology.

2. >100% distribution ≠ token appreciation

The amount above 100% includes plan interest mechanics.

3. class distribution ≠ every claimant payment

Only allowed claims satisfying distribution requirements receive a given distribution; disputed/jurisdictional/process states remain.

4. later recovery ≠ no fraud

The Second Circuit says the fraudulent deprivation was not negated by Bankman-Fried's belief that customers could eventually be repaid or by later investment appreciation.

Reopening condition

The universal word everyone would require a final claims/distribution ledger showing every in-scope customer claim allowed and fully distributed.

The phrase made whole would additionally require an explicit economic definition and claimant-level comparison.

The phrase proving no loss/fraud cannot be reopened by later repayment alone because the criminal adjudication expressly rejects that theory as a defense to the fraud at issue.

F. SECOND "WHY NOT?" — THE $12.7 BILLION NUMBER

Popular formulation

"FTX customers lost $12.7 billion."

Why not

The $12.7 billion comes from the CFTC consent judgment:

• $8.7 billion restitution;

• $4 billion disgorgement.

That is a monetary-remedy structure, not an account-balance or customer-shortfall measurement.

The customer-owed estimate in the Debtors' 2023 investigative report is a separate approximately $8.7 billion figure.

Counterpedia should allow the numbers to look similar without equating them.

G. SOURCE-PAGE / REVERSE-WIKIPEDIA VALUE

1. FTX-S11 — Digital Asset Conversion Table / D.I. 7090

Why ideal

This may be the best FTX Source Page.

A reader can start with: 1 unit / N units of a token then traverse to:

• petition date;

• court-approved conversion value;

• liquidity/lockup adjustments;

• Allowed Claim;

• distribution percentage;

• actual cash distribution.

Then reverse into every sentence that says:

• "recovered 105%";

• "claim worth $X";

• "customer balance."

It exposes the denominator under the headline.

2. FTX-S10 — Bankruptcy Court Digital Asset Estimation Opinion

Why ideal

The opinion explains why expert values differed and notes that experts were sometimes valuing different things.

Reverse traversal:

legal valuation rule → expert methodology → claim conversion → plan value → distribution

and separately: market value after petition → not the claim denominator.

This is Counterpedia's measurement-model page.

3. FTX-S09 — Second Circuit Bankman-Fried opinion

Why ideal

One source lets the reader distinguish:

ultimate asset value / repayment argument from fraudulent deprivation at the time.

Reverse traversal:

• trial evidence;

• jury verdict;

• defense theory;

• appellate holding;

• criminal forfeiture;

• later bankruptcy recovery claims it constrains.

It is the perfect answer to:

"If everyone got paid, how was it fraud?"

4. FTX-S16 — Recovery Trust distribution history

Why ideal

Each distribution is a time-indexed observation.

A Source Page can show:

Distribution 1 → class percentages

Distribution 2 → cumulative percentages

...

Distribution 5 → 105% / 105% / 103% / 120%

while linking each number to:

• the Plan;

• class definition;

• Allowed Claim denominator;

• interest rules;

• eligibility requirements.

This prevents a current percentage from overwriting the historical recovery trajectory.

H. 30–60 SECOND DEMO MOMENT

Show four numbers with no explanation:

$8.7 BILLION

FTX.com owed customers
Debtors' petition-date investigative estimate.

$12.7 BILLION

CFTC judgment
$8.7B restitution + $4B disgorgement.

$14.7–$16.5 BILLION

Later property projected available for plan distribution
Recovered/monetized bankruptcy pool.

105%

Current cumulative distribution for allowed Class 5A / 5B claims
As of July 31, 2026.

Ask:

Did customers lose $8.7B, receive $12.7B, get access to $16B, or make a 5% profit?

Counterpedia answers:

Those numbers have different denominators and legal meanings.

Click 105%:

original token quantity → Nov. 11, 2022 petition date → Digital Asset Conversion Table → USD claim estimate → Allowed Claim → post-petition interest → 105% cumulative plan distribution in USD

Then click:

"So the fraud caused no loss?"

Counterpedia opens the 2026 Second Circuit opinion:

later appreciation / possible repayment → does not undo deceptive deprivation → conviction affirmed.

That is the user-facing reveal.

I. CAPTURE PRIORITY

P0 — essential

1. FTX-S03 underlying Second Investigative Report + announcement

2. FTX-S08 criminal judgment/verdict/sentence records

3. FTX-S09 official Second Circuit June 12, 2026 opinion

4. FTX-S10 Bankruptcy Court Digital Asset Estimation Opinion

5. FTX-S11 D.I. 7090 + exact Digital Asset Conversion Table

6. FTX-S12 U.S./Bahamas Global Settlement / court-approved valuation framework

7. FTX-S14 Confirmation Order D.I. 26404 + Plan D.I. 26404-1

8. FTX-S16 fifth distribution/current cumulative percentages

9. FTX-S17 current allowed/disputed eligibility FAQ

P1 — important corroboration / posture

1. FTX-S01 John Ray First-Day Declaration D.I. 24

2. FTX-S02 Jan. 2023 asset presentation and underlying docket exhibit

3. FTX-S04 CFTC initial complaint

4. FTX-S05 CFTC consent judgment exact order

5. FTX-S06 SEC SBF complaint

6. FTX-S13 May 2024 proposed-plan forecast

7. FTX-S15 Plan Effective Date notice / D.I. 29127

8. FTX-S18 distribution-service-provider guidance

9. FTX-S19 customer-account balance semantics

P2

1. FTX-S07 Ellison/Wang SEC record and later final consent judgments

2. individual distribution docket reports

3. individual asset-sale/recovery records if the page later explains exactly how the distribution pool grew

4. FTX Digital Markets/Bahamas liquidation orders and claims data for cross-border comparison

OPTIONAL

1. FTX-S20 Wikipedia comparison edition pinned by oldid

J. INTEGRITY FLAGS

1. Do not use "recovery percentage" without a denominator

Required fields:

• class;

• Allowed Claim amount;

• valuation basis;

• distribution date;

• cumulative vs incremental.

2. 105% is current only as of July 31, 2026

Further distributions may change cumulative percentages.

Recapture before publication.

3. Not every claim is Allowed

Current support material explicitly says Disputed Claims remain under reconciliation.

4. Distribution eligibility has procedural prerequisites

KYC, tax forms, service-provider onboarding, sanctions and jurisdiction can affect timing/eligibility.

5. U.S. distributions are fiat at the Trust-to-provider layer

Do not label them "crypto repayments" because a provider later lets a recipient buy crypto.

6. Petition-date USD valuation does not track post-petition token prices

This is a deliberate bankruptcy claim methodology, not an accidental omission.

7. Court valuation opinion / D.I. 7090 are exact SourceEdition targets

If the Conversion Table changes or is superseded for a category, claims must bind to the exact table edition.

8. Locked/illiquid tokens can have special valuation adjustments

Do not assume every token's conversion value is a simple spot-price snapshot.

9. FTT is specially treated as equity

Do not treat it as an ordinary customer digital-asset claim.

10. $8.7B debtor estimate and $8.7B CFTC restitution are different graph nodes

Never merge on numeric equality.

11. $12.7B CFTC judgment is restitution + disgorgement

Do not label it "customer losses."

12. $11B criminal forfeiture is punitive/proceeds-focused

Second Circuit expressly notes forfeiture is not restitutive.

13. Later estate value does not imply original customer assets were intact

Recovered value can come from investments, litigation, settlements and asset monetization.

14. "FTX was solvent" needs a defined test/date

The Second Circuit records that FTX could not meet withdrawals; Bankman-Fried asserted assets could cover liabilities. Do not use one word to collapse the dispute.

15. Bankruptcy debtor reports are first-party post-collapse investigations

They are valuable but not independent adjudications.

16. SEC/CFTC complaint allegations retain allegation posture

Later criminal conviction can support overlapping conduct separately; it does not silently convert every civil allegation.

17. CFTC consent judgment has its own posture

Consent findings/liability ≠ jury verdict.

18. Bankman-Fried conviction is defendant-specific

Do not assign his verdict to FTX entities, Alameda entities, or other executives.

19. Direct appeal was affirmed June 12, 2026

This dossier does not assert that every possible Supreme Court review path has been exhausted. Freshly check before a final procedural-status claim.

20. "Made whole" is not a self-defining metric

Potential meanings include:

• 100% allowed claim;

• allowed claim + interest;

• original asset quantity;

• current-market replacement cost;

• net-of-tax recovery;

• time-value-adjusted recovery.

Every use must name the measure.

21. PRNewswire pages here are issuer-supplied releases

Their role is first-party debtor/recovery-trust announcement, not independent journalism merely because PRNewswire hosts them.

22. Kroll child URLs can be operationally fragile

A 403 from a given client is a capture failure, not evidence the document does not exist. Record the failure and retry through the governed acquisition path; never substitute a mirror silently.

K. FTX CAPTURE DISPATCH SHAPE

For FTX-CAP1, acquire in this order:

1. FTX-S10 Bankruptcy Court Digital Asset Estimation Opinion from deb.uscourts.gov

2. FTX-S11 D.I. 7090 exact order + Conversion Table from Kroll

3. FTX-S14 D.I. 26404 + D.I. 26404-1 confirmed Plan

4. FTX-S03 exact Second Investigative Report from Kroll + announcement

5. FTX-S01 D.I. 24 First-Day Declaration

6. FTX-S08:

   • jury verdict form

   • judgment

   • sentencing judgment/order

   • DOJ sentencing release

7. FTX-S09 official Second Circuit opinion

8. FTX-S12 Global Settlement:

   • signed agreement

   • U.S. approval order

   • Bahamas approval order if used

9. FTX-S05 exact CFTC consent order

10. FTX-S04 initial CFTC complaint

11. FTX-S06 exact SEC complaint

12. FTX-S13 proposed-plan announcement and disclosure statement

13. FTX-S15 Notice of Effective Date D.I. 29127

14. all Recovery Trust distribution announcements 1–5, not just current one

15. FTX-S17 current dashboard/claims status page

16. FTX-S18 current provider guidance

17. FTX-S19 balance/transaction semantics

18. optional asset-recovery transaction records only if a specific "where recovery came from" claim is authored

CAP1 output remains intentionally boring:

• requested locator

• final locator

• HTTP result

• media type

• exact bytes/digest

• capture observation

• source-owned dates

• docket/case identifiers

• claim class

• valuation date

• valuation table/version

• principal vs interest

• incremental vs cumulative distribution

• allowed/disputed status semantics

• source/posture

• captured / refused / failed

• no final standing

• no article prose

L. PROVISIONAL FTX THESIS FOR REVIEW

FTX should not be demoed as:

"Customers lost $8 billion and later got it back."

That sentence destroys almost every interesting property in the record.

The stronger Counterpedia thesis is:

The amount missing at collapse, the legal value of a bankruptcy claim, the later pool of recovered assets, the percentage distributed under a plan, civil monetary remedies, and criminal forfeiture are different measurements produced by different institutions for different purposes.

And the central causal/adjudicative principle is even stronger:

Later repayment can change the economic outcome without changing whether an earlier fraudulent deprivation occurred.

The current FTX record can simultaneously say:

• FTX could not meet withdrawals in November 2022;

• post-bankruptcy management estimated FTX.com owed customers about $8.7 billion;

• digital-asset claims were converted to petition-date USD values under court-approved rules;

• the estate later recovered/monetized enough property to support distributions above 100% of some allowed claim classes;

• the Recovery Trust reports 105% cumulative distributions for allowed Class 5A/5B claims as of July 31, 2026;

• those distributions are not in-kind recovery of the original crypto at current value;

• Bankman-Fried's seven-count conviction remains affirmed on direct appeal;

• the Second Circuit explicitly rejected ultimate repayment/later appreciation as a defense to the fraud.

FTX therefore exercises:

• changing valuation;

• bankruptcy claim denomination;

• legal valuation vs market value;

• class/denominator discipline;

• principal vs interest;

• shortfall vs restitution vs disgorgement vs forfeiture;

• later recovery vs earlier deprivation;

• proposal vs confirmation vs actual distributions;

• allowed vs disputed claims;

• cross-border claim administration;

• civil allegation vs consent judgment vs criminal verdict;

• and temporal distribution truth.

The FTX invariant is:

"Recovered 105%" is not a fact until Counterpedia can answer: 105% of what, valued when, under which legal rule, for which claim class, paid when, and in what form?