Deep Dive into FWA: An Intriguing Experiment Turning NFTs into "On-Chain Gachapon"

marsbitPublished on 2026-07-30Last updated on 2026-07-30

Abstract

A Deep Dive into FWA: The “On-Chain Gacha” Experiment for NFTs Fake World Assets (FWA), created by TokenWorks, introduces an innovative “NFT gacha machine” fully operating on-chain. Users can deposit eligible NFTs paired with ETH (called Backing) to create a Position, acting as a prize pool. Others can then pay a uniform Acquisition Price for a chance to win a random NFT from the pool. The core mechanism features a reverse probability system: Positions with lower Backing have a higher chance of being selected, serving as common prizes, while high-Backing Positions are rare “jackpots.” The acquisition price is calculated based on the harmonic mean of all Backings, keeping entry costs low. When a Position is won, the purchaser must choose: keep the NFT or accept the Standing Bid (85% of the Backing, claimable in ETH or $FWA tokens), returning the NFT to the original depositor. The protocol involves two main roles. Depositors provide liquidity (NFT + ETH), earning a share of fees from each draw, distributed equally per active Position, plus potential $FWA rewards. Purchasers pay to spin the gacha, receiving $FWA rewards for participation. A special “Crown” reward goes to the Position with the highest Backing. The $FWA token has a fixed supply and is initially obtainable only through protocol participation (depositing or purchasing), with external buying disabled early on to reduce sell pressure. Its value is supported by a built-in buy pressure: when purchasers opt for the $...

What would you do if you had an idle NFT in your wallet? List it on a marketplace and wait? Or just let it gather dust?

Recently, a new project called Fake World Assets (FWA for short) has emerged on the Ethereum mainnet. Developed by the TokenWorks team with the official website at fwa.fun, this project essentially creates an "NFT Gachapon Machine" that runs entirely on-chain. Anyone can put their NFT into the machine as a prize, and others can pay a unified price to take a chance.

It cleverly blends concepts like providing liquidity on Uniswap, the thrill of blind box draws, and tokenomics. Today, let's break down this project in simple terms and see how it actually works.

I. Key Terms Explained

Before diving into the mechanics, let's align on some key terms for clarity.

Position: In FWA, you can't just put an NFT into the gachapon. You must pair an NFT with a sum of ETH. This combination, locked together, constitutes a complete "Position".

Backing: This is the ETH you pair with your NFT. It serves as your capital and also determines the probability of your NFT being drawn.

Standing Bid: The Backing you deposit essentially becomes a "standing buy-back offer" for that NFT. If someone draws your NFT but doesn't want it, they can directly sell it back to you and receive a large portion of your Backing.

Acquisition Price: The unified price a participant pays for each draw from the gachapon. This price is calculated in real-time by the system based on all positions in the pool.

Crown: The position with the highest Backing in the pool wears a "Crown" and receives an additional share of the draw fees.

II. Core Mechanism: How the Gachapon Machine Operates

A Depositor locks their NFT along with a self-selected amount of ETH into the protocol, forming a Position. This ETH, called Backing, fulfills three key roles:

1. Determining Selection Probability (Selection Weight): Weight is inversely proportional to Backing. Higher Backing means lower probability of being drawn, making the position safer and longer-lasting. Lower Backing means a higher chance of being drawn.

2. Serving as the Standing Bid: The full Backing is locked to support the depositor's standing buy-back offer to the drawer.

3. Acting as the Depositor's Capital. Standing Bid and Backing are closely related but distinct concepts: Backing is the actual locked ETH capital, while Standing Bid is the "always-available buy-back" price offered using this capital. By default, when a drawer accepts the Standing Bid, they can take 85% of the Backing (choose to receive it as ETH or swap it directly for $FWA). The remaining ~15% is a settlement discount, which by default goes to the protocol. Randomness is provided by Chainlink VRF, with requests settled strictly in submission order to prevent front-running or manipulation.

Positions in the pool are roughly categorized by rarity: Common, Uncommon, Rare, Epic, Legendary, mainly corresponding to different Backing levels.

III. Two Core Roles and Gameplay

1. Depositor – The Liquidity Provider "House"

Deposit a whitelisted NFT (currently supporting dozens of collections including CryptoPunks, BAYC, Azuki, Milady, Pudgy Penguins, Ten Thousand Tokens, and continuously adding more) + any amount of ETH as Backing (with a minimum threshold). Revenue sources: · Each time someone draws, after deducting the protocol fee and the Crown's share, the acquisition fee is evenly distributed among all active positions (each position receives the same amount, regardless of Backing size).

· The "Crown" holder with the current highest Backing receives an additional small portion of each fee.

·$FWA token rewards (early allocation weighted by √Backing).

· Can voluntarily withdraw at any time (as long as the position hasn't been drawn and pending requests are settled or expired).

If drawn: Drawer keeps NFT → Depositor recovers almost all Backing (minus ~1% protocol settlement fee), loses NFT. Drawer sells back → Depositor recovers NFT, but loses most of the Backing.

2. Purchaser/Drawer – The "Player" Seeking Random Acquisition

Pays the unified acquisition price calculated in real-time by the system (pool Expected Value, i.e., the harmonic mean of all Backings + ~10% premium fee + a small VRF service fee). Same price for everyone at the same moment, with slippage protection available. Upon successful payment, guaranteed to receive a random position (probability is much higher for low Backing than high Backing). After drawing, must choose one option (within a time-limited window): - Keep the NFT. - Accept the Standing Bid, receive 85% of that position's Backing (in ETH or $FWA), and return the NFT to the original owner. Also receives $FWA rewards (early distribution evenly split among successful draws each day).

This design makes low-Backing positions the "common loot," keeping draw prices cheap and participation accessible. High-Backing positions become the rare "jackpots," attracting players seeking high odds.

IV. $FWA Token Economic Model

$FWA is a fixed-supply incentive token. Its core purpose is to bootstrap the two-sided market and convert protocol activity into token value.

Initial Distribution: 50%: Injected into the Uniswap v4 FWA/ETH liquidity pool. 30%: 15-day early emission (2% of total supply daily, 1% each for Depositors and Purchasers). 20%: v1 snapshot airdrop (claimable via Merkle proof based on a specific block snapshot).

External purchases are disabled early on; tokens can only be earned by participating in the protocol. Selling is always open. This reduces early sell pressure. Value support and appreciation logic:

When a drawer chooses "sell back and settle in $FWA", the system uses 85% of the Backing ETH to buy $FWA directly from the market and sends it to the user, creating real, sustained buy pressure (especially stronger when high-Backing positions are drawn).

Protocol fees can be configured for $FWA buybacks (currently disabled by default). If enabled, default allocation after buyback is 40% to Depositors, 40% to Purchasers, 20% burned.

The higher the protocol activity, the stronger the fee and settlement buybacks, leading to more pronounced deflation and demand. Token transfers are restricted; trading mainly occurs through official pools with a 1% transaction fee.

V. Revenue Sources

1. Commission on each draw fee (1% of pool acquisition fee): Deducted from the premium fee portion of the user's acquisition price. The user's actual paid price remains unchanged; this 1% is taken from the premium.

2. Settlement commission when drawer keeps NFT (1% of Backing): Only incurred when the drawer "keeps the NFT", deducted from the Backing returned to the depositor. Not charged when selling back.

3. Settlement discount when selling back (15% of Backing): By default, entirely goes to the protocol. Can be switched in the future to be distributed among all Depositors.

4.$FWA token transaction fee (1% buy/sell): Goes independently into a dedicated fee wallet, not through the Splitter distribution mentioned above.

VI. Important Notes:

User's acquisition price = Pool Expected Value (EV, harmonic mean) + 10% premium fee + VRF service fee.

Using a user payment of 0.1 ETH pool acquisition fee as an example (ignoring VRF service fee for simplicity):

1. Break down structure: EV (Expected Value) ≈ 0.0909 ETH; 10% premium fee ≈ 0.0091 ETH; Total 0.1 ETH

2. Protocol first takes 1% fee = 0.1 × 1% = 0.001 ETH (deducted from premium fee)

Now: EV portion remains ~0.0909 ETH; Remaining premium ~0.0081 ETH; Total distributable amount ≈ 0.099 ETH

3. Then take Crown's 5% from distributable amount: Crown reward ≈ 0.099 × 5% ≈ 0.00495 ETH (goes to highest Backing holder). The Crown's cut is taken from the entire distributable amount, affecting both EV and premium portions.

Distribution of final remaining portion (key point): After deducting protocol and Crown shares, the remaining funds are processed separately based on source: The portion belonging to EV (main body, approx. 0.09): Fixed, evenly distributed to all active Depositors, unaffected by hot/cold pool state.

The portion belonging to the premium fee (approx. 0.008): Has hot/cold distinction: Hot Pool → More/all goes to Depositors (further split evenly). Cold Pool → More/all is converted into $FWA purchase quota for successful drawers. Smooth transition in intermediate states.

Current Splitter Allocation

VII. Key Design Features

1. Clever Combination of Inverse Weighting + Even Fee Distribution Higher Backing → Lower draw probability → Longer survival → Can collect fees more times. But each fee distribution is evenly split by number of positions, unrelated to Backing size. Result: Small depositors are incentivized to consistently provide "cheap loot," while large depositors achieve higher total returns by "living longer." Both sides have reasons to participate.

2. Harmonic Mean Pricing

The draw price is determined by the harmonic mean of all position Backings. The harmonic mean is strongly pulled down by the lowest Backings. So, even with super high-value jackpots in the pool, the overall draw price remains cheap. This allows "low-cost, high-frequency draws" and "high-value, rare jackpots" to coexist without conflict.

3. Dynamic Hot/Cold Allocation of Remaining Premium Fee

The remaining premium fee isn't fixed for one party; it slides based on pool activity: Hot Pool → More to Depositors (encouraging sustained liquidity provision). Cold Pool → More to Drawers for buying $FWA (stimulating demand, bootstrapping). This allows the protocol to auto-adjust supply/demand without manual intervention.

4. Standing Bid Mechanism

The Backing locked by the Depositor simultaneously becomes an irrevocable buy-back offer. The drawer, upon winning, has a binary choice: keep the NFT, or directly take 85% of the Backing (can also opt to receive it as $FWA). This protects the Depositor's asset safety (Backing is always fully covered), provides the drawer with a "stop-loss/cash-out" option, and creates real buy pressure for $FWA. This design significantly lowers the psychological barrier to user participation.

5. Forced Buy Pressure from Settlement in $FWA

When a drawer chooses to sell back and settle in $FWA, the system uses 85% of the Backing ETH to buy $FWA directly from the market. This converts part of the Depositor's capital into real token demand, directly linking protocol activity with token price.

6. Asymmetrical Buying/Selling (referred to as anti-pixiu by the community)

Early on, you can only sell, not buy. Therefore, only two groups initially obtain $FWA: airdrop recipients from the old user snapshot, and real protocol participants – NFT Depositors and successful drawers. The benefit of this design is that it directs early token circulation primarily to genuine participants, not external speculative capital, giving the protocol ample time to bootstrap. A very interesting project.

Related Questions

QWhat is the core concept of the Fake World Assets (FWA) project?

AFake World Assets (FWA) is a fully on-chain project that functions as an 'NFT gachapon' or 'loot box' machine. Users can deposit NFTs paired with ETH (Backing) to create positions, and others can pay a unified 'Acquisition Price' for a chance to win a random NFT from the pool. It combines elements of Uniswap-style liquidity provision, blind box mechanics, and tokenomics.

QWhat are the two primary user roles in the FWA system, and how do they interact?

AThe two core roles are Depositors and Purchasers. **Depositors** act as 'dealers,' providing liquidity by locking an NFT and ETH Backing to create a position. They earn revenue from acquisition fees and FWA token rewards. **Purchasers** are the 'players' who pay the Acquisition Price to randomly win a position. If they win, they can either keep the NFT or sell it back to the original depositor for 85% of its Backing (in ETH or FWA tokens).

QHow does the Backing amount for a position affect its likelihood of being selected in a draw?

AThe Backing amount inversely determines the selection probability. A position with **lower Backing has a higher probability** of being selected, making it a more common 'prize.' Conversely, a position with **higher Backing has a lower probability** of being selected, making it a rarer 'jackpot' that can survive longer in the pool and collect more fee distributions.

QWhat is a key feature of the $FWA token's economic model designed to create buying pressure?

AA key mechanism is the **mandatory buy-side pressure** created when a Purchaser wins a position and chooses the 'sell back for $FWA' option. In this case, the system uses 85% of the position's ETH Backing to **directly purchase $FWA tokens from the market** and send them to the user. This converts protocol activity into consistent, real demand for the $FWA token.

QHow does the protocol use the 'harmonic mean' to calculate the draw price, and what is its benefit?

AThe unified 'Acquisition Price' paid by Purchasers is based on the **harmonic mean** of all the Backing amounts in the pool. The harmonic mean is heavily influenced by the lowest values. This means that **even if the pool contains very high-value NFTs with large Backing, the draw price remains relatively low and affordable**. This allows for cheap, frequent participation while still offering the potential for high-value rewards.

Related Reads

Bernstein Reveals Details of Core Scientific's $14 Billion Deal with AMD

Analysts from Bernstein revealed details of a deal between Core Scientific and AMD with a potential total value of over $14 billion. According to the report, initial contracts for 530 MW of capacity could generate this revenue over 15 years, with AMD acting as a credit guarantor for part of the bitcoin miner's infrastructure. The partnership, announced on July 28, has the potential to allocate up to 2.5 GW of data center capacity for AI. Bernstein broke down the 530 MW into 377 MW of direct triple-net lease for AMD and 152 MW for an unnamed cloud provider backed by AMD's credit. This structure is seen as lowering financing costs and counterparty risk. AMD also received warrants to buy 30 million Core Scientific shares at $23.47 each, which vest upon reaching the 2.5 GW target. Average annual revenue from the deal is estimated at around $0.9 billion, or about $1.8 million per megawatt, which is 5-25% below recent AI hosting deals by other miners. However, the 377 MW triple-net lease for AMD carries a margin close to 100%. Core Scientific expects capital expenditures for the deal to be $11-12 million per MW, totaling about $6 billion. Bernstein views this partnership as a new phase in the transformation of former bitcoin miners into AI infrastructure operators, with AI chipmakers like AMD now acting as direct anchor tenants. Recent similar deals include Hut 8 allocating 704 MW to a tenant believed to be Nvidia, and AMD reserving 200 MW with Riot Platforms. Core Scientific also paid Block $41.9 million to terminate a mining chip supply contract as part of its accelerated diversification into AI.

cryptonews.ru39m ago

Bernstein Reveals Details of Core Scientific's $14 Billion Deal with AMD

cryptonews.ru39m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片