This is a strong first iteration - especially given the complexity of cross-chain mapping and labeling work required to get here. Kudos to the team for shipping something concrete.
One question that may become increasingly relevant as these reports mature:
how fixed and reproducible are the underlying calculation assumptions across time?
As DAOs scale, reporting tends to shift from:
“Is this directionally correct?”
to
“Can this number be reproduced, explained, and defended six months later?”
Some examples of things governance participants often end up asking:
• Are pricing sources and timestamp conventions fixed and versioned?
• Are rounding and missing-data rules explicitly defined?
• If the same address set is re-run next quarter, should outputs be identical?
None of these are blockers for an initial report - but they tend to become important once reports start being used as inputs for budgeting, audits, or historical comparisons.
Curious whether future iterations are planning to formalize a methodology or calculation-versioning layer alongside the narrative insights.