Greenfield Capital Files Supervisory Complaint Against Safe Ecosystem Foundation Amid Growing Governance and Growth Concerns

Crypto venture capital firm Greenfield Capital has escalated its ongoing feud with the Safe Ecosystem Foundation by filing an official supervisory complaint with Switzerland’s foundation watchdog. The legal move seeks to enforce sweeping changes to the foundation’s board of directors, following months of private and public engagement that Greenfield claims failed to resolve deep-seated governance concerns regarding the management of the widely used self-custody infrastructure project.

In an open letter addressed to the broader Safe community, Greenfield founding partner Jascha Samadi detailed the decision to approach Switzerland’s Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA). According to Samadi, the regulatory filing comes after his firm grew increasingly concerned about the overall trajectory of the Safe ecosystem since early 2025. The venture capital firm pointed to what it views as lagging performance relative to the broader cryptocurrency market, alongside a systemic lack of independent voices and external oversight on the foundation’s governing board.

"We have come to believe, after more than a year of research, dialogue and patience, that Safe will not reach its potential under its current governance," Samadi stated in the open letter, highlighting a frustration that has been quietly brewing among key stakeholders before spilling into the public domain.

In response to the developments, a spokesperson for the Safe Ecosystem Foundation, Samuel Akpan, stated that the organization has not received any formal inquiry from the Swiss regulatory watchdog. Akpan declined to comment further on the specifics or the legal merits of the potential complaint brought forward by the investor.

The mounting governance dispute arrives at a critical juncture for the Safe project, which has publicly outlined ambitious financial targets for the coming years. The organization has been targeting a financial break-even point and a doubling of its revenue throughout 2026. In a corporate announcement published earlier in February, the project reported generating more than $10 million in annualized project-wide revenue by the close of 2025, alongside a long-term strategic ambition to scale its operations toward $100 million in annual recurring revenue by the year 2030.

Greenfield Questions Safe’s Revenue Growth and Market Share

Despite the optimistic financial projections shared by the project’s leadership, Greenfield Capital has sharply questioned Safe’s actual revenue growth and its ability to capture market share in a rapidly expanding sector. The venture firm pointed directly to financial figures from the second quarter, which recorded $1.98 million in revenue. This quarterly performance translates to an annualized run rate of approximately $8 million, a figure that Greenfield notes falls far short of the anticipated $20 million revenue expectation set for 2026.

Furthermore, the investor argued that Safe is progressively losing ground in the Web3 space despite a generally favorable macroeconomic backdrop for decentralized finance and digital assets. Samadi highlighted a stark contrast in performance metrics between January 2024 and August 2026. During this period, the total value held securely within Safe accounts dropped dramatically from $66 billion down to $30 billion, marking a decline of more than 50 percent. Meanwhile, the broader decentralized finance total value locked experienced a 40 percent expansion across the industry.

A similar divergence was noted in the stablecoin sector. Over the same timeframe, the total supply of stablecoins grew by roughly 135 percent globally. However, stablecoins held within Safe accounts on the Ethereum network increased by a modest 11 percent, causing Safe’s overall market share of circulating USDC to plummet from 12.8 percent down to just 2.5 percent.

"In the category that has grown the most and that self-custody infrastructure is best placed to serve, Safe has been losing ground for two and a half years," Samadi emphasized, underscoring the investor’s frustration with the platform’s commercial stagnation during a period of widespread sector adoption.

Samadi attributed many of these operational and strategic shortcomings directly to the composition of the foundation’s board, citing a distinct lack of independent members equipped with experienced decision-making backgrounds. Specifically, the venture firm’s public critique pointed to potential conflicts of interest on the board. These include board member Stefan George and his ongoing professional role at Gnosis, as well as fellow board member Richard Meissner and his operational ties to various commercial entities engaged in developing and operating Safe-related products.

Greenfield revealed that it had spent several months directly petitioning the foundation to voluntarily restructure its governance framework. These proposed changes included replacing George and expanding the existing board with truly independent, externally recruited members who possess specialized expertise in traditional finance, corporate risk management, and long-term business strategy. Having exhausted internal dialogue without achieving the desired organizational reforms, Greenfield is now asking the Swiss regulatory watchdog to formally examine the foundation’s governance structures and determine whether mandatory corrective measures are necessary to protect the interests of the ecosystem.