The Ethereum Foundation said it will convert 10,000 ether over the coming weeks using centralized exchanges, a move it framed as routine funding for research, grants, and donations, and one that quickly sparked criticism from decentralized finance proponents who argued the sales should run through onchain rails or over-the-counter deals.
"Over several weeks this month, EF will convert 10K ETH via centralized exchanges as part of our ongoing work to fund R&D, grants, and donations," Ethereum Foundation said.
In a notice posted on X, the foundation said the conversions, worth approximately $43.6 million at current prices, will be split into “multiple smaller orders” rather than a single block trade. The organization pointed to its standing treasury-policy blog, which outlines how it periodically converts ETH to meet operating needs. Released in June, it detailed a framework for managing assets and converting ETH to cover fiat-denominated costs associated with ecosystem R&D, grants, and donations.
Tuesday’s announcement also comes as the foundation has paused or slowed several grant programs to reduce its burn rate, The Block previously reported.
Reaction from builders and traders was swift. Gnosis co-founder Martin Koppelmann asked, “What’s missing from DEXs to do it via DEXs?”
Other commenters urged the foundation to borrow against its ETH using DeFi-native lending platforms like Aave. Some also proposed OTC deals with corporate treasuries instead, or dollar-cost-averaging sales onchain to let the community bid transparently. The EF previously sold 10,000 ETH directly to Joseph Lubin's treasury firm, SharpLink Gaming.
“There are better ways to get liquidity than dumping on the open market,” wrote Compound-linked product designer and former Meta engineer Josiah Gulden, arguing that selling rather than borrowing “doesn’t exactly instill confidence in EF’s outlook on ETH as a treasury asset.”
The general argument in support of the CEX approach is that exchange liquidity and settlement tooling can reduce operational risk and slippage for large transfers, while splitting orders can limit market impact compared with single prints. The foundation did not disclose venues, an exact schedule, or targeted execution prices.
