NPPI Governance Charter

Why a benchmark needs governance

A price benchmark is only worth what people trust it to be. The moment the number can be moved by the interests it measures — a developer that wants a higher comp, a buyer that wants a lower one, a subscriber that pays for a flattering print — it stops being a benchmark and becomes marketing. Governance is the set of commitments that keep the index independent of the people who care what it says. This charter exists so those commitments are written down, public, and enforceable against us.

1. Independence principles

1. The index serves its readers, not its subjects. NPPI is produced for the people pricing deals against it. No covered entity — utility, hyperscaler, developer, financier, or counterparty — receives preferential treatment in the index.
2. No pay-for-print. Inclusion, exclusion, ranking, and quality-scoring are never for sale. Commercial subscription buys access to the analysis; it never buys influence over the number. (See Disclosures.)
3. Separation of index and commerce. Until the operation is large enough to staff separate functions, methodology and commercial decisions may rest with the same people. The firewall against commercial pressure is enforced today by written policy and the public integrity ledger — not yet by organizational separation. As the team grows, the people who publish the print will be separated from those who sell subscriptions.
4. Transparency by default. The full methodology is public and versioned. Every change is published with its reasoning.
5. Provable record. Every published dataset is cryptographically hashed and timestamped so the print cannot be quietly revised after the fact. (See Integrity.)

2. The contributor firewall

As the confidential submission panel forms, market participants will be able to contribute real, executed strike prices under NDA. Those contributions are governed by a strict firewall:

• Confidential submissions are aggregated and never attributed. No published figure can be traced back to a single contributor's deal.
• A submission is never published below a minimum aggregation threshold (multiple independent contributors) that prevents re-identification.
• Contributors receive no preferential index treatment in return for contributing. Submitting data does not move your own comp.
• Raw submissions are access-controlled and are not shared with commercial subscribers, advisors, or any covered entity.

3. Oversight Committee being established

An independent Oversight Committee will be seated as the submission panel reaches a working contributor base. Its purpose is to remove the founder as the single point of trust. The charter commits to:

• Composition: a majority of members independent of Reactor N, with no single market segment (operators, hyperscalers, developers, financiers) holding a majority of seats.
• Mandate: approve material methodology changes, audit that the contributor firewall is being honored, review published corrections, and adjudicate conflict-of-interest disclosures.
• Cadence: review at each quarterly release, with authority to require a correction or a methodology change between releases.
• Transparency: the committee roster and its decisions are published here once seated.

Until the committee is seated, methodology decisions and corrections are made by Reactor N under the principles in §1 and recorded publicly. We do not claim independent oversight we do not yet have.

4. Methodology-change process

1. Proposed changes are drafted against the current public Methodology and assigned a new version number.
2. Material changes carry a comment window before they take effect, announced to subscribers.
3. Once the Oversight Committee is seated, material changes require its approval.
4. The methodology version and its effective date are recorded with every published print.

5. Corrections & retractions

If a published number is wrong, we say so. Corrections are published in the next release (or immediately, for material errors), name the figure that changed, and state the reasoning. The integrity ledger preserves the original hashed print so the correction is auditable against what was first published — we cannot rewrite history, only annotate it.

6. Raising a concern

Anyone — contributor, subscriber, or covered entity — may raise a governance or conflict concern at governance@reactorn.com. Concerns are logged and, once the Oversight Committee is seated, reviewed by it.

Related: Methodology · Conflicts & Funding · Index Integrity