Matthew Finlayson: Although I like Ethereum for the innovation it has brought to Crypto, there is no substitute for native BTC in terms of protocol level security and robustness in addition to liquidity and choice of providers. If this is a technical issue then it may be more beneficial to look at RSK as their BTC side-chain is EVM compatible and therefore less of an integration issue for engineers.

If it has to be Ethereum based then I would like to see a statement from Invictus that they are happy with the provisions, liquidity and legal aspects of the custody provider for WBTC (BitGo if I am not mistaken) to then make an informed opinion on this.

David Salter: makes sense. I am also in favour of actual BTC; wBTC is quite a bit easier to implement but we can do an actual BTC wallet with our current infrastructure :)