Informal governance meeting room with floor-to-ceiling windows and city views, someone organizing DAO proposal documents on a glass table, casual afternoon light.
Protocols

Pyth Improvement Proposal Process

Meta-standard defining the lifecycle of a Pyth Improvement Proposal from ideation and community discussion through formal review, voting, and implementation. Canonical guide for protocol architects and governance participants seeking to propose changes to core oracle mechanics.
introduction
GOVERNANCE LIFECYCLE STANDARD

What is the Pyth Improvement Proposal Process?

The meta-standard defining how protocol changes are proposed, reviewed, voted on, and implemented within the Pyth Network.

The Pyth Improvement Proposal (PIP) Process is the canonical governance lifecycle for modifying core Pyth Network mechanics. It provides a structured pathway for any community member to propose changes—from new price feed specifications and aggregation algorithm adjustments to publisher stake-weighting models and cross-chain governance message standards. The process is designed to ensure that protocol architects, data providers, and DeFi integrators can track a proposal from initial ideation through formal review, on-chain voting by PYTH token holders, and final implementation across Pythnet and its connected chains.

Operationally, the PIP process directly impacts the security and economic assumptions of consuming protocols. A proposal that alters the aggregation algorithm or confidence interval calculation, for example, can change the price that triggers a liquidation in a lending market. The lifecycle mandates phases of community discussion and technical review before a vote, giving risk teams and integration engineers a predictable window to assess the downstream effects on their fallback oracle designs, staleness tolerances, and liquidation parameters. The canonical source for active and historical PIPs is the Pyth Network governance forum and associated GitHub repositories.

For builders and operators, the PIP process is not merely a governance formality; it is the trigger for integration work. An approved PIP that introduces a new data type standard, such as a realized volatility feed, requires consuming smart contracts to update their on-chain verification interfaces. Similarly, a change to the cross-chain price update message format demands coordinated upgrades to relayer infrastructure and receiver contracts. Chainscore Labs supports teams through this lifecycle by providing upgrade readiness reviews, smart contract audit preparation, and impact assessments that map a specific PIP's technical changes to the exact integration points in a client's protocol.

PROPOSAL LIFECYCLE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PIP Process at a Glance

Operational overview of the Pyth Improvement Proposal lifecycle, identifying affected actors and required actions at each stage to help teams prepare for changes to core oracle mechanics.

AreaWhat changesWho is affectedAction

Proposal Ideation

A new PIP is drafted and shared for community discussion on the Pyth forum

Protocol architects, data providers, DeFi integrators

Review the draft for technical feasibility and integration impact; provide feedback before formalization

Formal Review

The PIP is assigned a number and enters a structured review phase with canonical specification

Core developers, security auditors, governance delegates

Audit the specification against the Pythnet data model and cross-chain message format; verify backward compatibility

Governance Vote

Token holders vote on-chain to approve or reject the PIP

PYTH stakers, governance delegates, protocol risk teams

Evaluate the proposal's effect on oracle trust assumptions, publisher economics, and data delivery guarantees before voting

Implementation

Approved changes are coded into Pythnet validator clients, Hermes relayers, or on-chain receiver contracts

Validator operators, relayer operators, SDK maintainers

Upgrade infrastructure to compliant versions; test against the new specification in a staging environment

Cross-Chain Activation

Governance messages encoding the change are broadcast to destination chains via Wormhole

Bridge operators, cross-chain application developers, multisig signers

Verify governance message payloads on each target chain; confirm receiver contracts execute the change atomically

Integration Migration

Consuming protocols must update their oracle interfaces to align with new data structures or methods

DeFi protocols, wallets, exchanges, custodians

Update on-chain verification logic and off-chain parsers; adjust risk parameters if aggregation or confidence interval calculations changed

Monitoring and Verification

Post-activation monitoring ensures the change behaves as specified and does not degrade data quality

Risk teams, data analysts, relay operators

Monitor price feed freshness, confidence interval accuracy, and cross-chain delivery latency; report anomalies to Pyth governance

technical-context
FORMAL PIP PROCESS

Proposal Lifecycle and Governance Gates

The canonical meta-standard defining how a Pyth Improvement Proposal moves from ideation to implementation, including the formal gates that govern changes to core oracle mechanics.

The Pyth Improvement Proposal (PIP) Process defines the end-to-end lifecycle for proposing, debating, and ratifying changes to the Pyth Network's core protocol. This meta-standard governs modifications to price feed construction, aggregation algorithms, cross-chain messaging formats, and publisher economics. For protocol architects and governance participants, the PIP process is the single authoritative pathway for altering the oracle's behavior, distinct from the operational execution of those changes by validators or the integration work by downstream DeFi protocols.

A PIP progresses through a sequence of defined states: Ideation, where a concept is informally discussed in community forums; Draft, where a formal specification is authored and submitted to the PIP repository; Review, where protocol architects and stakeholders assess technical soundness and economic impact; Last Call, a final comment period signaling readiness for a vote; Vote, where token-weighted governance on Pythnet ratifies or rejects the proposal; and Implemented, where the ratified change is deployed to the network. Each transition requires meeting explicit criteria, such as editorial approval, a minimum review period, and a successful on-chain vote. Proposals that modify the aggregation algorithm, publisher stake-weighting, or cross-chain governance message format face heightened scrutiny and extended review windows.

The governance gates are designed to prevent unilateral changes to oracle mechanics. A PIP that passes the vote stage triggers an on-chain governance action on Pythnet, which is then atomically relayed to all connected chains via the Cross-Chain Governance Message Standard. This ensures that a ratified change to, for example, the confidence interval calculation is applied uniformly across every deployment, eliminating state fragmentation. Integrators and risk teams must monitor PIPs in the Vote and Implemented stages to anticipate breaking changes to the updatePriceFeeds interface, staleness thresholds, or the binary encoding of price updates.

Teams building on Pyth should treat the PIP process as a critical operational signal. A PIP entering Last Call is a trigger for integration review, impact assessment, and testnet validation. Chainscore Labs can assist with formal review of PIPs that affect your protocol's oracle dependency, including analyzing changes to aggregation logic, verifying cross-chain governance execution, and updating fallback oracle configurations to maintain resilience during transitions.

IMPACT ANALYSIS BY ACTOR

Who is Affected by a PIP?

DeFi Protocols & Integrators

Protocols consuming Pyth data are the primary downstream actors affected by PIPs that alter price feed schemas, aggregation logic, or the on-chain verification interface.

Impact areas:

  • A PIP changing the exponent or conf field semantics requires immediate smart contract updates to avoid mispricing assets.
  • Proposals modifying the pull oracle interface (e.g., updatePriceFeeds arguments) break existing receiver contracts until they are upgraded.
  • Changes to staleness thresholds or the fallback oracle standard demand a review of liquidation and risk parameter configurations.

Action checklist:

  1. Monitor PIPs in "Last Call" status that touch Price Feed Specification or On-Chain Verification Interface Standard.
  2. Run integration tests against testnet deployments of proposed changes.
  3. Prepare upgrade transactions for receiver contracts well before mainnet activation.
  4. Reassess risk parameters (LTV, liquidation thresholds) if confidence interval calculations are modified.

Chainscore Labs can perform a protocol impact assessment and review your receiver contracts for compatibility with upcoming PIPs.

implementation-impact
PIP LIFECYCLE & INTEGRATION EFFECTS

Implementation Impact by Proposal Type

The type of Pyth Improvement Proposal directly determines the scope of technical work for integrators, publishers, and relay operators. Each proposal class carries distinct implementation requirements, testing burdens, and operational risks.

01

Price Feed & Aggregation Logic Changes

Proposals altering the core aggregation algorithm or confidence interval calculation require immediate action from consuming DeFi protocols. Teams must update their liquidation engines, loan-to-value ratios, and risk parameterization models to reflect the new price formation methodology. A failure to re-audit these parameters against the new aggregate logic can lead to incorrect liquidations or bad debt accumulation. Chainscore Labs can perform a protocol impact assessment to map every downstream dependency on the changed aggregation function.

02

Cross-Chain Message & Verification Updates

Modifications to the cross-chain price update message format or the on-chain verification interface are breaking changes for all receiver contracts. Every deployed smart contract that calls updatePriceFeeds must be upgraded to parse the new binary structure and verify the updated payload. This requires coordinated testnet deployments, security audits of the new receiver logic, and a carefully sequenced mainnet migration to avoid oracle downtime. The risk of a mismatched parser silently accepting malformed data is critical.

03

New Data Type Standards

The introduction of derived data types like funding rates or realized volatility expands the oracle's surface area but introduces new integration risks. Protocols consuming these feeds must understand the exact calculation methodology, its staleness properties, and how it behaves during market stress. A funding rate feed that lags during high volatility can be exploited. Integrators should treat each new data type as a distinct oracle with its own failure modes, requiring separate risk analysis and monitoring thresholds.

04

Publisher Stake-Weighting & Economic Security

Proposals that change how publisher stake influences aggregate price and confidence fundamentally alter the trust model. A shift toward heavier stake-weighting can increase the influence of large publishers, introducing a centralization vector that risk teams must model. Protocols with high total value locked should re-evaluate the economic cost of a corruption attack under the new weighting scheme and adjust their fallback oracle configurations or staleness tolerances accordingly.

05

Hermes Relay & SDK Specification Changes

Updates to the Hermes relay protocol or canonical SDK APIs require all self-hosted relay operators and backend services to upgrade their infrastructure. A change in subscription patterns or fee management logic can break custom indexers, keeper bots, and liquidation engines that rely on a specific data delivery cadence. Operators should run a parallel test instance against the new relay version to validate update frequency, gas estimation accuracy, and error handling before decommissioning the old client.

06

Fallback & Interface Standard Proposals

Standards that define a unified fallback oracle interface or abstract verification contracts require DeFi protocols to refactor their oracle consumption layer. While these standards promote resilience, the migration introduces a new dependency chain and potential for misconfiguration in the failover logic. A fallback that triggers incorrectly on a stale-but-valid Pyth price can route transactions to a less reliable secondary source. Integration testing must cover edge cases where Pyth data is delayed, not just absent.

PIP LIFECYCLE RISK ASSESSMENT

Risk Matrix for Protocol Changes

Evaluates the operational and integration risks introduced at each stage of a Pyth Improvement Proposal, from ideation to final implementation across chains.

PhaseWhat changesWho is affectedAction

Ideation & Discussion

New oracle mechanics, data types, or aggregation logic are proposed.

Protocol architects, risk teams, DeFi integrators

Review the PIP's motivation and technical specification for potential impacts on price feed semantics and integration contracts.

Formal Review

The proposal's technical specification is frozen and undergoes community and core contributor scrutiny.

Auditors, integration engineers, governance delegates

Conduct a preliminary impact assessment on dependent systems like lending markets and perps. Verify the standard against existing on-chain verification interfaces.

Governance Vote

Token holders vote to ratify or reject the proposed standard or parameter change.

Governance delegates, protocol treasuries, risk officers

Monitor the vote outcome. A passing vote signals a binding change that will require operational readiness. Verify the canonical vote status on Pythnet.

Implementation

Core client software, Hermes relayers, and on-chain receiver contracts are updated.

Node operators, relay operators, wallet builders, exchange integration teams

Test against the new implementation in a staging environment. Update SDKs and parsing logic to handle new data structures or message formats.

Cross-Chain Activation

Governance messages are relayed atomically to update oracle contracts on multiple destination chains.

L2 sequencers, bridge operators, multi-chain DeFi protocols

Verify that the governance action has been correctly applied on every relevant chain. Monitor for any cross-chain delivery failures or state inconsistencies.

Post-Activation Monitoring

The new standard is live and producing data consumed by downstream applications.

Data teams, risk managers, liquidation engine operators

Monitor the new price feeds or aggregation behavior for anomalies. Validate that confidence intervals and EMA/TWAP values are computed correctly against the new standard.

PIP LIFECYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Integration Readiness Checklist for a New PIP

Before a ratified Pyth Improvement Proposal reaches mainnet activation, integration teams must verify that their systems can consume, parse, and act on the resulting data or interface changes. This checklist maps the operational, security, and compatibility checks required to safely absorb a new PIP.

Locate the final, ratified PIP text in the Pyth governance forum or canonical GitHub repository. Verify the proposal's current lifecycle stage: Draft, Review, Last Call, Accepted, or Implemented. Do not rely on secondary summaries.

  • What to check: The exact data model changes, new fields, deprecated methods, or altered aggregation logic.
  • Why it matters: Misinterpreting a draft as final can lead to integrations that break on activation.
  • Readiness signal: The PIP status is "Accepted" and the target activation Pythnet slot or governance execution timestamp is known.
Chains We Build On

Looking to build on a specific blockchain?

We build smart contracts, DeFi applications, wallets, tokenization platforms, and blockchain infrastructure across the major ecosystems teams choose today. That includes Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, Avalanche, Solana, Sui, Aptos, Hedera, Stellar, and NEAR, with support for additional EVM and non-EVM networks based on your product requirements.

EVM ecosystems

  • Ethereum logo
    Ethereum
  • Arbitrum logo
    Arbitrum
  • Optimism logo
    Optimism
  • Polygon logo
    Polygon
  • Avalanche logo
    Avalanche
  • Cronos logo
    Cronos

Non-EVM ecosystems

  • Solana logo
    Solana
  • Sui logo
    Sui
  • Aptos logo
    Aptos
  • Hedera logo
    Hedera
  • Stellar logo
    Stellar
  • NEAR logo
    NEAR

Additional ecosystems

  • Polkadot logo
    Polkadot
  • Cosmos logo
    Cosmos
  • TON logo
    TON
  • Cardano logo
    Cardano
  • Algorand logo
    Algorand
  • Tempo logo
    Tempo

Also available for Base, appchains, custom EVM networks, and cross-chain product architecture.

PIP LIFECYCLE AND PARTICIPATION

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions from protocol architects and governance participants about navigating the Pyth Improvement Proposal process, from ideation to implementation.

A PIP progresses through distinct phases designed to refine ideas and build consensus before on-chain action:

  1. Ideation: A problem or feature is discussed informally in community forums or the Pyth Discord.
  2. Draft PIP: The author formalizes the proposal using the standard PIP template, defining the specification and rationale.
  3. Community Review: The draft is shared publicly for a minimum period (e.g., 7 days) to gather feedback from publishers, integrators, and token holders.
  4. Formal Proposal: If the draft gains traction, it is submitted as a formal on-chain governance proposal on Pythnet with a defined voting period.
  5. Voting: Token holders vote. The proposal must meet a defined quorum and approval threshold to pass.
  6. Execution: An approved proposal is executed atomically on Pythnet and, if it affects cross-chain contracts, governance messages are relayed to target chains for execution.

Teams should verify the exact minimum review periods and voting thresholds against the current on-chain governance parameters, as these can be modified by governance itself.

Trusted by Industry Leaders

Delivering blockchain solutions for 5+ years.

We have partnered with 50+ leading DeFi protocols, NFT ecosystems, and fintech innovators to build secure, scalable, and capital-efficient blockchain products.

Selected Partners & Clients

ChainVote logo
Reax logo
Sokail logo
Swapsicle logo
SyntheX logo
Tekika logo
Telos logo
Zexe logo
ChainVote logo
Reax logo
Sokail logo
Swapsicle logo
SyntheX logo
Tekika logo
Telos logo
Zexe logo
ChainVote logo
Reax logo
Sokail logo
Swapsicle logo
SyntheX logo
Tekika logo
Telos logo
Zexe logo
ChainVote logo
Reax logo
Sokail logo
Swapsicle logo
SyntheX logo
Tekika logo
Telos logo
Zexe logo
I've been working with Chainscore Labs for last 3+ years, they've consistently delivered with strong ownership across multiple projects. The team is reliable and detail-oriented.
L
Lee Erswell
CEO, Telos Foundation
how to get started

How to get started?

If you're looking for blockchain integration, ChainScore Labs has 5+ years of experience helping teams build and integrate exchanges, wallets, smart contracts, tokenization solutions, and protocol-connected products, we can help you choose the right path, integrate securely, and get to production faster. Our team consists of experienced blockchain developers and architects who can help you with your blockchain integration needs.

01

Exploration & Strategy

Define your product goals and choose the right blockchain architecture for your use case.

02

Architecture & Design

Design the smart contracts, tokenomics, and security parameters of your system.

03

Development & Integration

Build and integrate with wallets, oracles, and front-end dApps for a seamless experience.

04

Security & Launch

Comprehensive audits followed by a risk-managed mainnet deployment to protect your users.

Start a build

Need a blockchain engineering team?

Send the project context and we will respond with next steps, scope questions, and a practical path to delivery.