Discrepancy in SVs across different sources

Hello!

The ① 5N Lighthouse Explorer shows there were 54 SVs (Tier 1 + Tier 2 + Pending).

However, the following link indicates that there are 56 SVs:

② About The Foundation – Canton Foundation

We are a major financial institution preparing to build on Canton and I am currently working on preparing a list of the 54 SVs as part of our project due diligence materials, but the two lists do not match when I compare them, so I am trying to understand the reason for the discrepancy.

(a) Could you please clarify whether there is any difference between the SVs listed in ② and those listed in ①?

(b) In particular, I would like to confirm whether Canton Foundation, DTCC, and Nasdaq, which are not listed in ① but are listed in ②, are in fact SVs.

(c) Also, in ①, there appear to be multiple entries that seem to correspond to the same organization, such as Circle, C7, and IntellectEU, under categories such as Active/Staking + Tier 1. Does this mean that these organizations have three voting rights in total?

For reference, below are the entries that appear in one list but not the other:

Listed in ① but not in ② (12):

GSF
C7
23d16c2-
auth0_007c699cce
auth0_007c699ea9
Circle-SvRewardsActive-1
Circle-SvRewardsStaking-1
C7–SvRewardsActive-1
C7-SvRewardsStaking-1
IntellectEU-SvRewardsActive-1
IntellectEU-SvRewardsStaking-1
Blockdaemon

Listed in ② but not in ① (16):

7Ridge
Bosphorus SV
Canton Foundation
DTCC
Franklin Templeton
Hex Trust
LayerZero
Mesh
Nasdaq
NodeOps
Talos
USDT0
Woodside AI
Wormhole
YZi Labs
Zodia

(d) Could you please help me understand the differences between the two lists, particularly how the different entries and duplicate-looking entries in ① should be interpreted?

Q2
Who are the 13 SVs?

There are 13 SV nodes, and that is the list that votes. On MainNet today they are:

1. Global-Synchronizer-Foundation
2. Digital-Asset-1
3. Digital-Asset-2
4. Cumberland-1
5. Cumberland-2
6. MPC-Holding-Inc
7. Five-North-1
8. C7-Technology-Services-Limited
9. SV-Nodeops-Limited
10. Liberty-City-Ventures-1
11. Orb-1-LP-1
12. Tradeweb-Markets-1
13. Proof-Group-1

Governance votes are one per node. Reward weight does not add votes.

Everyone else on the Foundation page holds SV reward weight that is paid out through one of those 13 nodes as a beneficiary. The operators publish that mapping, with the CIP behind each allocation, in the MainNet approved SV identities file. That file explains all of your diffs:

(a) ② lists organisations with SV weight. ① is Lighthouse’s CIP-0105 locking dashboard: one row per reward-receiving party, plus org rows, with Tier 1/2/3 from lock compliance and Pending for escrow or unmapped parties.

(b) Canton Foundation is the Global-Synchronizer-Foundation node under its new name, shown as GSF in ①. DTCC (CIP-0083) and Nasdaq (CIP-0097) each hold weight, but it is paid to escrow parties on the GSF node, so ① shows them as ghost rows under GSF. Same for most of your ②-only list. 7Ridge and Woodside AI are not in the file yet.

(c) No. The Circle Staking and Active entries are two wallets for one allocation, 70% locked and 30% active per CIP-0105 (CIP-0041). IntellectEU (CIP-0058) and C7 are split the same way. Circle and IntellectEU run no node, so no vote. C7 runs one node, so one vote. The auth0 rows are Liberty City Ventures’ two wallets, and 23d16c2- is a truncated party id.

For due diligence, cite the on-chain list for who votes and the config file for who earns. The file changes with every SV CIP, so pin the commit.

Useful links

• MainNet approved SV identities: the 13 nodes and every beneficiary allocation, with CIP references
• Live SV nodes on canton.wiki: the same 13 with current weights
• CIP-0105: SV weight tiers and the locking requirement behind the Staking/Active split
• All CIPs: one per SV onboarding or weight change
• Canton Foundation, About: list ②
• 5N Lighthouse, Super Validators: list ①
• Splice DsoRules: the governance contract, one vote per SV

Thank you so much for the detailed response!