Competitor Benchmark

This page records the documentation benchmark used to shape the Signalite Mintlify docs.

Reference docs reviewed

Project	Strong pattern
Looping WHLP	Product overview, contract addresses, deposit flow, withdrawal queue, integrations, builder codes
Looping WHLP builder codes	Partner acquisition and revenue attribution as a first-class integration topic
Liminal	User-level deposit, withdraw, destination, and strategy-unwind explanations
Liminal referrals	Explicit partner commission terms and product exclusions
Morpho Earn	Clear split between onchain contracts, API data, SDKs, simulations, and revenue models
LI.FI Earn	Single integration promise for discovery, execution, and monetization
LI.FI Earn architecture	Freshness windows, normalized vault data, and capability resolution
Privy Earn	Simple wallet-action framing, real-time positions, gas sponsorship, revenue sharing, vault setup
Mintlify Mermaid	Diagrams-as-code for maintainable integration flows

Gap analysis

Dimension	Competitor baseline	Previous Signalite docs	Implemented now
Flow of funds	WHLP and Liminal explain deposit, withdraw, and unwind flows	Text only, no visual flow	Added Flow of Funds with Mermaid diagrams
Accounting	Mature vault docs distinguish rate, TVL, exchange rate, and backing	Basic share-price explanation	Added Accounting and Proof
Queue semantics	WHLP documents request, solver, cancellation, expiry	Queued redeem existed, but was not visually mapped	Expanded queued redeem and flow diagrams
API/data layer	Morpho and LI.FI make data APIs first-class	API page existed	OpenAPI tab plus sync workflow retained
SDK path	Morpho documents SDK/resource split	SDK quickstart existed	SDK pages kept and readiness helpers documented
Partner revenue	Privy/Morpho/WHLP document fee or builder-code concepts	Missing	Added Partner Revenue as roadmap/sandbox model
Receive chains	Liminal makes destination explicit	Present but easy to miss	Receive networks page kept and tied into flow diagram
Operational gates	LI.FI-style freshness/capability pattern	Present	Release gates and readiness pages kept
Audit package	WHLP exposes audit references and contract posture	Only mentioned in prose	Added Audit Package

Signalite positioning

Signalite is not trying to be a generic vault marketplace like LI.FI Earn, or a pure wallet-action abstraction like Privy Earn. The docs should position it as:

A single high-conviction sHLP product
A partner API for state, proof, history, and action quotes
A typed SDK for app integration
A transparent liquidity model with instant and queued exits
A constrained strategy with explicit readiness gates

Important differences

Signalite has a more complex lifecycle than a normal synchronous ERC-4626 vault:

Area	Normal vault expectation	Signalite requirement
Deposit	User receives shares immediately	Same, but assets may later be batched into strategy
Price	Backing is usually fully onchain in one contract	API must include vault, strategy, Core, HLP, and in-flight buckets
Withdraw	Often immediate if liquid	Instant if buffer exists, queued if HLP unwind is required
Activity	Transaction history is enough	Redeem lifecycle state must be indexed and shown
Partner app	Can read contract directly	Must use readiness, quote, and activity APIs

Partner documentation standard

Before a selected partner integrates, docs must make these states unambiguous:

Where user funds enter
Which contract mints shares
Which states count toward share price
When exits are instant
When exits are queued
How a pending redeem becomes claimable
Which actions can be cancelled
Which receive networks are native versus bridged
Which revenue-sharing features are live versus roadmap
Which contracts and operational services are in the audit scope

Remaining documentation gaps

These should not be claimed complete until the product implements them:

Live partner attribution field in quote/build endpoints
Referral commission accounting
External audit report page
Final public risk disclosure
Public uptime/SLA page

Implementation outcome

The docs now include the same categories mature competitors expose:

Product overview
Flow of funds
Accounting/proof
Deposit guide
Withdrawal guide
Activity lifecycle
API reference
SDK reference
Readiness/release gates
Partner revenue model

Start

Build flows

SDK

Operations

Reference docs reviewed

Gap analysis

Signalite positioning

Important differences

Partner documentation standard

Remaining documentation gaps

Implementation outcome

​Reference docs reviewed

​Gap analysis

​Signalite positioning

​Important differences

​Partner documentation standard

​Remaining documentation gaps

​Implementation outcome

Reference docs reviewed

Gap analysis

Signalite positioning

Important differences

Partner documentation standard

Remaining documentation gaps

Implementation outcome