The StoneTurn Report: What the CFTC's Own Expert Actually Found

When the CFTC needed an expert to analyze Rose City Income Fund's finances, they hired StoneTurn Group.

StoneTurn is not a small firm. They are one of the most respected forensic accounting and expert witness organizations in the world, with offices across the United States and Europe. Their work is cited in federal courts regularly. When the CFTC hired them, they were hiring the best.

What StoneTurn found is in their report. And what their report actually shows — when read carefully, rather than selectively — does not support the narrative the CFTC presented to the court.

What the Report Contains

The StoneTurn report documents the fund's financial history in detail. It records the total amount invested: $5.9 million. It records the total amount redeemed: $29.3 million. It records the fund's performance across its operating period. The numbers are there. The math is there.

What those numbers show is a fund that returned $29.3 million on $5.9 million invested — a mean annual return of 303%. The lowest individual investor return was 16.44%. Not a single investor lost money.

These are not Sam Ikkurty's numbers. These are StoneTurn's numbers. The CFTC's own expert documented a fund where every investor profited.

What the CFTC Chose to Emphasize

The CFTC's presentation to the court focused on the Genie Technologies program, characterizing the carbon offset bond structure as a Ponzi scheme — using new investor money to pay earlier investors. The blockchain tells a different story: 126 receive transactions show ETH flowing from Genie Technologies back into the fund's wallet. The fund was receiving money from Genie, not the other way around.

Dasso's declaration described these transactions without reviewing the blockchain. She has since admitted this under oath.

The Expert Witness Contradiction

The most remarkable aspect of the StoneTurn report is what it implies about the CFTC's own theory. If the fund was a Ponzi scheme — if investor returns were being paid with new investor capital rather than genuine gains — then the fund should show a pattern of cash inflows from new investors being immediately redirected to pay earlier investors, with no underlying asset growth.

The StoneTurn report does not show this pattern. It shows a fund with real DeFi protocol holdings, real on-chain activity, and real returns. The 885 blockchain transactions are the underlying record. The StoneTurn numbers are the summary of what those transactions produced.

A Ponzi scheme cannot generate a 303% mean annual return for every investor while maintaining an immutable public ledger of every transaction. The two facts are incompatible.

Why This Matters for the Appeal

The Seventh Circuit is reviewing whether the district court's summary judgment was correctly decided. The StoneTurn report — the CFTC's own expert's work — contains the data that undermines the Ponzi characterization. The blockchain contains the transaction-level evidence that the StoneTurn numbers summarize.

The appeal brief argues that the district court failed to engage with this evidence. The court's summary judgment opinion contains no substantive analysis of the 885 transactions, the 126 Genie receive transactions, or the investor outcome data that StoneTurn itself documented.

A court that does not engage with the primary evidence has not decided the case. It has deferred to a characterization that the evidence contradicts.