The controls are the product.
Anyone can subtract one published price from another. What an institution buys is the assurance that the same subtraction was done the same way every week, that the inputs were qualified before use, and that a number cannot be quietly changed after the fact. That is what this page documents.
Six controls
| Control | What it prevents | Where it is enforced |
|---|---|---|
| Input qualification | An unpublished or unsourced number entering the index | src/ingest.mjs — reject on any of six missing fields |
| Computation separation | A spread being produced by hand and described as derived | src/assess.mjs — the only path to a value |
| Withholding | A gap being filled by interpolation or a carried price | assess.mjs — returns withheld, never a fallback |
| Date integrity | Two different days presented as one observation | mixed_dates flag — shown, never smoothed |
| Append-only issue | A published number being edited in place | src/publish.mjs — refuses to overwrite an existing record |
| Correction, not revision | History rewritten so the record always looks right | publish.mjs --correct — new dated record with a reason |
Integrity of the record
Every publication is written once and hashed. The SHA-256 digest of each record is published on the series page and in the feed, so a reader holding a copy can prove whether it is the copy that was issued.
record issued → file written once → sha256 computed → digest published
│
a later correction is a new file,
never a new hash on the old one
This is not a distributed ledger and does not claim to be. It is a dated sequence with a verifiable fingerprint, which is what a counterparty actually needs in order to rely on a number in a contract.
All checks passed · 16/16
1 record · 0 corrections
latest 2026-09-23 · dc56e54727
Every spread was recomputed from the observations frozen inside its own record, not from today's inputs. Every file was re-hashed. The feed was compared against the record, field by field.
Separation and conflicts
What AVIX does not do
- It does not trade SAF, jet fuel or any instrument referencing this index.
- It does not advise on, broker or arrange offtakes.
- It does not sell recovery, consulting or benchmarking services on top of the assessment.
- It does not accept payment contingent on the level of a published spread.
Why that matters
A publisher that earns a fee from the overpayment it reports has an interest in the size of the overpayment. Licensing revenue is flat and unrelated to the direction of any spread. That single design choice removes the largest conflict an index provider can carry.
Where a client also licenses the feed, the licence is priced on distribution, not on the value the client extracts from any individual print.
Errors and complaints
A suspected error in a published spread should be raised at index@xvilan.com with the publication date and the leg in question. The process, in order:
1 acknowledge within 2 business days 2 verify against the assessor's own publication, not our file 3 decide uphold or reject, in writing, with reasons 4 correct if upheld: new dated correction record, original retained 5 notify every licensed recipient, on the day the correction issues 6 retain the complaint, the decision and the correction, indefinitely
There is no fee to complain, and no requirement to be a licensee to raise an error. A reader who finds a mistake is doing the index a service.
Method change control
The method carries a version number, currently 0.2. A change to a spread definition, a unit rule or a qualification test is a new version, published before it takes effect, with the date it applies from. A method change is never applied retrospectively to an issued record.
Where a change would alter a historical spread if recomputed, the series keeps the original and states the break rather than restating history to look continuous.
Regulatory position, stated plainly
AVIX is not an authorised or registered benchmark administrator under Regulation (EU) 2016/1011. It is a publisher of derived spreads. This matters to you if you intend to use a spread in a way the regulation covers:
- Reading a spread, or using it for internal analysis and risk work, does not require an authorised administrator.
- Referencing a spread in a financial instrument, a fund's objective, or a contract whose value is determined by it can bring the index into scope. In that case the administrator must be authorised, or the use must fall within an applicable exemption.
- Any party intending settlement or instrument use is responsible for confirming the position for its own jurisdiction and product, and should not rely on this page as legal advice.
The controls above are built to the standard an authorisation process would examine, because building them later, after a client asks, is not possible. Applying for authorisation is a separate step and is not claimed here.
Records and retention
| Record | Retention | Location |
|---|---|---|
| Published publication records | Indefinite, append-only | data/series/ |
| Correction records with reasons | Indefinite | data/corrections/ |
| Input observation sets as ingested | Indefinite, per publication | data/observations.json · embedded in each record |
| Candidate sets and rejections | Indefinite | data/candidates/ |
| Licence agreements | Term plus six years | Corporate records |
| Complaints and decisions | Indefinite | Corporate records |
Because each publication record embeds the observations it was derived from, the full derivation of any historical spread can be reconstructed from the series alone, without access to any other system.