Description
The goal of the task is to:
- Minimize the overlapping of liquidity providing positions and GNO incentives captured by the Gnosis DAO
- Enable cleaner effectiveness analysis of incentives.
Important to note that this is short/mid - term plan until Uniswap and Balancer deploys. That will fundamentally change how we design and implement liquidity and incentives (mainly through voting for pools).
- 🟢 Analyze Pro’s and Con’s of incentivizing OR providing liquidity in each protocol
- 🟢 Decide where liquidity will be concentrated (pools and protocols)
- 🟢 Define a plan two move liquidity (time span, steps and quantities) out of protocols that are not going to be supported with liquidity
- 🟢 Communicate the plan with those protocol teams (where the DAO’s liquidity is substantial).
- 🟢 Follow execution with the team and monitor Liquidity and APR on each protocol
Pros and Cons for ONLY incentivizing the protocol
|
Pros |
Cons |
Recommendation |
| SushiSwap |
- Well-known protocol, likely will attract liquidity on its own given a good APR. |
|
|
- Diversity of pools that can be incentivized
- Lesser impact as current Karpatkey’s TVL is 20%. No pool (except Sushi/GNO) has more than 60% Liq provided by the DAO | | Only incentivize |
| Swapr | - Swapr is the protocol with most transactions and active users between DEXes (though the one with largest TVL atm), which may help to attract investment with a good APR. | - The campaigns and carrots are a friction for incentives.
- Some pools are heavy dependent on DAO’s liquidity (GNO/XDAI, GNO/WETH, BTC/ETH)
- It is uncertain how much SWPR will be used for incentives in the future. | Candidate for only liquidity. If supporting HoneySwap is still important, recommendation is to only incentivize Swapr, having a good plan for those pools with heavy investment. |
| HoneySwap | Similar to Swapr. | - Currently not being incentivized by us. (xCOMB rewards). Start incentivizing will mean a higher effort.
- Protocol not being maintained, it will be hard to get ongoing support.
- Some pools are heavy dependant on DAO’s liquidity (GNO/XDAI, GNO/WETH) | If supporting HoneySwap is important, keep liquidity here. Otherwise in Swapr. |
| Symmetric | It may be a good round test for the protocol’s capacity to attract liquidity beyond DAO’s | Current DAO’s TVL is 90%, pulling out liquidity may be a death sentence to the protocol | Only Incentivize. Have a “slow” management of change given DAO’s LP weight. |
Exit plans