Please share with us your insights on liquidity program

I believe liquidity should be addressed as a long-term issue. Such liquidity programs like Geyser occupy an important position for the Dev Protocol.

My goal is to create at least 10x more liquidity than today and 30x to 50x more liquidity in the long term.

Recently, I have been focusing on effective programs for that purpose.

There is a possibility that an officially new liquidity program will not be implemented for some time after the end of Geyser so that a new Geyser may be implemented in a short period of about 1 to 2 months (Of course, community voting is required). It’s not the extended Geyser, and it’s a new program. Geyser has a known bug in ratio calculation and is likely to adopt a different program than Geyser in the long run.

Give me a little more time to put these plans together. Also, if you have any insights into audited contracts that have gained community acceptance for liquidity programs, for example, such as Synthetix, let us know what you think.

2 Likes

I’m all for finding and using a new geyser infrastructure BUT I think we ought to extend the current one until we are ready to move over. An overlap would be the most sensible approach.

We will loose a large chunk of liquidity otherwise as people will most likely back out of uniswap LP if there is no counter measure for the impermanent loss

We don’t want to start the 10x at -5x…

1 Like

Aggre answered this on Discord:

A completely new program is being planned, but in the short term, a copy of the current Geyser program is being planned. It will be announced soon.

So there will be a Geyser to overlap with the current Geyser until the best liquidity solution is in place.

1 Like

Sounds like a plan.

Is the intension to keep the current X5 system in place or will we be removing this?

There are options for a program where X5 is kept but the barriers to entry are high for new users, and where X5 is not kept but new users can easily enter.

Given the current market conditions, I doubt that (new users providing liquidity) > (current Liquidity providers adding their stakes social rewards on liquidity). I think that keeping X5 would actually increase the liquidity, even though it’s just an overlap to a more efficient program.

I have drafted a governance vote. I welcome your feedback.


As we all know, improving liquidity is a long-term challenge for Dev Protocol.
We already offer the Uniswap v2 liquidity program utilizing the forked Geyser, but the existing program will end on July 3. I plan the next completely revamped liquidity program, but I still need some time to establish the details.

Before establishing the details of the long-term liquidity program details, I propose two short-term programs, an “extended Geyser” or a “new Geyser.” This proposal avoids creating gaps in liquidity programs and allows the community to devote sufficient time to new liquidity programs.

What is an extended Geyser?

Add liquidity rewards to the current Geyser contract. Existing liquidity providers will earn additional liquidity rewards while preserving their current Reward Multiplier. Most of the added liquidity rewards will be allocated to existing liquidity providers, as many liquidity providers already have a time factor of around 3-6 months. Therefore, there are barriers to entry for new liquidity providers.

What is a new Geyser?

Deploy a new one that is the same as the existing Geyser contract. The new Geyser provides a mechanism similar to the existing Geyser, but the liquidity rewards are provided in a completely flat state. New liquidity providers and existing liquidity providers can participate in the program under the same conditions.

Duration and rewards

Whether we choose the “extended Geyser” or the “new Geyser,” I propose the duration and liquidity rewards as follows:

Duration: 2 months
Liquidity rewards: 10000 DEV (However, if the liquidity increases by 20% or more, add 8000 DEV to avoid low APY)
Bonus Period: 1 month
Max Reward Multiplier: 5x

APY simulation:

Liquidity increments Expected max APY
1% 634.73%
2% 317.36%
3% 211.58%
5% 126.95%
8% 79.34%
13% 48.83%
21% 30.23%

*These APYs are the added liquidity divided by the added total liquidity rewards. In the case of the extended Geyser, the existing states are also considered, so these APYs do not show an exact value.

Options

  1. Extended Geyser
  2. New Geyser

The question is, will the new geyser be on V3 of uniswap. If so it maybe worth moving it over into a new geyser.

If it’s staying on V2 it might just be easier and less hassle for the team to keep things as they are and just extend.

The 5X setup is a really good way to promote long term positions in the geyser but it doesn’t incentivise putting rewards back into the programme (or staking them on projects).

You might be pleasantly surprised that if we remove the 5X for the extended 2 months more staking and liquidity occurs using rewards from the past 6 months.

The question is, will the new geyser be on V3 of uniswap. If so it maybe worth moving it over into a new geyser.

I think so, but it will be a little further. In fact, it’s on our roadmap. Uniswap is developing a contract for staking Uniswap v3 NFTs. GitHub - Uniswap/uniswap-v3-staker: Canonical liquidity mining contract for Uniswap V3

You might be pleasantly surprised that if we remove the 5X for the extended 2 months more staking and liquidity occurs using rewards from the past 6 months.

That’s a side effect we can expect if we start the next Geyser as the “new Geyser”.

What would your preference be aggre?

I think if we are keeping the 5X bonus scheme for these next two months maybe it’s best to leave things as they are, and just increase the rewards as you suggest.

That way people aren’t having to unstake and move Dev LP tokens around twice (assuming they will have to in September).

It would be nice to be able to withdraw staking rewards from the past few months without losing the 5x bonus. But I guess this isn’t possible with the current geyser infrastructure?

What would your preference be aggre?

Personally, I prefer the new Geyser. The reward multiplier called 5x seems to be a concern, but when a user reaches 5x, the user also gets cumulative rewards from 1x to 5x.

It may be helpful to imagine that “5x” is where the user has 100% of the claimable rewards cap, and “1x” is the state where the user has 20% of the claimable rewards cap. So the loss by resetting 5x to 1x only occurs if you want to unstake before 1x reaches 5x again. I’m sorry, I didn’t have enough explanation.

It would be nice to be able to withdraw staking rewards from the past few months without losing the 5x bonus. But I guess this isn’t possible with the current geyser infrastructure?

Yes, that is unfortunately impossible.

I actually think it is a very clever way of getting people to stay in the geyser as my understanding is that if you have reached 5x then unstaking takes you back to the beginning at 1x.

The only downside is people will tend to leave the rewards in the geyser rather than using them to add to liquidity of stake within the Dev protocol.

Decisions decisions!

:blush:

I like both options.

1 Like

If we start Geyser v2 just before Geyser v1 ends (a day or so before), it will be easier to wait for Geyser v1 to reach 100% of its rewards before moving on to Geyser v2.

1 Like