Intro
Cryptex has currently 2 liquid pools. Today I’d like to talk about CTX/WETH pool on Sushiswap because it has slightly different specifics than the TCAP pool.
(It will be discussed in separate forum topic as Cryptex Liquidity Strategy: TCAP (2/2))
Liquidity is an issue for a lot of projects. In the early days of defi, liquidity mining was used to ensure liquidity, but the projects found out pretty soon this is very expensive and inefficient. This fact led to a number of projects trying to deal with liquidity much more efficiently - Olympus Pro, Tokemak, Ondo, etc. So there are a number of ways to better address liquidity.
Problem
CTX total volume is pretty high with reasonable distribution. Wintermute is doing great job to ensure enough liquidity on CEXes.
However there is a significant activity on Sushiswap too- cca 30% of total volume generating trading fees.
CTX/WETH volume:
CTX/WETH trading fees:
CTX/WETH pool stats:
Pool pair: CTX/WETH
Pair correlation:: 0.62
Pool APY: ~25% (trading fees)
Current TVL: $382k
Protocol: Sushiswap
Incentives: 26.038 CTX → $110k (0,26% of total supply)
Duration: 90 days
Daily inflation: 289 CTX → $1.21k
Pool APR rewards: 59% (CTX rewards)
The current CTX/WETH Sushiswap incentives will expire on October 15th 2022. The is not sustainable to keep extending incentives forever. But as seen above this LP pool generate trading fees, which could be potentially treasury revenue or used elsewhere. At this moment, it costs DAO 26.038 CTX distributed over 3 months to ensure liquidity for this pool, which is equivalent of $110k. Therefore I believe we should start a discussion about CTX long-term liquidity strategy.
Suggestion:
I will kick of with an idea that DAO could provide CTX tokens to the LP pool and let other people or community members to deposit the second asset (WETH or any stablecoin). Both assets would be matched up and put into LP pool together. DAO would negotiate rewards to non-CTX depositors, while DAO would take all IL and trading fees. By other words DAO would be junior with variable yield, and non-CTX depositors would be seniors with fixed yield. The terms would be negotiated prior to that action. The pool size can be limited, possible whitelist for CTX, TCAP holders, vested rewards, targeted yield, duration etc…
That would result into more efficient liquidity solution, better token distribution, use of idle treasury assets and aligning LT goals.
Few things to consider:
Why do we pair CTX with WETH vs stablecoins?
How to assess IL risks?
How would active LP management change the outputs?
Why is this suggested solution better over bonding?
Please feel free to provide your feedback or suggest other solution.