Doesn’t matter if you have 1 or 1000 it’s still expensive!
Agreed, as just a normal person I can hardly do anything on the Ethereum network without it being painfully expensive now, which is such a shame as last year I was going round trying everything on defi and now it’s just not worth it.
Defo a plus 1 for 100% auto staking option
that is a really important feature that Harvest.Finance has that Badger.Finance doesnt have also it would be good to have the clear number on the profit sharing etc.
- Stay at 50% reinvest
- Optional 100% reinvest
- Move all to 100% reinvest
I was originally one of the people who felt 100% autocompounding was better until I thought about the purpose behind the mechanics. While I’d appreciate hearing from development on this, I actually wrote about this in my content piece.
Here’s an excerpt on that autocompounding mechanism:
While Badger’s token staking vault does draw some comparisons to Harvest Finance’s auto-compounding FARM staking vault, Badger’s approach is arguably better. While still accumulating a percentage of rewards from all the Badger Setts, the Badger staking vault instead distributes only about half of the rewards back to the underlying LP (liquidity provider) position for auto-compounding. The rest it distributes as claimable rewards, meaning you have to pay gas fees in Ethereum (ETH) to claim. Harvest simply auto-compounds the entirety of your stake, meaning you only have to pay gas when you claim the whole deposit. All your rewards auto-compound, meaning you arguably earn more efficient yield. One might consider this a design flaw, but herein lies the brilliance and balance of Badger’s system.
Over time, your stake will earn a multiplier for remaining in the Sett. This means that the longer your Badger or other LP position is staked, the better the return will be for your deposit. Rather than having to decide whether to claim the entirety of your rewards and reset that multiplier or risk taking no profits, you can simply claim a portion of your rewards without unstaking. This also gives you the flexibility of deciding whether you want to just claim some rewards, such as for trading, or put them all directly back into the Badger Sett to begin earning multipliers on the newly deposited portion.
When you think about the purpose of the Badger staking system and how it impacts liquidity providers (LPs) in how they make their staking vs unstaking, buying vs selling decisions, it’s no wonder how quickly Badger’s governance token has risen in value.
I think we should keep it how it is. It sounds more convenient, but I think we need to examine the purpose of the mechanism as-is first.
I’m not sure how this is all that different than what you can do with FARM’s autocompounding vault. If I want to take profit, all I have to do is unstake a portion of my FARM tokens from the autocompounding vault. The remainder will continue to compound. Functionally, you should have the same degree of personal agency in your choices with either product.
It would need to be developed as you say and how its been done successfully in the past for sure.
Hi @DeFiFry very interesting to hear a different perspective on the proposal.
If you read my proposal, I don’t think it is fully contradicting the mechanism. If I may quote you:
“you can simply claim a portion of your rewards without unstaking. This also gives you the flexibility of deciding whether you want to just claim some rewards”
Next to the point @KW710 is making, the flexibility part is still intact, because the flexibility of unticking the box is in the proposal itself. Or maybe I’m missing the point you tried to make.
We understand each other. I personally would love 100% autocompounding if there were flexible withdrawal options. I just have the feeling that there is a reason it was built the way it was, and I would like to hear reasoning from development speaking to that to better make an informed decision. Changing a core smart contract without a single voice of dissent, it just gives me some pause.
i agree in the logical sense of 100% auto-compounding not being different and that it is definitely more gas efficient but unstaking has a different psychological effect than claiming rewards and staking them for yourself. we want our badgers to interact with ethereum while earning yield on their $btc. thoughts? @DeFiFry
I suppose how users think about it would depend on the size of their investment. Obviously claiming a few Badger isn’t worth it gas-wise compared to claiming tens or hundreds. So larger deposits you’re claiming more frequently, as it makes sense more often to either claim to sell or reinvest in Badger Staking Sett. You could argue that’s a positive or negative psychologically. Are you think about all the unnecessary gas you’re paying, or how much money you’re making? You could argue either thought becomes more recurrent.
My perspective is generally what’s the safest, most efficient way to generate the highest yield. I would argue that’s 100% autocompounding with the ability to withdraw a portion of my stake. However, if that somehow translates in a less-safe smart contract or a psychological component that actually inhibits long term trust and growth, well that’s the issue for me.
Is there a way to make this a wallet signature action rather than a true on-chain transaction then? Basically have your cake and eat it too as far as the psychological effect of unstaking and staking vs the gas savings achieved through autocompounding vaults?
@DeFiFrog I see my post gained some positive traction and votes. What does it take to get the team involved or get this proposal to the next level? Thanks a lot!
I agree with the psychological aspect of claiming, and then having the personal responsibility of stake or sell.
I think it could be a nice QoL feature of adding a “claim and stake” option next to the “claim” button. It still leaves it up to the user, in the end, and saves at least one step. The same kinda thing was added to the Setts page already when depositing badger into them.
Please be informed that the proposal has been transformed into a BIP for voting and cast your vote there if you think this should be or should not be implemented:
autoinvest of rewards for compounded earnings without paying gas fees is a great idea. Why wouldn’t this be already the default setting? Is it because you have to pay gas to unstake a portion of your Sett rewards? So people would prefer to not have to pay that gas to take some rewards out? Why couldn’t we be allowed to personalize our Reinvest percentage individually per person? Right? Why fix it to 50% or 100% etc?
Having a locked reinvest % for everyone Its kinda inflexible and not very user friendly if you lock these things up to one way or another, it just creates haves and have nots… Some are happy some are not. But a flexible reinvest option allows each user to choose exactly what they need.
Why am I unable to post these comments or suggestions on the BIP pages? Its like only a select group of investors are being allowed to participate in the discussion on the BIP pages.
bips are only open for a certain amount of time. As for your suggestion, i’m not a dev but it may be they have to do it that way due to gas costs. If all emmissions had to be split up on different percentages for different users it seems it would greatly increase the complexity and maybe gas costs.
Doesn’t matter if you have 1 or 1000 it’s still expensive!