BIP 58: Emissions: ibBTC/WBTC SLP Sett incentives

BIP | Badger Improvement Proposals
1

Category: Emissions.

Scope: Add ibBTC/WBTC SLP Sett to the general emission schedule with a 1.5x multiplier.

Status: Snapshot.

TL;DR:

  • Add ibBTC/WBTC SLP Sett to the general emission structure with a 1.5x multiplier.
    In combination with the Launch Boost it would keep the rewards for the Sett at around the same level as they are now, during Phase III of its Guarded Launch.

Overview.

With the ibBTC guarded launch phase coming to an end, it’s time to integrate the ibBTC/WBTC Sushi Sett into our general emission structure.

Currently, byWBTC Sett has a 2x multiplier, renBTC and ethBTC Setts have 1x multipliers, and tBTC and sBTC have 0.5x multipliers.

I suggest adding ibBTC to that structure with a 1.5x multiplier.

With the standard 2.5x launch boost (BIP 57) it would mean that the rewards in the following week for the Sett will be at a similar level to the current week.

The updated emission schedule with the change is available in this sheet.

Specifics.

For the third phase of ibBTC guarded launch the Badger Council approved spending 10500 Badger and 2 GDIGG as weekly rewards to ibBTC/WBTC SLP Sett.

Incorporating the Sett into the emission schedule with a 1.5x basic multiplier and a 2.5x launch boost would put the rewards for the Sett at 12,023 Badger for week 19.

Here’s how incorporating the Sett with different multipliers affects the rewards to non-native Setts:

ibBTC multipliers
ibBTC multipliers735×525 80.9 KB

The more detailed info on how this change affects the emissions for the next month is available in the sheet.

What multiplier should we add ibBTC/WBTC SLP Sett with?
  • 1x
  • 1.5x
  • 2x
  • Other

0 voters

One thing worth mentioning is that the ibBTC/WBTC SLP pool also receives the rewards of the tokens that it has been minted with.
So for example, if byWBTC had 4% APY in Badger rewards, that would add 2% APY into the ibBTC/WBTC SLP pool.
This, however, would change to the benefit of SLP Sett depositors if ibBTC travels cross-chain and participates in other liquidity mining programs.

Implementation.

If approved by the governance, the changes can be implemented with the following emission cycle on Thursday.

1 Like
2

Can we add $SUSHI to the regular rewards emission schedule. A commitment and clarity to some form of regular distribution is important.

2 Likes
3

not sure how Sushi rewards could be put into the emissions schedule.
There is the commitment to the regular distribution of Sushi rewards, it’s being worked on.
As far as I know, the goal is to have it on a cycle-by-cycle basis

4

I think perhaps visibility would go a long way, even if it was shown as “Claimable” and “Estimated for next cycle” of Sushi alongside the other rewards.

5

Interesting that the majority of the votes have been against the recommendation of the team (2x versus the recommended 1.5x multiplier), however no discussion about how it might be better for the DAO. I would be interested to know the reasons why some of you are voting for 2x.

I am currently mostly in ibBTC so 2x would be best for me. But this is not about what is best for me, but what is best for the DAO, and what the best mix would be considering all the other Setts.

6

lol voting for “other” whatever that means because why not lol hahahaha perhaps I want 5x to earn more and 0 emissions to other setts lol :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

7

Personally, I see no harm in adding ibBTC with 2x multiplier, it might be a better option.
1.5x is more of a middle-of-the-road option for balancing the interests of other vault users and ibBTC users.
If the governance chose the 1x option, that could have a negative impact on the launch, but both 1.5x and 2.x options are fine in my opinion.

ibBTC is a core product for BadgerDAO, it is a fee-generating and TVL multiplying product, and it requires deep liquidity.

When it’s added with a 2x multiplier it cuts more from other non-native Setts, which in turn might incentivize more ibBTC minting by our users.

In any case, as there hasn’t been unanimity in voting, and we’re only a couple of votes above the quorum, I think that adding all three options to the snapshot and let the token holders decide would be best.

8

Sure. I am always interested in the thought process, the arguments and the analysis. It is much more valuable than just the vote.