Deploy liquidity pools for sETH2/ETH and rETH2/ETH on Uniswap V3

Ideas
21

I am amazed at the amount of discussion this has sparked - way to go guys!!

@mitchel @rustedpopcorn @cryptochrome @dreth @jonathanstrange thank you for the support :muscle:

Lot to digest, and I am like 3-4 tequilas in. Viva Mexico! :slight_smile: However, we need to get the liquidity up and running! Want to boost my APR, not planning on exiting my stake!
Will re-read again tomorrow, and post something of more value. Salute! :slight_smile:

@TopNotchInvest Tequila is my favourite drink :sweat_smile: Glad to hear you were having a good time. Still looking forward to your thoughts!

As someone holding only ~1.6 sETH I would be thankful to have some sort of guide to assess if providing liquidity myself might be profitable for me - at least as soon as we’ve decided about the LP details.

We have a guide for the LPs sketched out in case this proposal goes through :slight_smile:

If i understand this rigth, 0.3% is the current V2 fee and 0.05% is the incentive for stable coins. Since we want a narrow price range, wouldn’t 0.05% make the most sense?

@George You raise a valid point - indeed, we want the peg to be as tight as possible, and that is typically achieved with the help of arbitrage opportunities. At a first glance, they would likely be hard to come by if the trading fee was set to 0.3%. However, a lot depends on where these arbitrage opportunities come from. Since withdrawals are a while away, the only arbitrage opportunities would be based on triangular arbitrage between pools where sETH2 is paired with another asset (more volatile relative to ETH, e.g. FLI-ETH2x, USDC, WBTC etc.) and the original sETH2/ETH pool. In such pools, the fee is typically set to 0.3% as well; hence, the cost of every arbitrage trade would be 0.6% if we stick to the 0.3% trading fee and would be 0.35% if we choose 0.05% instead. In my mind, the difference between the volume of arbitrage with 0.35% cost and 0.6% cost is not significant considering the number of days with at least 0.6% moves in asset prices. Hence, I am leaning in favour of 0.30% as the fee, because it would generate great fees for the LPs and attract deeper liquidity. Would be great to hear your thoughts on this.

I think this warrants a discussion for sure, I’d say that we need to incentivize these nicely, but without giving up too much of the SWISE supply as to not dilute the price too much.
As an additional proposal I think it would be nice to have an SWISE/ETH pool on Uniswap V3, even tho I wouldn’t like to seem like I’m suggesting that we need all the pools in the same protocol, I do believe that an SWISE/ETH pool (with equal liquidity mining incentives as the 1INCH/SWISE pool) on Uniswap V3 would probably get more use.

@dreth I agree with the sentiment about the incentives and the idea of listing $SWISE on Uniswap V3. I only see one hurdle (which is likely to be temporary): Uniswap V3 requires active liquidity management on behalf of LPs, which is a pretty advanced (and costly) task for the ordinary users. While for the stable pairs like sETH2/ETH this is less of a concern, for more volatile assets (like SWISE/ETH) it holds true. This requires us to implement (or integrate with) a solution that adjusts the range automatically based on the price movement. Such solutions are yet hard to come by. While we are exploring the different options (xU3LP is one of them), at the moment there is no certainty about either of them. Hence, it would be great to create a forum post to kickstart the conversation about such a pool and the options we could use. If it were to come from you, it would be amazing :slight_smile:

Just want to say…have not been active around the discord or forum much of late because IRL work is kicking my ass, but it brings a tear to my eye to see the engagement and thoughtfulness on display here. WAGMI vibes are strong.

Fully agree, this incredible response from the DAO leaves me hopeful about the things to come!

4 Likes
22

  1. Where is the demand for sETH2 going to come from? There has to be awareness in the market that sETH2 exists… and people have to actually go to uniswap, seek it out and buy it. How will awareness be created?

  2. There is going to be an initial flood of sETH2 hitting the market… this is going to create lopsided supply for sETH2/ETH LP. I don’t understand how that will be overcome. The law of supply and demand says there will have to be a price adjustment somewhere… right now it seems like we’re calling it LP incentives. So, either the seller takes a hit or StakeWise subsidizes the difference, which is allowing sETH2 sellers to devalue $SWISE to exit their position. Another way of saying it, is those that want to leave the community, will do so at the expense of the community… leaving us holding their bag. Not fair.

  3. How many liquidity providers who own sETH2, also own an equal amount of ETH? Seems like most people who staked, likely staked most of their ETH… I did. So, to provide liquidity, LPs also have to add more sETH2 to the market, just to get enough ETH to stake. This is likely cost prohibitive… and adds to the over-supply of sETH2 problem.

  4. I don’t understand how the arbitrage opportunities exist. Arbitrage against what? You get one arbitrage opportunity, right?.. Buy sETH2 at a discount and exit when unstaking is possible. I don’t see any easy arb opportunities. Maybe the complex ones will work, but they’re over my head. How many people will actually attempt complex arbs?

  5. I also don’t understand the leverage opportunities with LPs. That one is over my head too. If someone could explain how providing liquidity can create leverage opportunities, please do.

  6. When Eth2.0 launches, doesn’t all this become obsolete?

  7. This all applies to rETH2, as well.

Summary:
I don’t know a ton about LP, but common sense says that if you want to exit ETH staking before it’s possible, you’re not going to get 1:1 without generosity from the buyer, the Liquidity Provider or StakeWise. So, why do we need all this complexity?

The built-in demand for sETH2 comes from new stakers. They come to the website holding ETH and they want to earn rewards. They are essentially ready to swap ETH for sETH2. The only incentive for them to buy sETH2 on Uniswap instead of thru StakeWise is if there is a discount. That goes for rETH2, as well.

I say go ahead and try the liquidity pools… I will support it. I won’t be able to participate in them, without selling half my sETH2… and I imagine most are in the same boat. But, it’s worth a shot.

My additional proposal is that StakeWise sets up an interface where people can list their sETH2 and rETH2 for sale on the website… When a new staker comes along, they can compare, in real time, the price difference between buying existing sETH2 at a discount (AND earning rewards right away) or staking 1 for 1 thru the website.

The easiest way to absorb extra sETH2 supply is through new stakers. StakeWise can spend time and resources promoting the site getting new stakers, instead of trying to chase the holy grail of letting stakers, who didn’t dyor before they staked, off the hook.

Bonus:
The added benefit of listing sETH2 on StakeWise website is SW acts as a broker/escrow agent earning fees for the service. SW is a business (doa biz) after-all… and the more revenue sources, the more valuable SW becomes, which means the more valuable the $SWISE token becomes.

1 Like
23

marketing!, afaik there’s a budget for marketing, but arbitrage too

This is expected, but the market balances itself with time, every major staking protocol should eventually reach a balance in this sense. Also, there is simply more benefit in holding sETH2 than ETH anyway if you’re not trading or actively using your ETH.

The existence of the pool allows people to exit their position if they desire to do so.

incentives from participation in the LP, a lot of people will not want to exit their position because it’s could be more profitable to keep it and pool your sETH2 or rETH2 with ETH.

Im sure many expected the pool to be set up, so they might have held onto some if not half as much ETH. I’m sure a lot of people will also come to stake and pool just because of the incentives as well. But yes, this is a valid concern.

A significant amount of liquidity is provided by stakewise itself though, so keep that in mind.

The exact amount of ETH that will be needed for the pool is information that @kiriyha handles according to the responses to the polls, but there’s also an amount of people that probably want to exit part or all of their position that probably haven’t responded to the poll.

simplest example:

1 ETH = 1.01 sETH2, Buy 1 ETH worth of sETH2, gain 0.01 sETH2 minus ETH fees (equivalent to 0.01 ETH).

The fact that most of the liquidity will be in a tight range doesn’t mean that the price can’t be moved.

You’d be surprised.

Big wallets are the ones that perform the most arb though.

Nope, you’ll need staking pools. Not everyone has 32 ETH to run their own validator, so there will always be a need for staking pools.

There’s also added benefits to staking pools over running your own validator, one example could be slashing insurance at the cost of a bit of yearly returns, or the fact that the risk of running your own validator and being slashed is absorbed by the entire pool instead of just yourself, thereby reducing APR, but still remaining profitable to stake.

Also, when ETH2 launches, every major dApp, token, pool, staking protocol remains live, just as before the merge. The consensus mechanism being different doesn’t change what’s already deployed on the blockchain.

There’s no freebies, there’s a fee for exchanging your staked ETH in the pool, but the idea is to make that pool the hub for position exiting when unstaking isnt possible.

The pool also creates a lot of other benefits/opportunities though:

  1. Pool rewards for LPs in the shape of SWISE
  2. Distribution of the governance token to incentivize participation in the DAO
  3. The LP tokens and the native protocol tokens are building blocks for DeFi, it allows easier integration with other DeFi protocols.
  4. Users are actually able to exit their position before unstaking
  5. Revenue through LP fees.

Hope all that makes sense, but if I’m wrong in anything, please feel free to correct me.

1 Like
24

That’s true, holding it off until there’s an already deployed, working and up to the stakewise standard automated liquidity management system makes a lot of sense and goes in line with the way things have been done so far. Carefully and well executed.

:eyes:

1 Like
25

I appreciate your thoughtful responses. Thank you, Dreth!

I will support the proposal because the momentum is there, it has been promised to the community, I trust the team and it poses no risk to those who will continue to happily stake.

I’ll be watching how it all works with a great amount of curiosity.

Cheers, StakeWise Fam!

2 Likes
26

First of all, @stanislavkozlovski I love this comment for its thoughtfulness and commitment to finding the best path forward. So much to respond to here (in a good way).

NON_RISKY < ----1) --------2)----------- 3) ------- 4) → RISKY

I like this scale and the framework for thinking about the beneficial actions for the protocol in terms of risk/reward for the ecosystem participants. I mostly agree with the framework - both holding and LPing with sETH2 is likely considered to be riskier than holding and LPing with ETH, and hence must command a higher yield than the alternative options. Which brings us to these points:

What I am suggesting is that:
1) we, as a project, strongly want to have sufficient and growing LP volumes for ETH/sETH2 (as well as rETH2)
2) a solid way to achieve this desire is to ensure the risk spectrum has the same order as the profitability spectrum – i.e the riskier it is, the more profitable it is.

I fully agree with both. While we have a plan to boost LP volumes (in short, increase trading volume by adding arbitrage opportunities, leading to higher trading fees, which attract yet more liquidity), fixing point 2 requires us to focus our attention on what you can do with sETH2 in DeFi to earn a yield that would compensate for its perceived riskiness (i.e. exceed the APY generated on ETH alone). The path to do this is the inclusion of sETH2 into farms and protocols across DeFi as a yield-bearing version of ETH, which would allow users to earn a staking yield on top of the farming rewards.

This, of course, would require having:

  1. a deep enough sETH2/ETH liquidity pool that could sustain the volume of trades associated with the wide deployment of sETH2 across DeFi without much slippage
  2. widespread awareness about StakeWise as the leading staking protocol with its own staked ETH token version
  3. people seeking the opportunity to boost their staking yield when buying sETH2 at a discount.

The prerequisite for (1) is good APY, while the prerequisite for (2) and (3) is strong marketing and a range of successful integrations. The team is ready to start execution on all these aspects after the deployment, and hence your comment and thinking are very well-timed.

Answering the questions that you pose:

  1. Can we change Uni pool settings once deployed? (if we can, perhaps no need to dive into this in such detail just yet)

We cannot change the settings unfortunately, but we can always deploy another Uni pool with a smaller fee. I would expect that in Phase 2, we would probably need to switch to the pool with a 0.05% trading fee, owing to the fact that the tokens will become even more liquid (thanks to the ability to redeem them directly for ETH).

  1. Have we looked into how other competitors do this?

We have - whenever deploying liquidity on Sushi/Uniswap v2, a trading fee of 0.3% is fixed and cannot be changed, so whoever deploys on those DEXs have 0.3% as choice of a trading fee. When it comes to Curve, the opposite is true - the fees are intentionally set at 4-5bp as default, and going higher is seemingly impossible. Finally, it would seem that the only truly successful liquidity pool for staked ETH tokens so far has been Lido’s stETH/ETH pair on Curve, but not sure how much of their playbook we could use considering the different dynamics of LPing on Uniswap V3.

  1. e.g do we know if Lido LPing is more profitable than staking? A summary of that would be helpful in picking what our strategy should be

It is more profitable owing to the CRV and LDO rewards that LPs earn in the pool. While these are nice rewards to accumulate, I think LPs would prefer generating their yield from trading fees first and other incentives second, for a significant overall boost. Uniswap V3 gives us this possibility. The team’s current recommendation to the DAO would be to exercise caution about significant token disbursements in farming - we want to enable SWISE time-locking to remove some of the selling pressure before we suggest to seed significant amounts of SWISE in the pool. So again, creating an environment where the trading fees are strong comes first, also in the interest of sustainability; token disbursements come second.

  1. Do we have reasonable expectations that LPing will be more profitable than pure hodling/staking?

At this point, there is a plan to make it more profitable through creating arbitrage opportunities and expanding sETH2’s adoption in DeFi, thus making it a desirable and widely traded asset. Owing to the capital efficiency of Uni V3 and the fee level we choose, plus any farming rewards we as a DAO add on top, we believe there is a reasonable expectation that LPing will be more profitable indeed.

Looking forward to your thoughts!

1 Like
27

Hey @ottodv, these are indeed important considerations and I am glad we can talk through them. I think you capture the POV of potential LPs really well, and this comment together with others from @stanislavkozlovski, @jonathanstrange and @Selby has been illuminating in terms of concerns regarding the peg that we as a team need to address in the plans we propose to the DAO.

First I agree that 0.3% tx fee seems to be best for now. 0.05% seems a bit low to make LPing interesting, and 1% seems too high for those trading.

I agree, that’s pretty much my opinion too.

Regarding sETH2, one motivation to buy them could be to not have to wait for activation, but get tokens that stake immediately. For this to be interesting the pool itself should only start rewarding new deposits once they have been activated (which is not the case right now), this additionally prevents the pool APR from dropping when there is a lot of ETH being newly deposited. This benefit stays even after the merge of the beaconchain with ETH1, when withdrawing becomes possible. It’s a way to jump the activation queue, that will always remain valuable. In theory this should make sETH2 slightly more valuable than ETH.

It’s a great point, and especially relevant now that the queue has grown (and is expected to remain long for a while, especially after the Merge). Intuitively, it is important to preserve the existing stakers’ APY (anecdotal evidence of some folks in our community worrying about the drag on APY confirms this too), and with an added benefit of helping the peg, it makes all the more sense. We intend to propose a change in the Pool activation queue parameters to the DAO, where the criteria for entering the queue will be tightened to lower the chance of APY dilution for the existing stakers. In turn, it should also benefit the sETH2 peg.

For rETH2 is seems to me that once the merge has happened, there is really no reason for the market to exist as it can be simply withdrawn. Until then, my thought was to make holding rETH2 rewarding by simply giving holders a reward paid in Swise that is equivalent the the staking APR of sETH2.

Agree with this - it remains in the pipeline as per the earlier proposal on the forum: rETH2 Staking Contract to Incentivize Choosing StakeWise. We also liked and considered your comment on there about removing the need to perform staking txs to become eligible for SWISE. Hence, the new rewards distribution system supports automatic accrual of SWISE to rETH2 holders - they would only need to claim it whenever they’re ready to. We will reactivate the discussion about this as the next step after enabling the time-locking of SWISE. Until then, the people who read the forum are privy to the alpha that is the benefit of accumulating rETH2 early on :wink:

It might even be better to just have an sETH2/rETH2 market (instead of sETH2/ETH). From a liquidity provider point of view, whether you have one or the other is equivalent in terms of APR. (While ETH itself doesn’t have a reward).

I agree that from the POV of an LP, holding one or the other would be profitable; however, this pool would need to exist only in addition to sETH2/ETH pool (because ability to exit into ETH is still needed). Still, it could perhaps replace the rETH2/ETH pool, as it would still create the opportunity to sell the rewards for ETH (albeit with a >0.6% discount) while offering the possibility to compound returns (via a direct swap into sETH2). Since I think that enabling compounding would be the main purpose of such a pool, the trading fee in it could be set to 0.05% instead of 0.3%, to not actually curtail the effect of compounding. What are your thoughts on this?

Coming back to the sETH2 market, that one could be sETH2/ETH, here we could apply the more traditional LP reward OR we could reward just the ETH part in the pool with a Swise reward and APR again equivalent the sETH2 staking reward (which the sETH2 part accrues). In this scenario again from a liquidity provider point of view it doesn’t matter which one you have, both return the same APR.

I think another way to describe the idea of rewarding just the ETH part of the pool with SWISE is to say that the farming APY should be at least half the staking APR, making the total yield at least as good as the staking APY. Still, as discussed with @stanislavkozlovski, we probably need to offer extra incentives to the potential LPs to make it a compelling proposition from the risk/reward perspective. I would appreciate hearing your thoughts on this.

1 Like
28

So, will there be people wanting to buy sETH2, not just selling? I can see the reason for selling if you staked and now need liquidity.
There might also be a few people selling half their sETH2 to be able to put liquidity into the pool.
Or does it not matter if the trading is a bit one sided?

@jonathanstrange thank you for a very relevant comment. I believe that concerns about trading becoming one-sided due to people leaving are not unfounded; however, we should not forget about the fact that every sETH2 represents real ETH, and when bought at a discount, it immediately boosts the staking APR. In addition, with the plan to make sETH2 integrated across the ecosystem, create arbing opportunities, enable rETH2 → sETH2 swaps, I think there should be a good degree of buying pressure to help sustain the peg.

There is one interesting aspect of having a discount that perhaps deserves more attention. The lower the staking APY drops in the network (from all the people entering staking), the smaller the discount one needs to make buying sETH2 worthwhile. For example, when the staking APY is 6.3%, buying sETH2 at a 1% discount results in a 12% boost to the APY (((1.063/0.99 - 1)-0.3%)/0.063 ~ 12%). At a 2% discount, the boost increases to 30%; at a 3% discount, the boost is 47%, and so forth. Hence, not only there are practical benefits to buying sETH2 from the pool (for the opportunity to jump the queue that was mentioned in the discussion with @ottodv), but also the monetary incentive to do so is high.

What remains necessary is to popularize StakeWise as the go-to staking solution and make others aware of the benefits of helping maintain the peg. On the team’s side, the work to secure this status is actively underway, along with the addition of the option to buy sETH2 from the liquidity pool instead of minting new tokens (whenever it is more profitable to do so) into the UI.

3 Likes
29

Just to be sure we’re talking about the same thing. Because you were talking about APR above. You’re talking about compounded interrest? Because sETH2 is decoupled from the reward/compound part.

where are the -0.3% comming from?

2 Likes
30

Hey @Selby your input is very appreciated! I think your concerns are understandable and need to be properly addressed.

  1. Where is the demand for sETH2 going to come from? There has to be awareness in the market that sETH2 exists… and people have to actually go to uniswap, seek it out and buy it. How will awareness be created?

To support the peg, two things need to happen: an increase in the opportunities to put sETH2 to work (to minimize the desire to exit) and an increase in awareness about sETH2 as a staked ETH derivative, as you correctly point out. For both, the team needs to work on marketing and integrations - there is no way around it. However, we are very cognizant of this and hence work is underway to make a strong impression in the crypto community and leverage the advantages of our token system to get us the integrations we need and want.

There is going to be an initial flood of sETH2 hitting the market… this is going to create lopsided supply for sETH2/ETH LP. I don’t understand how that will be overcome. The law of supply and demand says there will have to be a price adjustment somewhere… right now it seems like we’re calling it LP incentives. So, either the seller takes a hit or StakeWise subsidizes the difference, which is allowing sETH2 sellers to devalue $SWISE to exit their position. Another way of saying it, is those that want to leave the community, will do so at the expense of the community… leaving us holding their bag. Not fair.

This is definitely a risk which we recognize. Hence, we’re doing the groundwork to create more incentives to stay and meet the demand for exit without having an impact on the peg. What is good about Uniswap V3 is that provided a sufficiently tight range is chosen by the LPs, impermanent loss is minimized and slippage is small, helping the peg - this should be the case with a correlated asset pair like ours. Then, it will be the DAO’s job to attach sufficient incentives to liquidity provision in order to attract sufficient liquidity. We will make a recommendation about the appropriate amount based on responses to the withdrawal questionnaire.

  1. How many liquidity providers who own sETH2, also own an equal amount of ETH? Seems like most people who staked, likely staked most of their ETH… I did. So, to provide liquidity, LPs also have to add more sETH2 to the market, just to get enough ETH to stake. This is likely cost prohibitive… and adds to the over-supply of sETH2 problem.

I am not certain that users would be selling sETH2 for ETH to add liquidity if the peg is significantly off balance i.e. if they would receive significantly less ETH for sETH2 than what they had paid for it. Hence, I am relatively confident that those who staked 100% of their capital will not contribute too much to the selling pressure in the beginning.

I don’t understand how the arbitrage opportunities exist. Arbitrage against what? You get one arbitrage opportunity, right?.. Buy sETH2 at a discount and exit when unstaking is possible. I don’t see any easy arb opportunities. Maybe the complex ones will work, but they’re over my head. How many people will actually attempt complex arbs?

There exist opportunities for triangular arbitrage i.e. where sETH2 can be paired against a volatile asset other than ETH and would be bought/sold to utilize the discrepancies in its price in that asset vs the price of ETH in that asset. Example: creating a sETH2/USDC pool would allow arbitrage opportunities between sETH2/ETH, ETH/USDC and sETH2/USDC pools, contributing to the rise in trading volume in each of the pools and the support of the sETH2 peg on the move down in ETH’s price.

As for the number of people who would attempt it - I think it would be more important to get on the radar of institutional traders who routinely find arbitrage opportunities and utilize them to their advantage. Luckily, we know a couple of them and hence have high hopes about the prospect of boosting trading APY and supporting the peg via arbitrage.

The key challenge for this will lie in finding a solution for automatic range adjustment for the LPs as discussed here: Automatic LP position management options. Otherwise, the liquidity pools like sETH2/USDC would require too much capital to enable low-slippage trades, and hence arbitrage would become more difficult to pull off.

I also don’t understand the leverage opportunities with LPs. That one is over my head too. If someone could explain how providing liquidity can create leverage opportunities, please do.

This one is indeed rather debatable. The idea is that since LP tokens from any liquidity pool involving the StakeWise tokens wouldn’t need to be locked to access the farming rewards (one of the many advantages of the new system @tsudmi developed), they could be taken further in DeFi and potentially used as collateral for borrowing, especially in places like xToken (who recently announced support for such activity). While the team will be assessing these solutions for security and usability (and vice versa) in the near future, so far we cannot say with certainty whether collaterizing LP positions will become possible. It would be great to have though.

StakeWise could build it’s own market on the website, where people could list their sETH2 for sale, so new stakers could have a choice of buying existing sETH2 at a market price (discount) or staking directly. In this way new stakers would probably absorb the supply quickly.
The discount new stakers would get from absorbing the supply would increase their APY… there could even be an automated APY calculator showing the % return based on discount plus current rewards rate.

We actually want to incorporate the ability to purchase sETH2 from the Uniswap V3 pool at the moment of deposit (if this proposal is successful) into the UI, largely achieving the purpose of the marketplace you suggest. So another reason to be more optimistic about the sETH2/ETH peg :slight_smile:

Let me know your thoughts on these matters!

2 Likes
31

Just to be sure we’re talking about the same thing. Because you were talking about APR above. You’re talking about compounded interrest? Because sETH2 is decoupled from the reward/compound part.

No, I am talking about the staking yield in the network :slight_smile: the more it falls, the more attractive even the slightest discount for sETH2 becomes.

where are the -0.3% comming from?

The trading fee :slight_smile:

1 Like
32

Thanks for the thorough and well-explained reply. You guys are thinking through all this… in detail. Smart cookies :grin:

Happy to be a part of the project. Keep up the good work!

2 Likes
33

so we have to buy more eth to be part of the pool all my eth is being stake like where the incentive to use what we have on hand. I joined stakwise in thinking there were going to be inceptives to use what we have on hand to generate higher staking options like know to be further part of the pools we have to buy new tokens to generate higher interest on are tokens we curtly have. How come we cant stake are swise coins or use the tokens we got with the swap this hole stakwise model is becoming a bit to in depth for the person who cant afford to dump thousands in to it as it is I have $40000 in some days more. I was under the impression we would have more benefits to do more with what we had on hand. This is crazy my guys

1 Like
34

I agree why cant the LPs be set up to use the sETH2 and rETH2 coins as this will incentives people more 1. to use the pools, 2. to buy the tokens like we should not have to buy more eth to inceptives what we are already doing this is going to eliminate the little fishes from staking part in all of this stuff and put a damper in people thoughts on why they should take part in stakewise. If I had know that I would have to buy more eth to take part in the stakwise model to incentives my staking power I would have not staked my eth with stakewise. I staked with uall cause I thought we would be using what we had on hand. I think we should set the pools up to use sETH2 and rETH2 as the LPs. For a guy like me I would have to drop depending on day another 40 to 50 grand to use the pools. This is not fair for people who already drop their eth with u all.

35

As far as i’m informed it’s standard practice for LP providers to supply for both pairs

1 Like
36

question do u all think its a better idea to sell half of the eth I have to join the LP that way or join the pool by adding the sETH2 and rETH2 Im new to LP just want to here others ideas on this to make Shure I’m going to make the right decision thank you for anyone thoughts and ideas on this?

1 Like
37

what would make the most séance in direction to make the most out of the pools with out the most lost happening
.

38

question do u all think its a better idea to sell half of the eth I have to join the LP that way or join the pool by adding the sETH2 and rETH2 Im new to LP just want to here others ideas on this to make Shure I’m going to make the right decision thank you for anyone thoughts and ideas on this?

If your goal is to earn some more $SWISE with your tokens, then the sETH2/rETH2 pool would be a great option in terms of the APY and capital requirements :slight_smile: however, I suggest you wait until both pools are actually live before you decide

1 Like
39

my plan is to match the ETH. Wanted to buy some more anyway

1 Like
40

are we live with any pools yet or still in the works