Discussion: Liquidity Mining

Maintaining a high level of AMM liquidity is important for keeping bridging costs low and rates competitive. Higher AMM liquidity allows users to bridge large amounts with less slippage.

This is especially important for arbitrageurs. Bridge arbitrageurs make tight margins and need to offset their gas costs. Being able to transact in larger volumes with less slippage allows arbitrageurs to keep price differences across networks closer. Smaller price differences mean better rates for all users.

We believe a liquidity mining program starting at 2,200,000 HOP/month spread across the ETH, USDC, DAI, and USDT bridges may reduce bridging costs and drive higher volumes for Hop’s core assets.

Rewards can be split amongst networks and their AMMs based on approximate relative volumes as follows:

Network Network % Network HOP/month Asset Asset % of Network HOP/month
Arbitrum 45% 990,000 ETH 58.00% 574,200
USDC 30.00% 297,000
DAI 6.00% 59,400
USDT 6.00% 59,400
Optimism 30% 660,000 ETH 58.00% 382,800
USDC 30.00% 198,000
DAI 6.50% 42,900
USDT 5.50% 36,300
Polygon 20.50% 451,000 ETH 43.00% 193,930
USDC 42.00% 189,420
DAI 7.00% 31,570
USDT 8.00% 36,080
Gnosis 4.50% 99,000 ETH 23.00% 22,770
USDC 44.00% 43,560
DAI 19.00% 18,810
USDT 14.00% 13,860

Towards the end of each month-long period, adjustments to the rewards distribution can be discussed and voted on, a different liquidity mining program such as the one described in this post can be adopted, or the liquidity mining program can be discontinued.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and feedback :pray:

5 Likes

What is the proposed infrastructure for the program? Is this staking HOP within the protocol itself akin to other bridge tokens, or through liquidity pools like Uni?

2 Likes

The infrastructure is the standard Synthetix StakingRewards contract which will be used to reward holders of the bridge AMM LP tokens (e.g., hETH/ETH LP).

1 Like

Ok, great. I much prefer this to a third-party protocol.

2 Likes

I heard Game Theory of Liquidity mining during the community call and it made me think of the “tit-for-tat” optimal strategy. (Game Theory, Evolutionary Stable Strategies and the Evolution of Biological Interactions | Learn Science at Scitable)
I have never before thought about how we would integrate this basic type of logic into the liquidity incentives, but I believe that there is likely some connection. The largest issue I would think is that if we suppose that selling the token is “bad” that centralized exchanges enable users to short the token in a non-transparent way. If everything were on chain that would provide a real opportunity to track all actions on chain to evaluate users.

If we are to entertain $hop rewards for LPs, I think there should first be an emissions gauge with hop votes. Then the LPs should only be eligible for rewards if they lock the LP for a given amount of time. For instance, in incentivised Frax LPs if you lock your LP for 3 years you get 3x the rewards.

1 Like

Polygon networks should support matic~

At best, liquidity mining kicks off a sustained growth that continues after the program ends. At worst, liquidity mining is a temporary bounty for mercenary capital that dumps tokens for dollars and leaves after the program ends. We should focus on learning until we are confident that it’s more the former than the latter. The latter is especially painful today when there are no protocol fees.

A simple experiment could be incentivizing the ETH pool on Arbi and the USDC pool on Optimism. In doing so, we could compare how the incentivized pools compare with the three unincentivized pools with the same asset on other chains as well as the three unincentivized pools on the same chain.

You could also flip it and incent most pools but withold from two markets and use those as controls.

5 Likes

This seems like a pretty high reward rate relative to current token liquidity. Back of the envelope and current prices gives:

  • 550K in V3 liquidity across USDC - HOP and ETH - HOP
  • ~250K in rewards per month

As a rule of thumb, most yield farmers sell reward tokens to lock in profits - and especially in a bear market, we should expect mercenary capital :slight_smile:

1 Like

A simple experiment could be incentivizing the ETH pool on Arbi and the USDC pool on Optimism. In doing so, we could compare how the incentivized pools compare with the three unincentivized pools with the same asset on other chains as well as the three unincentivized pools on the same chain.

I do love the idea of launching something, assessing the impact, and iterating from there.

For this experiment, how do you think success or failure could be measured? Is the intent to test how much liquidity the incentives attract or to test if the benefits of liquidity mining outweigh the costs?

1 Like

I think $matic of polygon network and $op of Optimism network should be increased

Will HOP rewards vest 1 year? I am for a 1 year vesting cliff like SNX.

I’ve never seen program with continuous vesting work out.

It eliminates the mercenary LPs.

3 Likes

I’d be in favor of compensating somebody to come up with a data driven approach to assess the ROI (including designing the experiment itself) but off the cuff:

  • How much liquidity is attracted by each dollar of HOP incentive
  • LP stickiness both in dollars and addresses 1 day, 1 wk, 1 month, 1 year after LM ends
  • Ultimately looking for how much “long term liquidity” we get per $ of HOP incentive - gets to a CAC/LTV type of view

Use the controls to try to isolate the variable of LM is on as much as possible.

To @defi_dad point, other structuring like vesting or kpi options can be interesting as well to combat mercenary capital.

I’d be much more supportive of the current reward proposal if we include some form of vesting

1 Like

I wanted to note an analysis which is alternative to the experiment placed above. It comes from the observation that when the reward token value goes down, so does the TVL. By plotting $HOP/$USDC against bond yield, $HOP/$ETH against staking yield, we can see the relative attractiveness of farming $HOP. Wallets with TVL which are correlated to this are mercenary wallets / deposits whose timing corresponds to high returns in are mercenary deposits that would be expected to increase in size if monetary value increases and decrease in size if monetary premium decreases. I can begin coding up a DUNE dashboard to get at this. Initially, the Hop DAO could target a premium similar to these two opportunities and then make dynamic decisions about how much Hop to allocate given the analysis of deposits. Similarly, if there weren’t a 0.4% fee on LPs there could be temporal experiments, which fluctuate the amount of $HOP from week to week to see the responsitivity of LPers.

  • Ultimately looking for how much “long term liquidity” we get per $ of HOP incentive - gets to a CAC/LTV type of view

Wallets with TVL which are correlated to this are mercenary wallets / deposits whose timing corresponds to high returns in are mercenary deposits that would be expected to increase in size if monetary value increases and decrease in size if monetary premium decreases.

I think it might be worth taking a step back to define what makes an LP “mercenary”. To me, a mercenary LP is one that dumps all of the protocol token rewards instead of holding them. They don’t care about building alignment with the project they are farming and have no stake in the project. This is a different from an LP that is sensitive and responsive to yields and may or may not have a stake in the project.

I don’t think we should think of liquidity mining as a way use high yields to attract LPs that will then stick around in a low yield environment either out of apathy or altruism. Instead, we should think of these subsidies as a way to accelerate growth across all of Hop’s markets (especially new ones) and support the markets that are not yet self-sufficient.

The cross-chain bridge market will likely grow orders of magnitudes over the next 5 years and HOP subsidies can help Hop maintain its market position during periods of high market growth.

1 Like