Consensus Check Snapshot Poll: Snapshot will be put up next week. I've had a chance to discuss this with some members of the community but would like more feedback if possible.
Link to temperature check governance forum post: https://gov.uniswap.org/t/temperature-check-should-we-be-managing-systemic-risk-in-uniswaps-community-treasury-using-kpi-options/12624 Link to temperature check snapshot poll (passed w/201k $UNI): https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmXDNKm4feLGUXCdtHjHZYrNTMsysEhP34nRYFSM3HhKVT
During the temperature check we explored the issue of systemic risk in a treasury of 100% $UNI tokens, where there can be and have been significant drawdowns that directly effect the spending power and run way of the community treasury.
There are additional issues with paying grants with a volatile asset like $UNI:
Grant value is determined in USD, but paid in $UNI Tokens. Value of $UNI token is determined at the time tx is submitted to be approved by the multi-sig. There is minor price risk to the grantee as they get the approximate USD value in $UNI tokens after approval. The majority of the price risk is allocated to the treasury, as the grants budget will grow or shrink depending on what happens to the price of $UNI.
Almost all $UNI that has been awarded to the grantee is market sold. Most of the grants are used to fund actual people/projects/business and most of these people require stable coin cash flow to operate.
We do not know what and when spending will be required. Crypto is volatile, prepare for the worse, expect the best. If there is a significant outlay of funds at the low of the market, it will be devastating for the treasury's long term prospects. We've seen this happen with ICOs from 2017, where they were forced to sell assets at a significant loss to cover expenses.
The purpose of this proposal is to initiate the process of building a KPI option using UMA's battle tested EMP contracts (more details at the bottom) in order for the Uniswap Community Treasury (or anyone that wants to) to mint KPI options using $UNI as collateral to purchase stablecoins from the community.
KPI options can be created from any number of defined metrics/indicators, from feedback from the UNI community, the best metric to align stake holders with long term goals of Uniswap's platform is to track the Volume across Uniswap.
The beauty of KPI options is that it creates a win-win situation between Uniswap Stakeholders and the platform itself. Stakeholders that hold KPI options has the direct incentive to continue to support Uniswap platform because the value of the options increase as the overall value of the Uniswap platform grows.
General details on how KPI options work have been detailed in the temperature check: https://gov.uniswap.org/t/temperature-check-should-we-be-managing-systemic-risk-in-uniswaps-community-treasury-using-kpi-options/12624
After creating the 30 DMA Volume KPI option, there are several options on how to divest, which we will can be discussed more in detail after this consensus check.
Yam.finance has extensive knowledge on building synthetics on UMA's platform via our development of degenerative.finance, V2 of site to be launched soon. Combined with our experience in DAO treasury management, it allows us to have a unique perspective to create this proposal.
https://forum.sushi.com/t/build-kpi-options-with-uma-to-speed-kashi-adoption/3940
Consensus Check Snapshot Poll: Snapshot will be put up next week. I've had a chance to discuss this with some members of the community but would like more feedback if possible.
Link to temperature check governance forum post: https://gov.uniswap.org/t/temperature-check-should-we-be-managing-systemic-risk-in-uniswaps-community-treasury-using-kpi-options/12624 Link to temperature check snapshot poll (passed w/201k $UNI): https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmXDNKm4feLGUXCdtHjHZYrNTMsysEhP34nRYFSM3HhKVT
During the temperature check we explored the issue of systemic risk in a treasury of 100% $UNI tokens, where there can be and have been significant drawdowns that directly effect the spending power and run way of the community treasury.
There are additional issues with paying grants with a volatile asset like $UNI:
Grant value is determined in USD, but paid in $UNI Tokens. Value of $UNI token is determined at the time tx is submitted to be approved by the multi-sig. There is minor price risk to the grantee as they get the approximate USD value in $UNI tokens after approval. The majority of the price risk is allocated to the treasury, as the grants budget will grow or shrink depending on what happens to the price of $UNI.
Almost all $UNI that has been awarded to the grantee is market sold. Most of the grants are used to fund actual people/projects/business and most of these people require stable coin cash flow to operate.
We do not know what and when spending will be required. Crypto is volatile, prepare for the worse, expect the best. If there is a significant outlay of funds at the low of the market, it will be devastating for the treasury's long term prospects. We've seen this happen with ICOs from 2017, where they were forced to sell assets at a significant loss to cover expenses.
The purpose of this proposal is to initiate the process of building a KPI option using UMA's battle tested EMP contracts (more details at the bottom) in order for the Uniswap Community Treasury (or anyone that wants to) to mint KPI options using $UNI as collateral to purchase stablecoins from the community.
KPI options can be created from any number of defined metrics/indicators, from feedback from the UNI community, the best metric to align stake holders with long term goals of Uniswap's platform is to track the Volume across Uniswap.
The beauty of KPI options is that it creates a win-win situation between Uniswap Stakeholders and the platform itself. Stakeholders that hold KPI options has the direct incentive to continue to support Uniswap platform because the value of the options increase as the overall value of the Uniswap platform grows.
General details on how KPI options work have been detailed in the temperature check: https://gov.uniswap.org/t/temperature-check-should-we-be-managing-systemic-risk-in-uniswaps-community-treasury-using-kpi-options/12624
After creating the 30 DMA Volume KPI option, there are several options on how to divest, which we will can be discussed more in detail after this consensus check.
Yam.finance has extensive knowledge on building synthetics on UMA's platform via our development of degenerative.finance, V2 of site to be launched soon. Combined with our experience in DAO treasury management, it allows us to have a unique perspective to create this proposal.
https://forum.sushi.com/t/build-kpi-options-with-uma-to-speed-kashi-adoption/3940
I'll be putting up the snapshot vote to move this thru the consensus check. I hope to be discussion more in depth the exact details for the option for the final vote. I'll be reaching out to well known governance participants but feel free to reach out to me.
Thanks
I'll be putting up the snapshot vote to move this thru the consensus check. I hope to be discussion more in depth the exact details for the option for the final vote. I'll be reaching out to well known governance participants but feel free to reach out to me.
Thanks
Snapshot is live, any comments welcome!
https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmRKpArENVfj7bUaXuEj2QUqZCB5ZJGc9VDmNvyfTKnAKf
Snapshot is live, any comments welcome!
https://snapshot.org/#/uniswap/proposal/QmRKpArENVfj7bUaXuEj2QUqZCB5ZJGc9VDmNvyfTKnAKf
What is the simplified summary of KPI options?
I deposit UNI collateral on UMA for a UNI KPI option I then get 50% of that value in stable coins If UNI goes up over 30 days, I then get 50% more stable coins? That is probably not correct, but could you give a simple example?
What is the simplified summary of KPI options?
I deposit UNI collateral on UMA for a UNI KPI option I then get 50% of that value in stable coins If UNI goes up over 30 days, I then get 50% more stable coins? That is probably not correct, but could you give a simple example?
In general, I do not like the idea of diversifying the UNI treasury into stable coins unless I am bearish on UNI which I am not at the moment. What if we instead deposited UNI as collateral into an Aave pool, then took out DAI/USDC loans against it? The DAI/USDC loans could then be used to pay grants. Then we sell UNI every so often to pay off the loans. I don't mean to change the subject, but I'm trying to compare the strategies here. Is this the same idea? Also, if I were a grant, I would much prefer to receive UNI right now. Buy (receive) low, sell high. That does force the grants to be smart on when they sell though. Let us say over a 1 year time span where UNI triples in price, are KPI options a way to hedge UNI ... or are they more similar to buying stable coins?
What is the simplified summary of KPI options?
I deposit UNI collateral on UMA for a UNI KPI option I then get 50% of that value in stable coins If UNI goes up over 30 days, I then get 50% more stable coins? That is probably not correct, but could you give a simple example?
What is the simplified summary of KPI options?
I deposit UNI collateral on UMA for a UNI KPI option I then get 50% of that value in stable coins If UNI goes up over 30 days, I then get 50% more stable coins? That is probably not correct, but could you give a simple example?
In general, I do not like the idea of diversifying the UNI treasury into stable coins unless I am bearish on UNI which I am not at the moment. What if we instead deposited UNI as collateral into an Aave pool, then took out DAI/USDC loans against it? The DAI/USDC loans could then be used to pay grants. Then we sell UNI every so often to pay off the loans. I don't mean to change the subject, but I'm trying to compare the strategies here. Is this the same idea? Also, if I were a grant, I would much prefer to receive UNI right now. Buy (receive) low, sell high. That does force the grants to be smart on when they sell though. Let us say over a 1 year time span where UNI triples in price, are KPI options a way to hedge UNI ... or are they more similar to buying stable coins?
From Uniswaps point of view:
From KPI Holder point of view:
The key is to create a situation where KPI holder wins, UNI wins and incentives are aligned. All the exact numbers can be adjusted but the idea is this.
I do not like the idea of diversifying the UNI treasury into stable coins unless I am bearish on UNI which I am not at the moment.
While I am not bearish on $UNI, It is important to understand that holding 100% of the treasury in $UNI tokens is a huge risk. The treasury is actively being used to fund grants. It's similar to having a company have 0 cash and paying all employees and other financial obligations in stock. It is not prudent financial management. Also the DeFi Education Fund market dump could have been avoided if the treasury paid in stables.
Having stables allows the treasury more control and flexibility with reduced risk.
Also, if I were a grant, I would much prefer to receive UNI right now. Buy (receive) low, sell high.
Thank you for your suggestions @burtrico
From Uniswaps point of view:
From KPI Holder point of view:
The key is to create a situation where KPI holder wins, UNI wins and incentives are aligned. All the exact numbers can be adjusted but the idea is this.
I do not like the idea of diversifying the UNI treasury into stable coins unless I am bearish on UNI which I am not at the moment.
While I am not bearish on $UNI, It is important to understand that holding 100% of the treasury in $UNI tokens is a huge risk. The treasury is actively being used to fund grants. It's similar to having a company have 0 cash and paying all employees and other financial obligations in stock. It is not prudent financial management. Also the DeFi Education Fund market dump could have been avoided if the treasury paid in stables.
Having stables allows the treasury more control and flexibility with reduced risk.
Also, if I were a grant, I would much prefer to receive UNI right now. Buy (receive) low, sell high.
Thank you for your suggestions @burtrico