Add G-UNI FRAX-DAI and FRAX-USDC pools to Frax gauges
Background and Motivation
G-UNI is an easy-to-use, unopinionated framework built by the Gelato team for managing Uniswap v3 LP positions. G-UNI allows users to provide liquidity in the same manner as they would in Uniswap v2 with their positions being fungible as well as having fees from it automatically reinvested back into the position by Gelato automation, creating compounding effects. After being audited and used by projects such as Instadapp and Float for their own liquidity mining schemes, G-UNI has proven both it’s utility and resiliency.
The advantages of adding G-UNI pools for FRAX-DAI and FRAX-USDC to gauges include that it encourages wider participation from the Frax community in liquidity mining programs. In the program’s current iteration, users must take extra steps and specify an exact range as well as manage fees. With G-UNI, it’s as simple as set and forget and they do not have to manage anything extra themselves. In addition, Frax G-UNI positions could be used in the future on lending platforms such as Cream, Rari, and others.
FRAX G-UNI pools are currently in a fixed position as described below and in the future, can be upgraded with rebalancing strategies that promote maintaining the tightest peg. The G-UNI Pools are currently managed by the Gelato multisig but will hand it off to FRAX multisig when appropriate.
Position Lower Bound: 1 FRAX = 0.9901 DAI (tick = -100)
Position Upper Bound: 1 FRAX = 1.0101 DAI (tick = 100)
The Gelato team will be there to help with the process each step of the way. If the community has any questions or feedback, we would love to hear from you!
The proposal does not intend to replace but rather compliment the existing pools. The LM program in its current form incentivizes that LPs stay in a fixed position that cannot be adjusted. With G-UNI pools, the manager of it has a number of options for strategies including manual adjustments or implementing automated rebalancing. It comes down to what the Frax community prefers.
For fees, Gelato takes a 1% fee from fees claimed and a transaction fee to recoup the Gelato executor for gas costs on every automated transaction (such as a rebalance). Because this is a stablecoin pair, I do not expect too many rebalances.
I don’t understand how any FRAX liquidity pool can be “in direct competition” with the native farming pools. At the end of the day, if it increases TVL of the Frax Protocol, it means more FRAX expansions, more use of FRAX.
I assume you meant that the reward contracts will be different so that people have to “choose between” our farming rewards or the G UNI pools. If that’s what you mean, I actually think diversity of choices is a win win for everyone, icnreases decentralization, and also helps more people enter both the Gelato+FRAX ecosystem.
To be honest, if Frax’s goal is to be the “stablecoin that connects all stablecoins” then every stablecoin should have a G-UNI pool. For this reason, I am creating these pools to getting a better feel for what the Frax community wants.
What G-UNI Frax Pool(s) do you want to see first?
FRAX-DAI
FRAX-USDC
FRAX-USDT
FRAX-sUSD
FRAX-LUSD
All of the above
Pair not mentioned
0voters
Do you want to see multiple Frax G-UNI pools to start or just one Frax G-UNI pool?
well lets look at the extremes , if 2 pools is better then 1 , then why not 10 pools ?
we could set up 9 more pools all with different ranges and add them all to the gauge and let them battle it out for the volume.
personally i think choosing to split up the liquidity of the USDC/ FRAX uni pool rather then adding a new stable coin pool with a different FRAX / stable pair will be less useful to the protocol.
I just want to add that I think it would be worth having concurrent G-UNI FRAX-DAI and FRAX-USDC pools with the original Uni v3 ones for at least a few months. We can compare their performances and decide whether to continue only with G-UNI, continue only with classic Uni v3, or keep both.
I’m all for it but imo if we go this way we should unlock the current UNI USDC and DAI pools and let people move over to the new ones. If we are going to start adding duplicate pools then where does it end? It will just become cluttered and honestly look like shit. One or the other.
Or instead of running simultaneously we could only move over the FRAX-DAI one and keep the FRAX-USDC one as it is for now. That way we can compare as well without having to run duplicate pools.
Unlock FRAX-DAI to change it into a G-UNI pool. And then later when we can compare perfomances decide wether another voting should come to do the same for the FRAX-USDC pool.