[BIP-444] Enable 80/20 Weighted Gauge for $OVN [Optimism, Arbitrum, and Base]

BAL Gauges
1

PR with Payload

Summary:

We propose the introduction of an 80/20 weighted gauge for $OVN on Optimism, Arbitrum, and Base with the pairing as OVN/wUSD+. This initiative aims to foster greater liquidity and facilitate smoother transactions for users on these platforms. By enabling this gauge, we anticipate enhancing the yield-generating opportunities for both the Balancer community and Overnight Finance users.

References/Useful links:

Website: https://overnight.fi
Twitter: https://twitter.com/overnight_fi
Discord: USD+ ┃Overnight Finance
Docs: https://docs.overnight.fi
Defillama: https://defillama.com/protocol/overnight-finance

Protocol Description:

Overnight.fi is a protocol focusing on asset management, with a specialization in neutral-risk strategies. At the heart of its product line is USD+, which is a yield-driven stablecoin, fully backed by collateral. This collateral for USD+ is rooted in DeFi strategies that generate returns. These strategies encompass lending to platforms like Aave, and include both stablecoin-to-stablecoin and neutral-risk strategies.

USD+ by Overnight Finance

USD+ is a DeFi product that offers users the opportunity to invest in a diversified basket of stablecoins. The main goal of USD+ is to optimize yield generation by allocating funds across various yield-bearing protocols and platforms in the DeFi ecosystem. In essence, users deposit their stablecoins into the USD+ pool and receive interest-earning USD+ tokens in return.

wUSD+ is a type of wrapped token within the Overnight Finance ecosystem. In simple terms, it represents a stablecoin (like USD+) that has been “wrapped” to create a new token that can be used within the Overnight Finance platform and potentially other decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. This wrapping process allows for more fluid and flexible utilization of the stablecoin in various financial strategies and products, facilitating smoother transactions and broader integration within the DeFi space. It essentially helps in enhancing the functionality and interoperability of the original stablecoin, USD+.

Currently, Overnight Finance operates on multiple chains including Base, Optimism, and Arbitrum, with a significant amount of total value locked (TVL) across various products:

USD+: $21,772,869.93 TVL (Operates on Base, Optimism, Arbitrum, and others)
DAI+: $9,020,297.94 TVL (Operates on Base, Optimism, Arbitrum)
USDT+: $472,694.69 TVL (Operates on Binance, Linea)

OVN by Overnight Finance

OVN is the native token of the Overnight Finance protocol. It serves two main purposes: to promote the use of USD+, a yield-bearing stablecoin developed by Overnight, and to facilitate decentralized risk management within the protocol. OVN holders can participate in governance decisions, helping to align community incentives and guide the protocol’s development. Additionally, OVN will be used in Insurance Vaults, where it can be staked to earn insurance premiums and potentially benefit from upward price pressure due to the protocol’s revenue mechanisms. The token has a fixed supply of 1,000,000, with a detailed distribution and vesting plan to ensure the maximization of its value over time.

Motivation:

The motivation behind introducing this pair on Balancer stems from a variety of strategic benefits that this integration would bring to both communities:

  1. Enhanced Liquidity: The introduction of the OVN/wUSD+ pair on Balancer would significantly enhance the liquidity of these assets, facilitating smoother transactions and potentially reducing slippage.
  2. Increased Yield Opportunities: By leveraging Balancer’s flexible and dynamic liquidity pools, users can explore new yield-generating opportunities, thereby maximizing their returns on investment.
  3. Community Engagement and Growth: This collaboration would foster greater community engagement, bringing together the vibrant communities of both Balancer and Overnight Finance, and potentially leading to innovative developments and partnerships in the future.
  4. Strategic Alignment: The integration aligns with Overnight Finance’s strategy of expanding its ecosystem and enhancing the utility and value proposition of the OVN and wUSD+ tokens. It also aligns with Balancer’s goal of fostering a diverse and robust DeFi ecosystem.

Furthermore, to stimulate liquidity and encourage participation, the OVN/wUSD+ pair will be incentivized on the three chains - Optimism, Arbitrum, and Base. This incentive mechanism is designed to attract more users to the platform and foster a vibrant and active community around the OVN ecosystem.

Specifications:

  1. Governance: Information on governance Overview - Overnight Finance Docs (Beta)
  2. Oracles: Does the protocol rely on external oracles? No
  3. Audits: Audits

  1. Market History:
    Overnight Pulse on Beethoven Beethoven X | Overnight Pulse
    Overnight Pulse on Balancer Arbitrum Balancer

  2. Value: The pool is expected to generate trading volumes and fees for Balancer.The proposed OVN/wUSD+ pool aims to be a primary source of liquidity for both tokens, enhancing the stability and depth of the market on Balancer. We will also continuously incentivize the gauge to attract liquidity.

Contract Addresses:

wUSD+:
Optimism - 0xA348700745D249c3b49D2c2AcAC9A5AE8155F826
Arbitrum - 0xB86fb1047A955C0186c77ff6263819b37B32440D
Base - 0xd95ca61CE9aAF2143E81Ef5462C0c2325172E028

OVN
Optimism - 0x3b08fcd15280e7B5A6e404c4abb87F7C774D1B2e
Arbitrum - 0xA3d1a8DEB97B111454B294E2324EfAD13a9d8396
Base - 0xA3d1a8DEB97B111454B294E2324EfAD13a9d8396

$OVN Bribing Plan

Total amount of bribes between all our pools:

per week: $20,000
per month: $80,000 - $90,000

We plan to distribute them depending on bribe effectiveness on various dexes.

Specifcations:

Network PoolId Root Gauge
Optimism 0x00B82BC5EDEA6E5E6C77635E31A1A25AAD99F881000200000000000000000105 0x882168aAADCD18069Eeb6d76fc7541BB394043A9
Arbitrum 0x85ec6ae01624ae0d2a04d0ffaad3a25884c7d0f30002000000000000000004b6 0x099E0C611394809099A91c93783De47c80057efb
Base 0xa036553ad30f077bd46c37b1e8ac28e010d7b39e000200000000000000000056 0xd31342887B2EbeEc5e91D1dF07D93250D55E9ca1

The gauges each have 5% caps and would qualfiy as core pools due to their yield bearing component.

The Balancer Maxi LM Multisig eth:0xc38c5f97B34E175FFd35407fc91a937300E33860 will interact with the GaugeAdderv4 at 0x5DbAd78818D4c8958EfF2d5b95b28385A22113Cd and call the addGauge function for each of the pools, passing their corresponding Root gauge for the gauge(address) in the table above, and gaugeType(string) corresponding to their respective network in the table.

1 Like
2

I want to state that I am not very optimistic about these gauges. Main reasons are rather unprofessional business practices and bad treatment of LPs (we are making them whole as some LPs lost money). See [BIP-431] USD+ Linear Pool Refund

1 Like
3

I agree with Xeonus that given the timing of BIP-431, and the need for Balancer to step in and deal with this. It doesn’t seem an appropriate time to be requesting more gauges. Especially not ones that have more custom integrations such as rate providers.

It’s more important now than ever for the DAO to be thinking about risk management, both in terms of the internal operations and processes of the various SPs engaged and in terms of the how governance makes decisions around the code we integrate and the gauges we incentivise.

1 Like
4

I would just like to add our Bribing Plan here for our $OVN token.

$OVN Bribing plan

Total amount of bribes between all our pools:

  • per week: $20,000
  • per month: $80,000 - $90,000

We plan to distribute them depending on bribe effectiveness on various dexes.

5

1: I really don’t like the insinuation that veBAL voters should accept bribes to take on extra operational risk. Bribes are supposed to be about an economy of approved pools that are deemed non-toxic through these gauge votes, not part of the process of deciding which ones to approve.

2: I still feel uncomfortable with the complexity of this pool combined with our past operational experiences with overnight, and the idea of custom integrations like rate providers. Although the integrations team has deemed the rate provider itself to be safe and not upgradable.

3: 80/20 pools are generally intended for locking, and benefit balancer when they are the primary/only source of liquidity on chain. In this case, you’re not locking, and this seems very much like a play to treasury farm, and likely dump, as many emissions as you can. In my mind, that’s not what 80/20 pools are for. Especially in the context of new airdrop programs coming on line that give extra incentives and are trying to create more volume and real, healthy activity on L2s.

4: Low mcap coins are normally offered a single 2% gauge to start. In this case you are asking for 3 gauges at 5% each (15% of all veBAL) for a coin that is not even in circulation yet it seems. I don’t see any trading history provided and coin-gecko shows the token to be preview only with no price or liquidty info.

I’d be more comfortable with this gauge if it was a 50/50 pool without a custom rate provider, and if the 2% cap was split between all requested pool.

With that being said, I will leave it to the good veBAL voters to decided. This is an unhealthy request, that sits outside our normal frameworks being staged directly after an unfortunate event that ended up with the DAO paying out of pocket.

6

As OVN has patiently waiting for the rate provider review summarized here: https://github.com/threerocks-defi/code-review/blob/main/rate-providers/WrappedUsdPlusRateProvider.md

we ware moving forward with the vote as a late addition

https://snapshot.org/#/balancer.eth/proposal/0x0578f35938f8a66a2534cf79bc1221680503bb0ef12932dac939aa63bb3406b2

7

My perspective is that Overnight is offering 3 pools on the networks Balancer is trying to expand into. They say they will bribe 20k per week (40k per epoch). This will mean above a 10% increase in Aura’s bribe market if total bribes are placed there. This commands 4% of veBAL, without any considerations for BIP-19 related the the yield coming from wUSD+. If these pools are to grow, 5% caps are reasonable to me. I understand hesitation as market cap is an unknown, the cap is meant to meet the bribes they will place, plus yield accrued and recycled.

I would like to know if they will hold BAL to participate in governance or not. If they are voted down, fine, but I see it as a bad decision given market conditions. I think the risk reward of these pools is worth approving gauges for. The rate providers are reviewed by the integrations team and deemed safe. Not worth any hand waving related to those given the teams green light.

8

As a representative for Overnight Finance, we hear all thoughts about this proposal. If the veBAL voters think that 5% is a bit of stretch we agree with 2% as a starting point. We aim to create a competitive environment that rewards participation and ensures the most efficient allocation of resources. We believe that veBAL voters are sophisticated and discerning and they will prioritize the community’s best interest. Complexity is often a byproduct of innovation. Our past experiences teach us valuable lessons, enabling us to build more robust systems.

While 80/20 pools have been associated with locking, the beauty of the DeFi space is its adaptability. Our objective is to leverage the pool structure for its inherent benefits, not merely conform to traditional use-cases. The goal is to amplify liquidity and ensure stability, rather than exploit emissions. We’re using the pool to its fullest potential to cater to the evolving needs of the market. As also noted, the proposed bribe per week represents a significant boost in Aura’s bribe market, should all bribes be channeled in here.

The absence of a defined market cap or trading history doesn’t undermine the intrinsic value of the coin or its future adoption potential. The proposed gauge allocation, especially the 5% caps (can be settled at 2%), is informed by a forward-looking strategy, ensuring that it aligns with the expected bribes and accrued yield.

The gauge allocation is in recognition of the potential this new coin brings. Traditional metrics, like trading history, might not fully capture the inherent value and projected adoption. We’re operating in a rapidly evolving landscape; hence, a forward-looking approach is crucial. Coingecko’s preview status doesn’t reflect the groundwork and strategic partnerships that underscore this project.

The proposal aims to push the boundaries, capitalize on new opportunities, and ensure the best outcome for the community. We trust the veBAL voters to recognize the merit and long-term vision of this initiative.

9

The normal procedure would be to do some sort of a token sale or airdrop first to get the token out and distributed.

No one has ever used balancer emissions to create value out of a 0 value token before without some sort of prior event. It doesn’t seem a very healthy way to launch a token, at least not for Balancer.

Maybe it would be an interesting experiment, but 6% of veBAL on this is still too much in my opinion.

Have you considered some means of getting these tokens out into wider circulation before you start incentivising liquidty?

Tokens seeking Balancer gauges should have wide holdings, at least some trading history some how, and some price. 80/20 pools are not an effective way to bootstrap initial liquidity,

Am I missing something something somehow, or do I misunderstand the plans here?

You mentioned you plan to seek the best brib ROI across multiple DEXes. Are other DEXes granting gauges for this in their governance process?

1 Like
10

We are already live in Aerodrome and Velodrome. We are expanding more to other DEXes.

image
image824×114 10.7 KB

image
image787×129 10.4 KB

1 Like
11

Could you maybe provide a bit more information on the tokenomics of OVN?

You mention a detailed distribution and vesting plan for OVN. Where is this documented? How was OVN launched? How many are in circulation? How many unique holders and LPs are there? What is the circulating supply and market cap?

The BIP above talks more about USD+ than the OVN token, which makes up 80% of the gauges requested. It would help to understand the request and what a reasonable cap may look like.

Thanks.

12

on $OVNTokenomics: Overnight Tokenomics - Overnight Finance Docs (Beta)
on Pre-sale: https://docs.overnight.fi/governance/ovn-token/ovn-presale

13

Thanks for that. I suggest including this and more in future governance requests pertaining to $OVN.

Do you have a link with specific details about the presale/what the final price/what the results where? OVN Token Sale - OVERNIGHT BLOG mentions how it was being structured but now how it went down.

Has the public sale been conducted yet? Information about the results of that?

And again, Do you have any of the additional stats above about mcap/circ supply/holders/etc? Being that this is a cross-chain token. This is important information when assessing gauge caps, and it’s hard to find clear, consolidated information anywhere right now for this multichain token. Market history is part of the Gauge Request template, please provide it for all tokens involved in a pool in future governance: Instructions & Overview - #2 by solarcurve. The most important tokens to focus on are those that do not yet have pools on balancer/have not already had this context provided.

14

Thank you for the suggestion. We definitely will. The presale price was at $20 and we launched at $20 too currently sitting at $22-$23. We cancelled public presale and just used the money raised from private presale to bootstrap liquidity on DEXes. We launched at 20m FDV too.

1 Like
15

My suggestion based on everything discussed above is to come back with a new BIP that provides all this info and is only for a 2% pool on Arbitrum, where you seem to not have any liquidty yet. Then let’s see what the mcap of the token and fees on the pool looks like and consider more gauges in the future.

In the end, if you’re playing a competitive yield game across chains and DEXes, Balancer is not in a good position to compete on BASE until Aura deploys there anyway. I don’t see any need for this gauge right now based on your stated objectives. I highly doubt it will be used.

With that in mind, a 50/50 pool is much more likely to generate decent fee flows from both swaps and staking fees, making future gauges more interesting.

An 80/20 pool would be interesting, if it involved locking it in order to earn some reasonable “real yields” from protocol fees or allows vote on things of economic interest that has a secondary vote market where users can benefit from something other than gauge emissions for their 80/20 position.

In one case, BetSwirl is doing 80/20 without locking, but is still offering ETH yields on 80/20 staking outside the gauge: Staking Program - BetSwirl. I’d love to see a well thought out program/proposal that included these kinds of 80/20 dynamics from overnight.

For the best 80/20 programs, gauge incentives are an afterthought.

1 Like
17

Based on new information and guidance from respected people, we are going to submit a new proposal detailing everything with a reasonable ask of 2% cap for each gauge on 3 chains that we will incentivize.