Across supporting the Balancer token has been a huge success. So much so that the Across LP is nearly maxed out. This proposal asks the Balancer treasury to deposit another 40,000 BAL tokens into the Across LP (same size as initial deposit).
Motivation:
Balancer has 80k tokens that are stuck on Multichain and not useable for bridging. BAL token is not enabled on any other of the main 3rd party bridges (not canonical) for a meaningful amount of routes. Balancer team is pushing for more cross chain uses of the token and Across is the dominant bridge in being able to provide this service.
Here is a graph of volume share between the canonical bridges (arbitrum, polygon, and base) and Across bridge over the last 100 days. You can see Across continues to gain share and it’s currently 52% of the overall market vs canonical bridges!
Here is the current state of the BAL pool on Across, 90% utilized and hence offering 12% to LPs via bridge fees paid. During this period of recent high utilization, the LP has attracted ~8k of BAL tokens from various participants.
The Balancer DAO multisig eth:0x10A19e7eE7d7F8a52822f6817de8ea18204F2e4 will interact with the BAL token contract at 0xba100000625a3754423978a60c9317c58a424e3D and call approve with amount 40000000000000000000000. Then, the Balancer DAO multisig eth:0x10A19e7eE7d7F8a52822f6817de8ea18204F2e4 will interact with 0xc186fA914353c44b2E33eBE05f21846F1048bEda, call addLiquidity with l1Token as 0xba100000625a3754423978a60c9317c58a424e3D and l1TokenAmount as 40000000000000000000000
Could you be a bit more specific with your technical specs? Like the DAO treasury multi-sig 0x10a19e7ee7d7f8a52822f6817de8ea18204f2e4f will interact with HubPool ??? and approve 40’000 BAL, then call addLiquidity on contract ??? on chain Z.
In general neutral about this proposal. Could be a good way to accumulate more BAL for the treasury through fees, also as other sources of income like the Ribbon vaults are now decomissioned. There is always an inherent risk with depositing funds in bridges though. Up to veBAL holders to decide how they want to put BAL to work
In this case it’s more about utility than earnings. Right now at times trying to bridge 1k BAL fast across chain on an aggregator like Bungee is not possible. There is some liquidity on squid network, but only between arbi, base and mainnet and it doesn’t’ seem to be getting the same utlliization. The yields are nice, although it looks like we have only earned about 700 BAL and the rest is another deposit into the vault. Check the dao multisig balances.
As our multichain push picks up, we need more bridge liquidity. Across has shown themselves to be a reliable and trustworthy bridge partner. 80k BAL in total does not present any kind of existential risk to the DAO. I am in full support.
I’d also support funding another bridge provider or two, as I think we will continue to need more liquidty here and it is good not to keep too many eggs in one basket. Multichain taught us this lesson.
