[BIP-8] Enable TetuBAL/20WETH-80BAL Gauge

Gauge Proposal Template:
Whitelist the gauge for the newly created TetuBAL/20WETH-80BAL

References/Useful links:

Link to:
• Website - https://tetu.io/
• Documentation - Introduction - Tetu
• Github Page - Tetu · GitHub
• Communities - Tetu
• Other useful links?

Protocol Description:

Tetu is a asset management protocol that implements automated yield farming strategy for users

To have Deep liquidity for the pair and incentivize users to lock more BAL thereby benefiting the Balancer Ecosystem and Tetu


  1. Governance:
    Multi Sig - Tetu

  2. Oracles: Does the protocol rely on external oracles? If so, provide details about the oracles and their implementation in the protocol.

3. Audits: Provide links to audit reports and any relevant details about security practices.

  1. Centralization vectors: Is there any component of the protocol that has centralization vectors? E.g. if only 1 dev manages the project, that is a centralized vector. If price oracles need to be updated by a bot, that is a centralized vector. If liquidations are done by the protocol, that is also a centralization vector.

48 hour timelock and Multisig

  1. Market History: Has the asset observed severe volatility? In the case of stablecoins, has it depegged? In the case of an unpegged asset, have there been extreme price change events in the past? Provide specific information about the Balancer pool: how long has it been active, TVL, historical volume? You must provide a direct link to the pool AND a link to your pool’s gauge.

LBP- Balancer

Gauge: 0xAA59736b80cf77d1E7D56B7bbA5A8050805F5064

gauge recipient PolygonRootGauge | Address 0xcF5938cA6d9F19C73010c7493e19c02AcFA8d24D | Etherscan


Have you all created a gauge for this pool yet? Need that to be able to vote on this.

1 Like

have confirmed the above gauges are correct. cheers.


Please whitelist the pool Balancer(link given in top of the proposal) instead of the one that is being redirected on the LBP link . We had to redeploy the pool due to issues . Just so that it doesnt lead to confusing have 2 different links in the proposal
i’m leaving a comment here