Wormhole asset migration (part 2)

1yr ago

9 Comments

Content

AI Summary

Greetings Hydra Community,

To continue advancing our liquidity and asset diversification, I propose the migration of our remaining assets from Acala (Wormhole) to Moonbeam (Wormhole). The assets in question are:

WETH - currently worth ~$1.9M USD
DAI - currently worth ~$1.9M USD
WBTC - currently worth ~$0.9M USD

This would bring the Moonbeam (Wormhole) asset value to:

WETH - currently worth ~$2.2M USD
DAI - currently worth ~$2.2M USD
WBTC - currently worth ~$1.2M USD

Asset migration would occur via the same means as executed by referendum #60, these assets will be withdrawn from the Omnipool, swapped for the Moonbeam (Wormhole) equivalent for a small premium, and then added back to the Omnipool. This shift is motivated by:

Tapping into Moonbeam's rapidly growing ecosystem, known for its developer-friendly environment and ease of integration for Ethereum-compatible projects.
Utilizing Moonbeam's expanding liquidity pools and trading volumes, providing a fertile ground for new opportunities and enhanced utility for HydraDX users.

Given Moonbeam's advancements in cross-chain interoperability, extensive community engagement, and increasingly diverse range of DeFi applications, aligning ourselves more closely with Moonbeam presents a timely and strategic opportunity for HydraDX.

Additionally, this presents an opportunity to discuss new assets and Protocol Owned Liquidity (POL) distribution between pools. I encourage you to leave your thoughts and recommendations for new assets you’d like to see brought to HydraDX.

I present this proposal for community discussion before taking any official actions.

Thank you.

Up 1

Comments

7NzN...tBec

1yr ago

I agree that we can continue with the change of bridge assets from acala to wormhole Moonbeam, however, I recommend it be in small batches

300k of each assets per batch, as the Omnipool cannot be left without liquidity (that also serve as an anchor for the stability of LRNA and Omnipool prices due the volatile of the others)

Up 2

7LxF...v4uy

1yr ago

I am all in favor to migrate the liquidity from Acala to Moonbeam, however this means that all the LRNA accumulated on these positions would have to be liquidated, which can be detrimental to the stability of LRNA. Also shouldn't we leave a small amount of Acala liquidity as well?

I guess these actions need to be weighted properly, there is no rush.

We can do this incrementally.

7NzN...tBec

1yr ago

the other point that we should talk would be like the previous comment says:

" should we leave liquidity in acala wormhole assets? "

or just remove all and pass it to Moonbeam wormhole assets

I would prefer everything to Moonbeam assets, but I don't know what the consequences of that would be?

And in turn, what happens with the position that was "burned" at Omnipool? How do we move them or do them just stay there as liquidity?

Up 1

The_Tomiest_Tom

1yr ago

I am in agreement with Jose here, we can take out time to do it. I am in favor of moving assets from acala wormhole to Moonbeam but let's go step by step.

7MAv...Depm

1yr ago

only aye to this proposal , we have almost useless liq in weth wbtc on monnbeam , we need increase and increase to reach volume and not just dead liquidity in this pairs + acala not so trusty for me .

7L1j...F6TM

1yr ago

I think we should respect Acalas wishes and Exodus their project. 100% Aye to migration to Moonbeam. The risk profile is way better than Acalas.