Diversification of MRL DAI

16 Comments

Content
AI Summary

gm Hydratooooors,

We are currently in the process of withdrawing our Wormhole (Acala) assets and swapping them for Wormhole (Moonbeam) [MRL] assets as per this discussion.

We are also imminently going to be launching our Stablepools feature (finally!), meaning that when our DAI > USDC OTC order is filled, we will be launching USDC (native) directly into a Stablepool with USDT (native). We currently have between 2-2.1M DAI allocated as Omnipool liquidity.

In order to reduce our "bridge risk", we should not include DAI in a Stablepool with our native assets - that being said, we do need to have means of low slippage swaps between bridged and native stablecoins. I believe we can leverage MRL, Stablepools & Omnipool to provide a low-slippage decentralised stablecoins onboarding route into our ecosystem.

My proposal is as follows:

Diversify some of the ~2M DAI allocated as Omnipool liquidity (currently split between Acala & Moonbeam wormhole assets) into:
- 300K DAI (MRL)
- 300K USDC (MRL)
- 300K USDT (MRL)
- 300K USDC (or T) (native)
Place those assets into a 4pool Stablepool
Deposit the 4pool asset shares into the Omnipool

This will compliment our other 2pool Stablepool - USDC/ USDT (native) - which will also have its' asset shares deposited into the Omnipool. (liquidity will likely be ~2.6M worth of each, 2.2M current allocation + 800K of the existing DAI allocation)

The combination of these two Stablepools, deposited into the Omnipool will:

Allow HydraDX to operate as an onboarding route for DAI/USDT/USDC liquidity from Ethereum to Polkadot native stablecoins, with minimal price impact
Maintain stablecoin liquidity in the Omnipool at the current agreed ~6.6M across DAI/USDT/USDC
Reduce reliance on bridged versions of stablecoins and limit the impact of any risk on our protocol owned native stablecoins
Improve efficiency of swaps involving stablecoins

I have raised this discussion now, as we are currently in the process of swapping DAI (Acala Wormhole) for MRL versions - however, it would make sense to OTC the DAI directly into USDT (MRL)/ USDC (MRL)/USDC (native) instead of swapping to DAI (MRL) and then swapping once more for each of those assets.

Happy to answer any questions - stay hydrated!

EDIT: I have updated the numbers to ~300K of each of the assets in the MRL 4pool, as the research work we've done on the A parameters suggests that this will provide ample liquidity for the onboarding of liquidity. The remaining DAI from this allocation will be redirected towards native stablecoins.

Edited

Up 2

Comments

7L1j...F6TM

Sounds great. i guess we need to the bridge assets to onboard people. Otherwise i would have preferred more native tokens. But it's fine for now.

7NzN...tBec

this seems like a no-brainer for me

I would just like a clarification of what the final numbers of the different versions of both the Omnipool and stableswap would be, so we can know with certainty how much risk level we would have in bridgeds assets

With this proposal, thats mean that we reduce our stablecoin bridge assets from 2m $ to 1.5 m $ right? With the advantage that now will be a on-board from bridge assets to Native with minimal slippage

7NzN...tBec

Also i will recommend do the same with the WBTC that we had, and create a stablepool with WBTC/iBTC
Create a little amount for that

And swap more WBTC to iBTC in the Omnipool

7Jnn...hbvy

I have never bridged one asset in or out of Hydra except iBTC via Interlay. So for me is clear, that we should minimize the bridge asset's risks and increase the native assets, especially now with USDT and USDC native to Polkadot.

7MAv...Depm

I like native USDT-C , it's always more safer and easier to use

Edited

7KGg...kgXA

It's ok. We'll have more native asset and some bridged asset to swap.

7JpX...VVrF

I personally think it is a bad choice to split liquidity in this way for the following reasons:

usdt is already native on moonbeam and there is no liquid or used xc20 version of it
usdc on moonbeam has different versions with different bridges exposing us to the risk of the same and in the future given the native support with usdc with circle sdk it will be easy to port between chains
dai is already collateralized by usdc and is in bridged version

i propose to use only a stable pool dai acala/ dai moonbeam

7NzN...tBec

you are right that at least I have only seen that there is use of the usdc.w and not for usdt.wh since the native one existed

Therefore maybe it would be better to remove usdt.wh
and make a 3pool ( would double check on this, since on Moonbeam Stellaswap had a stablepool too, so maybe more is used there)

I dont see use on the dai( acala)/ dai ( Moonbeam) stable
Since at least me want to remove all the acala assets

Edited

7NzN...tBec

ok as I understand it, we are simply looking for a way to on/off ramp from/to Ethererum, and for that reason we are looking to have a stablepool that has brigded assets through MRL, it does not matter if they are used or not in Moonbean since MRL will send them directly to ethereum
And will serve for all the ecosystem have a way to swaps our natives stablecoins to eth stable without go via CEX

Up 1

The_Tomiest_Tom

Let's make it happen with the new parameters. Anything that facilitate the process of getting liquidity in and out and swapping between different native stables is a good idea in my opinion.