Planning the 2nd Batch of Polkadot Hydration Campaign Incentives

Remove ZTG from Omnipool

Nice analysis! The charts are a little hard to read so would be nice to see a single number for the average TVL utilisation per asset for the incentives period. I like the general approach of moving incentives from low utilisation assets to high utilisation ones.

Not super keen on increasing incentives for Bifrost tokens as it's hard to compete with their stable pools, though it does make hydra more convenient to use having the liquidity there.

Don't agree that ZTG needs special treatment as it already receives the lowest incentives. The price performance has been very bad but I don't think it's significantly worse than similar assets such as CRU. You say that the omnipool becoming the primary source of liquidity for ZTG like it's a bad thing, I think this is great and should be the ultimate goal for omnipool.

MYTH incentives make sense though liquidity is already pretty good and doesn't get much volume so would keep them pretty low. Think RING should also be considered.

Thanks!

I added a chart to the top of the TVL Utilization Dashboard that shows the Incentive Utilization for Batch 1 of the Polkadot Hydration Incentives Campaign.

1. I highly recommend decreasing incentives for iBTC and removing the ~17 WBTC excess in the WBTC-iBTC to return them to parity. Yes Hydra wants more blue chip BTC for money markets, but iBTC has turned out to be unsustainable and incentivizing it has led to a 7% price distortion, leading it to be botted and vault operators are trapped in vaults. Long-term, pulling in more iBTC liquidity regardless of the market distortion will only increase the risk to the Omnipool if it unravels.
2. Agreed, add incentives to MYTH/DOT to continue supporting that launch
3. RING clearly hasn't had much trading volume, so I'm not worried about incentivizing it much
4. PHA and GLMR incentives had larger impact primarily because they only had about $200k to start with whereas ASTR, CFG, BNC all executed POL deposits before the LM campaign started. Based on that, ASTR and CFG clearly had the largest buying volume impact from incentives. side note: @Giraffe note that the CFG POL deposit executed on June 9th, which I think was a day before LM campaign started. That makes it difficult to pull apart the effect of the POL deposit vs LM campaign effect.

As a Crust owner and supplier on HYDRA. Moreover, this token seems to be regularly dumped by the team and somes protocols that use it such as Uniswap, Aave, soon Ton and probably coinbase, and, in view of its infrastructural importance despite a lack of marketing and promotion of influencers, it seems to me that this role is largely underestimated given the developments made and in progress, a perpetuation or continuation of the rewards on it would be greatly appreciated.

At worst, review the rewards of the INTR token where the team is dedicated to BOB L2 BTC LAYER with the OP stack and no longer to this project.

Although a bridge with polkadot is envisaged, we have no certainty as to its arrival or even its realization.

Overmore I see a proposition to integrate Neuro token. I think is reward token, but put a good incentive for this one will be great for sustain the project and maybe his value by the price.

BNC and HDX are not typical VC coins with high FDV and low circulation, and people no longer recognize such coins.

With the subsequent repurchase of HDX, the launch of lending and stablecoins
BNC repurchase and adjustment of token economy model

They should have great potential, with strong upward potential in transaction amount and user purchasing desire.

What I mean is to provide farm incentives for both of them in the future.

Thank you for requesting feedback, and congratulations on the informative dashboard.

Here are my thoughts:

1 Relative Distribution of Incentives:

I'd like to reflect on whether we have the same goal as the 1st batch or if we want to adjust it.

From the first batch:
The goal of the Polkadot Hydration Campaign is to contribute towards building an accessible, deep layer of native liquidity which, over time, will help the wider Polkadot 2.0 ecosystem flourish
The capital flows which will be caused as a result of the Polkadot Hydration Campaign will be seen by the rest of web3 as a strong sign of a vibrant ecosystem which is in good health. Besides increasing the mindshare of Polkadot, we believe this can set the flywheel into motion which drives increased adoption driving additional capital into the ecosystem

It seems this goal was reached with a good degree of success. The question is: are we looking for more liquidity from the same accounts, or are we interested in attracting new ones from other ecosystems?
If the answer is more from the same, then I agree we should focus on top performers.
For others, we need to consider how to generate buzz to reach beyond the Hydration or even Polkadot Ecosystem.

2 Focus on Money Market:
Regarding the money market, personally it's difficult to judge without seeing it in action. However, it could mirror point 1 with a focus on top performers only. Given that the market is far from being a happy place at present, it could be a good idea to incentivize stablecoins.
(Very much looking forward to learning more about Hollar, though)

3 Bifrost:
It's probably better to focus on vDOT only since it might support the yield DCA. From the graph, I couldn't see that vASTR and the others are high performers.

4 I don't have much experience or insight to provide proper feedback on this point.

5 Incentives for MYTH/DOT Pool:
Yes, if it would come paired with the awaited airdrop, as it would be a pleasure to watch how much MYTH would be routed to Hydration.

Looking forward to the growth of Hydration.