IMC Period 19/20/21/22 Reports; Period 20/21/22 Budgets

Hi All, from your friendly neighborhood delinquent IMC treasurer.
Today, I’m ramping up my delinquency, by catching up on a record number of items.

Period 19 Report

  • We started working with Ramses on Arbitrum. We have some POL there, we have a veNFT they provided which we use to steer incentives, we provide incentives weekly.
    • There’s a bunch of entries to support getting the right types of money over to Arb wallet etc
  • There was some unused money from Paladin quests earlier – we got it back
  • The planned Base increase to 2 ETH happened, woo. Flat Money started incentives on Base as well. The combo really strengthened rETH on Base.

Period 20 Budget

  • The Arbitrum rETH/WETH pool migrated due to a rate provider change. We’re executing a bit oddly here to help get that transition to happen smoothly. Same amount of money though.
  • Optimism going from 2.5 ETH/fortnight to 2 ETH/fortnight. This reflects Arbitrum currently being ahead in usage.
  • We’re reducing rETH/RPL full-range balancer from 1.25ETH+50RPL per fortnight to just 1.25ETH/fortnight
  • We’re swapping away from Paladin for rETH/osETH b/c of bad efficiency on curve/convex
  • We’re trying out Merkl for ETH/RPL Uniswap concentrated market liquidity

Period 20 Report

  • While this period was active, Cakepie became an option for us (a bribe market to incentivize CAKE steering to particular pools). We tried it with 1 ETH. The experiment was “mostly successful”. There was a modest execution issue (we actually ended up incentivizing further in the future), but the Cakepie team worked with us to get the equivalent effect of having not messed up at all. Efficiency was quite good (spoiler, it continues to be good
  • We did not repeat the Merkl ETH/RPL incentive – it seemed to have zero impact

21 Budget

  • We continue to move more PancakeSwap incentives to Cakepie rather than Merkl
  • We plan to take a significant step down on mainnet rETH/ETH. In internal discussions, part of the thought behind this includes recognizing that the deposit pool and rETH contract had a lot of liquidity for exiting rETH. Essentially, we’re internally questioning whether “1% price impact from market liquidity alone” is really the proper metric.
    • We’re also trying to run leaner to maintain good runway in the face of dropping ratio

21 Report

  • There was an error in the rETH/RPL amount - intent had been 1.25E, but did that +50RPL (the old amount)

22 Budget


  • We’re finishing migrating PancakeSwap incentives from Merkl to Cakepie
  • We’re somewhat reducing total spend on PancakeSwap - read as “belt tightening continues”
  • We looked into the rETH/osETH pool more and found that it’s not doing much for us directly. We’re doing one last coincentive and then we’ll be bowing out from that. In this case, belt-tightening may have caused us to look, but I think this is the right call regardless.

Data - 1% price impact

We’re definitely seeing an impact from tightening our belts on mainnet.


1 Like