Let’s get a fews things straight:
Eliminating impermanent loss is impossible.
Bancor has never eliminated IL risk.

However, it is possible to TRANSFER IL risk.

Bancor transfers IL risk from LPs to $BNT holders, who earn rewards for managing IL risk.
When protocol fees > IL compensation, $BNT holders profit

The key role of the #BancorDAO is to manage IL risk & earn fees by:
- whitelisting tokens that earn more fees over time than IL
- seeding performant pools w/ BNT co-investments
- deploying LP incentives (BNT rewards)
In its ~9 months live, IL compensation has resulted in low levels of BNT inflation (<5%).

Fees earned by the protocol have proven to be a resilient buffer against the cost of IL compensation, while still driving some of the highest yields in DeFi on 70+ assets.
The industry’s first IL protection solution has yielded millions in fees & some fascinating findings -- and it's ready to evolve 🦖

We look forward to sharing more on the next phase of IL protection in #BancorV3

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nate Hindman

Nate Hindman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @NateHindman

10 Apr
Let’s not get lost in semantics on Impermanent Loss

I'm now seeing the following on crypto twitter: “AMM protocols trying to solve IL are a waste of time, YOU CAN’T SOLVE IL!”

Discussions on IL & methods to address it are confused by vague terms like “solved” & “mitigated”

👇
Impermanent loss indeed cannot be solved. Full stop. We’ve known that for a while

Just as insurance cos don’t prevent houses from burning down, neither does Bancor prevent IL from occurring

But is StateFarm wasting its time because its services do nothing to fire-proof houses?
IL is a risk - pure and simple, and it will always exist. The question is: who is best to deal with this risk?

Is it the individual LP? What if they don’t want to actively manage sophisticated hedging strategies that try to mitigate IL risk?
Read 23 tweets
21 Jan
Single-sided liquidity pools change the game for liquidity mining rewards programs, since they introduce novel re-staking functionality.
Broke: Dual-sided pools where an LP earns mining rewards, but can re-stake them to the protocol only by selling some of the tokens or pairing them with additional capital.
Bespoke: Single-sided pools where an LP earns mining rewards, which they can then re-stake in the pool and *compound gains* without selling any rewards or adding new tokens.

Rinse, repeat, automate 🤖💧🤖
Read 4 tweets
17 Jan
Anyone who tells you impermanent loss is no big deal because swap fees make up for it, show them this graph.

LP returns in the $YFI/ETH pool on Uniswap.

After accounting for swap fees, an LP would have suffered -40% loss vs +30% gains without IL.
Meanwhile, check out APY for the $YFI pool on uniswap.info.

Supposedly it's +29.62%

Only off by -70% 🙄

LPs are led to believe they're earning high APY, when in reality, they could be suffering heavy net losses vs. holding.
Another one: $USDT/ETH

uniswap.info tells us the projected APY is +47.71%

More like -3.77%
Read 5 tweets
1 Nov 20
1/ Let's talk about APY in AMM pools 📈

It's the main metric used to calculate profits, with many yield farms & AMM protocols advertising high APY figures to lure LPs 🤑

But the way APY is measured today makes some flawed assumptions that can be misleading 🧐👇 Image
2/ One flawed assumption is liquidity staked in a pool remains intact.

In reality, impermanent loss erodes staked liquidity and reduces profits from collected swap fees & liquidity mining rewards.

This can leave LPs with razor thin or negative returns.

3/ Yet most AMM front-ends list APY without taking impermanent loss into account.

This is why the returns you actually earn as an LP when you withdraw liquidity are often less than the projected APYs originally advertised in AMM interfaces.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(