korpi Profile picture
2 Sep, 20 tweets, 7 min read
"EIP-1559 sucks. After it was implemented gas prices skyrocketed!"

This take is propagated a lot and I think this is far from true. Correlation is not causation. I suppose gas prices would be much higher now if we didn't have EIP-1559. How does EIP-1559 save you $ETH? 🧵👇
1)
Before EIP-1559 when you submitted a transaction on Ethereum, you had to set up a single gas price. If it was high enough, your transaction was included in a block and you paid exactly what you agreed to pay. In many cases you might have substantially overpaid though. Why?
2)
Imagine you need to execute a transaction immediately. You check gas prices on gasnow.org and you see a rapid transaction is at 100 GWEI. But this is just an estimation and may suddenly increase. To secure inclusion in the first block you decide to use 200 GWEI.
3)
Your transaction goes through and you paid 200 GWEI. But the truth is that it might have been included in this block even if you had used 100 GWEI. You might have substantially overpaid. This is how it worked before EIP-1559. How does it work now?
4)
First we need to understand a few types of fees in EIP-1559:
- Base Fee - The minimum gas price required for a transaction to be included in a block which is set by the protocol and is burned. If your transaction doesn't cover Base Fee, it can't be included in a block.
5)
- Priority Fee - The gas price you are OK to pay to miners to process your transaction. It's a tip to incentivize miners to prioritise your transaction. If there are more transactions than can fit into a block, miners most likely will include the ones with the highest tip.
6)
- Max Fee - The highest total gas price you are willing to pay for your transaction. It must be higher than Base Fee + Priority Fee. If it's not, your transaction will be pending. If it's higher, your transaction will be executed and you will be refunded an excess amount.
7)
Have you paid attention? "Refunded an excess amount". That's the key. You set up Max Fee you are OK to pay but you always cover only Base Fee + Priority Fee. If they are lower than your Max Fee, you don't overpay. That's the power of EIP-1559. It wasn't possible before.
8)
How does it work in Metamask? You can manually change Priority Fee and Max Fee. Where to take them from? A great gas estimator is provided by @blocknative: blocknative.com/gas-estimator. It displays Priority Fee and Max Fee and the probability that your transaction will be included.
9)
Tips & tricks:
- Set up high Max Fee if you want your transaction to go through in case of sudden surges in network demand. Base Fee increases by 12.5% for each full block (it's >10x increase in 20 blocks!). If Max Fee < Base Fee + Priority Fee, a transaction won't go through.
10)
- Set up lower Max Fee if you are OK to wait until Base Fee + Priority Fee < Max Fee.
- Always check Priority Fee in Metamask! I noticed that it's sometimes set equal to Max Fee. In this case, you will definitely pay Max Fee for your transaction and most likely overpay!
11)
Imo, the fact that users are able to set up Max Fee but always pay only Base Fee + Priority Fee and, therefore, don't overpay for transactions, is a sufficient proof that EIP-1559 couldn't cause increase in gas prices. It's the opposite, gas prices would be higher without it.
12)
"But ser. Gas is insane now. It was lower before EIP-1559! What happened?"
JPEGs happened. NFT mania. Look at OpenSea volume and compare July and August. It was 10x increase in monthly volume which means a substantial increase in network congestion. dune.xyz/rchen8/opensea
13)
Or go to ultrasound.money and check the Burn Leaderboard. OpenSea has been the greatest ETH burner in the last 30 days. Every day there are a few NFT drops that enter the leaderboard too. In a bull run, when people make money, they are OK to spend more on gas.
14)
What could probably lower gas prices is a better EIP-1559 adoption. Only 51% of all Ethereum transactions are type 2, i.e. EIP-1559. There are still wallets that don't support EIP-1559, e.g. @Metamask + hardware wallet (wen?!).
15)
However, when I say "lower gas prices", I don't mean sustainably cheaper transactions on Ethereum in the long run. EIP-1559 is not a scalability improvement. It helps users not overpay for transactions but it doesn't improve Ethereum throughput. It was never meant to as well.
16)
Real scalability improvements are Layer 2 solutions. I believe most of our Ethereum activity will be soon on L2s while mainnet will remain expensive but truly decentralized and secure settlement layer. It's not the subject of this thread though :)
TL;DR:
- EIP-1559 didn't increase gas prices, JPEGs did (NFT mania).
- EIP-1559 allows users to not overpay for transactions because the difference between Max Fee and Actual Fee (Base Fee + Priority Fee) is refunded.
- Remember to set Priority Fee in your wallet to not overpay!
If you want to understand more how EIP-1559 impacts $ETH, I recommend my other thread:
Detailed but excellent explanation on EIP-1559 mechanics from @thedailygwei: thedailygwei.substack.com/p/this-is-eip-…

• • •

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

Keep Current with korpi

korpi 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 @korpi87

16 Aug
Being a liquidity provider for tokens that shoot up in price is a pain. You want to respect the pump but you can't because you are getting rekt by "impermanent" loss. Just look at this LP for $AXS-ETH. Rekt.

It doesn't have to be this way. Check out how! 🧵👇 https://revert.finance/#/account/0x37b2199f06ce7c100bb2a4c45
1)
Have you been there?

You buy a token that you think will rally like $AXS or $MATIC. You have conviction and patience to hodl. To earn some "passive income" while waiting, you deposit this token to AMM. The pump finally comes and you realize you got rekt by impermanent loss...
2)
The above story describes the experience of many novice liquidity providers (LPs). The promise of easy "passive income" in the form of liquidity mining (LM) rewards or AMM trading fees encouraged LPs to match their token with ETH or a stablecoin and deposit them into an AMM.
Read 24 tweets
2 Aug
EIP-1559 is scheduled to go live this week and I still see a lot of wrong takes on its impact. Remember:

- It doesn't make $ETH deflationary by default.
- It doesn't reduce $ETH supply by 90%, referred as "triple halving".
- It's still very bullish for $ETH.

Why? 🧵👇
1)
EIP-1559 is one of the most important upgrades in Ethereum's history. Its purpose is to improve user experience on #ETH by changing how transaction fees are estimated and how the network reacts to surges in usage.
2)
It doesn't lower gas fees in the long run because it's not a scalability improvement. However, it may help users not overpay for transactions due to a better fee estimation process. It also smooths out gas prices between blocks thanks to variable block sizes. https://thedailygwei.substack.com/p/this-is-eip-1559-the-dai
Read 9 tweets
30 Jul
Wow. I wasn't aware of this but it seems I might have contributed to the crypto history by writing the first comprehensive thread on $OHM and @OlympusDAO long before it became trendy :)
Although I covered it in early March before the project launched, the mechanics of staking and bonding are still up to date and the thread is, imo, a pretty good explanatory read on $OHM and @OlympusDAO:
I should probably collect clout on such a tremendous foresight I had with $OHM but the truth is I was lucky to learn about the project early thanks to @Fiskantes.
Read 7 tweets
28 Jul
There is a common misconception that due to concentrated liquidity on Uni v3 liquidity providers (LPs) earn substantially more trading fees. This is what the original v3 announcement suggests but it's not exactly how it works. Let's find out why! 🧵👇
$UNI
TL;DR:
- Concentrated liquidity on Uni v3 increases capital efficiency but not necessarily Fees APR for LPs.
- Fees APR is dependent on the competition between LPs.
- LPs are incentivized to provide liquidity on narrow price ranges which amplifies their risk of impermanent loss.
1) To begin with, a short reminder where the fees for LPs come from.

When traders swap on AMMs they pay a trading fee which is dependent on AMM/pool:
- Uniswap v2: 0.3%
- Sushiswap: 0.3%
- Uniswap v3: 0.05%, 0.3% or 1%
- Bancor: from 0.1% to 1%
Read 28 tweets
1 Jul
Dear users of @zapper_fi,
I hope you are fully aware of the misleading and often unrealistic "ROI" in the "Opportunities" section for Liquidity Pools.
I hope you realise you can still underperform simple "hodling" even with "ROI" of 100%+.

If not, let me explain to you why. 🧵👇
TL;DR:
- "ROI" on @zapper_fi is based on the fees from the last 24hrs & ignores IL which makes it an unreliable approximation of future returns.
- Toolkit from @ApyVision is a must for LPs in IL-exposed pools.
- IL-protected pools from @Bancor are the best place for passive LPs.
1) Before I start, I want to make it clear that this is not a rant on @zapper_fi. It's a great tool and I use it a lot. But I think the Team could do a much better job when it comes to informing users about certain risks which can result in financial loss.
Read 27 tweets
28 Jun
Do long-term liquidity providers (LPs) to AMMs earn passive income? What is their ROI when the impact of impermanent loss (IL) is included?

I compared LPing on Uniswap and Bancor to check if IL-protection from Bancor is a useful feature for LPs.

See 🧵for more alpha!

$UNI $BNT
TL;DR:

- LPs on Uniswap often end up with less money than they would have by “hodling”, while LPs on Bancor always outperform a buy-and-hold strategy when full IL protection is achieved.
- IL protection is a killer feature for passive income generation.

korpi.medium.com/understand-ban…
1) LPing involves investors lending their idle assets to an AMM in anticipation of passive returns from trading fees. Although trading fees do generate a revenue stream for LPs, it’s not always guaranteed passive income. It would be, were it not for the infamous impermanent loss.
Read 26 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!

:(