• AIP
  • [AIP-28] d3 Alliance

[AIP-28] d3 Alliance

We propose a new curve pool that consists of decentralized stablecoins, alUSD, FRAX, and FEI. Each of our respective protocols spends a lot of resourcing providing liquidity for our respective 3crv pools. By forming the d3 pool, we can pool our resources together and offer deep liquidity between our tokens.

The Alchemix, Frax, and Fei teams have discussed this, and together, we can leverage each protocol’s individual strengths. Currently, between these three teams, we control over 500k CVX, deep treasuries, and the ability to bootstrap with our respective governance tokens.

For this proposal, Alchemix will split its pool incentives and cvx voting power equally among alUSD3CRV, alETH, and d3 (pending gauge acceptance). The Fei and Frax teams will also be contributing towards incentives to maximize our collective efforts.

Each protocol can contribute in the following way:

Alchemix

Alchemix currently holds over 70k CVX, and this number is growing steadily. We also can offer ALCX to incentivise CVX and veCRV holders to allocate more to the d3 gauge. Furthermore, in the v2 of Alchemix, we can make FEI and FRAX accepted collateral types (pending governance approval). By including FEI and FRAX as collateral types, we can strengthen their stablecoin projects by bringing them the amazing utility of self-repaying alUSD loans, providing Alchemix with more TVL and income in the process. Furthermore, the more alUSD is backed by decentralized stablecoins, the more resilient it will be.

Frax

Frax controls over 450k CVX and is aggressively accumulating more. They too are involved in curve gauge bribing via the votium protocol built on top of convex. Their power in Convex would allow for enticing incentives for the d3 pool, and make it one of the top places to provide liquidity for in all of DeFi. Frax also has an advanced Algorithmic Market Operations Controller (AMO), which allows FRAX to expand and contract the supply of FRAX by minting FRAX into liquidity pools and withdrawing and burning from them. This allows them to safely grow the supply when it is warranted, and also to shrink the supply when off peg. This is a powerful lever at their disposal that can also benefit alUSD and FEI. If FRAX is on peg, they could mint it into the d3 pool, and such an action would cause alUSD and FEI to trade at a premium to it. When alUSD is at a premium, it makes it an attractive currency to mint to arbitrage the difference away, and in the process, more backing goes to the transmuter, increasing system yield and strengthening the peg. So when FRAX grows, so do its counterparts in the pool.

Fei

Fei has the deepest reserves of ETH over any other protocol in the space. This protocol controlled value (PCV) allows them to have a rock-solid peg for FEI, because they can add and remove liquidity to tightly peg Fei to $1. In this regard, FEI and Frax are very similar, albeit executed in differing ways. The fully decentralized collateral base and ethos of FEI fits perfectly in the vision of a decentralized 3Crv alternative. Coupled with the high collateralization (over 300% currently), FEI is an extremely logical addition to the pool.

Future Goals

Fei’s deep ETH reserves present a strategic opportunity in this alliance. Right now, the 3crv meta is so dominant because on all of the major DEX’s, there are deep DAI, USDC, USDT pairs with ETH. This allows any of these three tokens to be used as a bridge to any other token on Ethereum. By making a pool akin to the tricrypto pool, but with d3 and ETH, it will open the d3 pool to all of the liquidity across DeFi without having to over rely on the big three stablecoins. Having this alternative is critical if some regulatory black swan happens, and would be an excellent fall back for our respective tokens.

NOTE:
This post was edited from its original version because we placed too much emphasis on stuff that may or may not come about well into the future. After some reflection, the teams involved feel more comfortable with this version.

    Honestly, I kinda thought that this is what the d4 pool would turn into. I don't love the crv3pool monopolizing the stablecoin markets or its reliance on USDT. I don't think a USDT implosion is imminent or anything, but it is a centralized, sketch USD coin that isn't based on US soil. Lack of control makes USDT a much more likely target for the US government than USDC.

    3pool needs to be challenged for liquidity depth for many reasons.

    Frax minting directly into the pool could be an issue if not used responsibly (or if malicious control over the minter is gained). To be fair, that applies to malicious control of just about any of the d3 contracts.

    Incentivizing deep stable liquidity that isn't linked to USDT is pretty much a public service to the DeFi community at large. I've already beat the drum about partnerships enough so I won't do so here.

    I'm sure you're expecting this question Scoop, but what happened to Liquity in this equation? Conspicuously absent.

    Regardless, I'd be in support of the proposal for similar reasons to the d4 pool previously.

    I am one MILLION percent in favour of anything that helps the Ethereum stablecoin ecosystem moving away from Tether.

    I think this is a great step forward, and obviously if the 3 core teams have discussed it then they've put a lot of thought into it. I guess my only question is what would the fallout be for Alchemix if something happened to one of the other projects? (black swan/lose the peg/hack/rug/etc.)

    What are the risks involved for each member of the D3 pool?

      I support this wholeheartedly.

      This is an absolute banger of a team up. The current big three are not in cahoots, just a natural flow of the early market. The space has changed, and I think now is the time to team up and create a direct line to ETH and beyond for the collective. Collaboration is the ethos, and this move will really put that to the test; i predict favorably. This alliance is very sensible.

      I think the pool akin to tricrypto with ETH would be really useful, and have strong benefits in reduced fees from direct access to the broader market. I do wonder, if we can use a metapool as an asset in tricrypto and still use that metapool as a bridge. TriCrypto uses USDT instead of 3pool. I think we may need to select one to bridge.

      KW710

      This is a very good question. I would also like to understand what contagion risk exists if one of the d3 components collapses.

      If one of them loses their peg for whatever reason it'll primarily be LPers in the d3 pool that are affected. There is potential for alUSD breaking peg in that case too but it seems unlikely.

      We have mitigation of that risk already in the form of: The Transmuter, alUSD curve pool, and a 200% collateralization for alUSD. Unless the pool contains a HUGE amount of alUSD in the future it wouldn't represent a major threat imo.

      If, as an example, Frax as a protocol just falls over dead - We'd poke it with a stick, call an ambulance, send flowers, pour out our drinks and carry on with Alchemix business.

      the three aforementioned centralized stables are indeed a very serious systemic risk to the entire defi ecosystem, with (imo) high occurrence probability and high damage.
      this proposal is a very welcomed step in the right direction - you got my vote!

      Very good proposal. I agree that we need to fight for decentralized stablecoins. Scoopy why didn't you partnership with liquity and their LUSD - 100% backed by ETH. They are growing rapidly after Olympus start to offer bonds with LUSD and OHM/LUSD. Liquity has quite nice community. I think that decentralized stablecoins should work together. The fight against centralized stablecoins will be long and unfair. It will be a fight between David and Goliath and we know who is who.

        Great proposal. Being a long time observer of and participant in the U.S. capital markets and regulatory system I have many reservations about today's centralized stablecoins. Having a strong group of truly decentralized options is a smart path forward. Also second the requests for deeper risk analysis and mitigation plans should one of the partner protocols fail.

        scoopy The staying power of USDT has baffled me. And, clearly, USDC has gone the regulated route, which is not good for decentralization. MAKER has been one of my largest holdings since the beginning but their business model has become polluted with all the USDC. I heard Rune say less than a week ago that they are really aiming to reduce their reliance on USDC. That's going to take a lot of time. I think it's time to offer a legit, decentralized alternative.

        Was MIM considered to be a constituent of the D3? Or did it have to be a subset of the D4 pool?

        MIM is aiming to be a big player in the decentralized stablecoin space - it boasts a 1.7bn market cap and is available cross-chain. They're also backed by decentralized collateral, thus is easier to reason about its ability to maintain a peg yet still maintains the decentralized goal.

        I'm all for this. Love this and looking forward to contributing.

        10 days later

        ImYourHodlberry
        Strong +I to this - LUSD with immutable protocol and no front end is the purest of the decentralized stables

        Write a Reply...