Thanks for providing this intro to Metrom. The idea of conditional incentive campaigns has come up in the past, and it’s something that’s definitely worth exploring. As of today, the only platform that the UAC has used is Merkl, and the primary customization that we’ve played around with are the three gauges between fees, token A, and token B. Alternative campaigns under the growth program have also used OKX for distribution on Optimism, and we will likely be using Beefy for an upcoming campaign on Boba. But, by and large, Merkl is the go-to.
Most of the recent campaigns, especially for nascent pools where initially bootstrapping enough depth is important, we’ve relied on giving token A/B some weight. Much of this is because there’s a degree of unpredictability with campaigns that may be live for months at a time without revision to pools or gauges. More active campaigns, like the one we ran with Gauntlet for the Arbitrum LTIPP, had biweekly pool selection based on various stats, and that was entirely fee focused. The goal there was heavily biased towards volume. But since the UAC focuses mostly on bootstrapping funds, we do rely to a degree on token A/B. Metrom’s tick-based rewards adds an interesting element to this, where we can potentially target certain ranges specific pools. The duration of a campaign though matters a lot for deciding ranges. It’ll likely require more active management. Curious how dynamic Metrom is for starting/stopping/customizing campaigns as they’re underway.
Perhaps the best use case for conditional campaigns is those that bring initial uncertainty. When a new chain launches, the DAO may be hesitant to provide incentives due to the untested nature of the target chain. This was recently the case with Metal and Lisk. It makes sense to pitch the DAO with reasonable minimum payout, then select a corresponding lower+upper bound limits. I am curious how this would affect the LPs’ perception. Adding constraints helps the DAO track KPIs and budget campaigns better, but more complex restrictions may be a turn-off for certain LPs. Time weight is also important for TVL constraints. Is there a restriction for how long TVL has to sit in a pool before rewards are paid out? What if rewards hit the minimum payout and then TVL falls back?
The other aspect is fixed costs and agility with new chains. We’ll need to discuss how much Metrom will charge to deploy close to day one on new chains—which is of course aside from the variable costs on each campaign. Features like cross-chain incentives, where users earn on one chain and get paid on another, is also very helpful, especially when it comes to bridging the DAO’s funds. Having options here is nice.
Just set up a gc with you @0xVenky and the UAC to chat more.