Strategic Renewal for Support of Uniswap v3 Deployments

[GFXlabs]

Executive Summary

This proposal requests that the Uniswap DAO fund select Uniswap v3 deployments on the Oku interface. Over a year ago, the DAO funded deployments on six chains – Mantle, Gnosis, Linea, Blast, Polygon zkEVM, and Taiko – as part of a multichain expansion strategy. GFX Labs seeks renewal only for chains that have delivered meaningful impact to the Uniswap ecosystem. Rather than an across-the-board extension, we propose a targeted strategy based on usage metrics and ecosystem traction. By prioritizing high-performing deployments, the DAO can allocate resources more effectively while staying open to experimentation with promising new chains.

We also review for the DAO our offboarding policy for chains not recommended for renewal, ensuring a smooth experience for affected users and preserving trust in the Uniswap ecosystem.

Background

In 2024, the Uniswap DAO began funding multichain initiatives to extend v3’s reach into emerging networks. These efforts have put the Uniswap DAO in a position to gain market share on frontier chains before they scale. Early-stage chains benefit from access to the industry’s leading DEX—exposure they may not have received otherwise. Live across 36 blockchains and counting, Oku has served as a multichain liquidity conduit by improving interoperability, generating fees, enhancing experience for liquidity providers, and growing Uniswap’s dominance in the DEX vertical.

Since the launch of six DAO-sponsored chains, usage, performance, and TVL have varied significantly. Some chains have seen sustained user adoption and have promoted Uniswap v3 via Oku as their primary swap, bridge, and liquidity hub, while others have failed to grow from their promising onset of initial traction. The deployment of these chains on Oku allowed the DAO to trial new ecosystems while ensuring users had access to core Uniswap v3 functionality.

Chain Metrics

Chain	Launch Date	V3 pool TVL	Chain TVL	Total Vol.	Cumulative Fees
Gnosis	Aug ‘24	$13.5M	$275M	$1B	$592,000
Mantle	Jul ‘24	$431K	$218M	$620M	$234,000
Linea	Apr ‘24	$116K	$142M	$155M	$75,000
Taiko	Jun ‘24	$195K	$292M	$138M	$113,000
Polygon zkEVM	Jan ‘24	$1.2K	$2.64M	-	-
Blast	Apr ‘24	$118K	$112M	$4.5M	$14,000

Our overarching thesis for DAO-sponsored chain renewals is relatively simple: Trim the fat, fund what works, and save resources for higher-potential chains in the future.

Chain Notes

Gnosis - #1 multichain DEX. Substantial fee generation - clear choice for renewal
Mantle - #1 multichain DEX. Large chain TVL - room to grow v3 liquidity
Linea - Substantial chain TVL, favorable brand association - room to grow v3 liquidity
Taiko - Substantial chain TVL, opportunity to mobilize liquidity from native DEX Unagiswap
Polygon zkEVM: Polygon team is shutting down the network
Blast - Little progress on traction, and supported by Uniswap Labs’ frontend

As can be inferred from the table, the highest impact chains for Uniswap in terms of pool volume and fee generation are Gnosis and Mantle, which form the general basis of our funding request. Operational costs to host and maintain chains on Oku have always been publicly available through this forum and have not changed since we launched the first canonical deployment of v3.

Due to stagnation we advise against renewing Blast and Polygon zkEVM support. Additionally, Blast is available on the Uniswap Labs frontend. Subsequently, Oku will delist the chains after enacting our offboarding policy explained below. We welcome DAO discussion and input regarding overall sentiment and impact as it pertains to the greater Uniswap ecosystem for the respective chains.

Funding Request

We recommend the following chains be renewed for a one-year term:

• Gnosis
• Mantle

For the following chains, we are seeking discussion on whether the DAO should fund a one-year term renewal. Factors such as ecosystem impact, fee generation, network growth, and overall reputation should all be considered in the decision-making process.

• Linea
• Taiko

Not recommended for renewal:

• Blast
• Polygon zkEVM

Total: $120k ($60K per chain per year)

Costs associated with supporting these chains range from: Hosting, indexing, RPCs, dev-support, marketing, new features/updates, and ensuring global performance.

Offboarding Policy

Oku has created an offboarding policy for chains that opt out of a renewal agreement with us. To maintain trust and minimize user disruption, we announce our chain deprecation plan for a minimum of 30 days, followed by an additional 30-day offboarding period where users can access an interface for closing positions by request. At this point, the chain is fully offboarded from the Oku interface. As a non-custodial service, Oku never possesses users’ funds, and the act of closing positions can still be conducted manually after the offboarding period is complete. We feel this approach is most effective at maintaining amicable relationships with chains and users of the platform.

Conclusion

Serving as a high-performance, multichain liquidity hub, Oku provides first-in-class swap and bridge aggregation to ensure a consistent, smooth user experience for the most popular DEX across EVM. Accounting for ~10% of Uniswap liquidity, we’re positioned as an important contributor for new-chain expansion and growing Uniswap’s DEX dominance.

As we complete year-long service deployments for the chains outlined in this report, data on fee generation and usage paint clear next steps. We invite delegates to review and provide input regarding the potential renewal of Taiko and Linea. By requesting funds for only the most effective deployments, we conserve DAO spending while concentrating on markets with high potential for growth. Your support in this optimization effort will help shape a more efficient and impactful multichain strategy for Uniswap.

[AbdullahUmar]

I would personally be in favor of renewing all four chains: Gnosis, Mantle, Linea, and Taiko. Although I hold a higher degree of reluctance on Taiko.

Linea
All four of the chains have nearly over $150M in TVL, which could be stated as a loose metric for determining what chains uni v3 should be on. If the approach with Oku is that v3 accessibility is meant to be as ubiquitous as possible, continued presence on these chains would generally make sense. The scenario in my head that should be avoided is backtracking—for example, a team like Linea could one day announce a large ecosystem resurgence by way of any number of their partnerships, product synergies, and connections, bringing about a large influx of capital. In the event Uniswap wants to issue incentives, or apply for incentives from the Linea team if possible, then the flexibility for this should ideally be present. Deprecation of the Oku interface would make capitalizing on potential future opportunities difficult. Yes, the current activity is underwhelming on this particular deployment, but the cost we’re paying here is likely access to future growth. It may happen—it may not. But for Linea specifically, I wouldn’t necessarily rule it out. Linea could also in the future opt to prioritize a tried-and-tested DEX like uni v3 over alternative forks for reputation reasons, but that’s speculation of course.

Taiko
Taiko is an interesting one. My hunch is that their future growth potential is likely less than that of Linea. Much of the narrative surrounding their chain was focused on the zk tech utilized by the chain. They ran a handful of campaigns at launch to draw liquidity, and this got spread across numerous DEXs. The DEX landscape on Taiko is broad, most of which have seen large TVL attrition, including Uniswap. Taiko also did not prioritize Uni as a go-to DEX, making them more agnostic with DEX incentive allocation. Note that Linea also showed zero favorability to Uniswap so far either. If we were asked to renew the Taiko FE like 6-7 months ago, I would’ve been more fervently in support. It really seemed like there was genuine traction on blue chip pools, which is typically the asset sector that Uni plays in on these deployments. Below is an excerpt from a grant the growth program applied to in December 2024 (sadly it wasn’t accepted, but the point stands):

The story is quite a bit different now, however, hence my hesitation. All this to say—there was a period, even after incentives expired, in which this deployment performed decently. Could happen again in the right market conditions.

Gnosis
This makes sense to renew since Uniswap has become the main CLMM on the chain. It has also overtaken older deployments like Curve since Oku went live. Balancer is still the top DEX on the chain, but Uniswap has become a key player in the ecosystem. Their DAO has also prioritized the v3 deployment, as evidenced by the below RWA campaign they ran with Backed:

Mantle
Mantle is in a way similar to Linea. They are very well-capitalized and could run programs in the future that would enable Uniswap to benefit. Such optionality should ideally be preserved. There’s almost no chance though that their team would exclusively prioritize uni v3 if they don’t attain the Uniswap.org FE. They’ve been difficult to negotiate with in the past around this matter and were unwilling to allocate any incentive matching to Uniswap due to no access to the Labs FE. However, one of the benefits with larger chains like Mantle is that partner protocols are often willing to participate in growth on those chains. For example, as this deployment went live, Gamma provided some incentive matching on their end. If potential partners like ALMs are actively involved in certain ecosystems, Uniswap has the potential to leverage those connections. This is not the case with all chains.

Polygon zkEVM and Blast

• Blast has the Labs UI. No need to further support them alternatively. Their chain’s narrative has also fizzled.
• zkEVM is, candidly put, dead. Polygon seems to be focused on Katana now—and POS. Polygon POS also has v4 now, and they’re focused on growing that deployment. Also, iirc, the DAO did not fund the zkEVM deployment.

Below is a list of chains that the DAO has subsidized Oku on:

Chain	Oku Implementation
Linea	$105,000
Blast	$105,000
Mantle	$105,000
Taiko	$105,000
Gnosis	$105,000
Celo	$105,000
BOB	$105,000 (structured as a rebate to BOB, not paid to Oku)

[kpk]

Thanks for putting this forward — we appreciate the structured approach Oku has taken in evaluating the outcomes of the Onboarding Package program across different chains. Looking at actual performance data to guide renewal decisions feels like the right path for ensuring DAO resources are used effectively.

We agree with the framework proposed and would support renewals for Gnosis, Mantle, and Linea:

• Gnosis stands out as a clear success case — Uniswap became a top DEX on the chain, retained usage after incentives ended, and is contributing meaningful revenue back to the protocol.
• Mantle has seen solid volume throughput, even if TVL is lower than Gnosis. That activity shows there’s real usage and traction worth supporting further.
• Linea is still early in its lifecycle, but we see strong future potential here — especially considering its connection to Consensys initiatives like the MetaMask Card. The brand association alone is valuable, and we think it makes sense to continue supporting it.

On the other chains, we don’t see strong enough traction or retention to justify ongoing subsidisation of a dedicated frontend.