0x Polygon Grant Application from Ruler and Cover

Hi mintcloud, you are correct on the transaction counts. Unfortunately there is no easy way for us to get the number or unique takers. We used 0xtracker.com and semi-manual parsing to get you the above data. Getting the unique makers will involve writing a full featured parsing script. Before we do that please let me mention that we do keep track of the liquidity providers on the books for the purposes of rewarding them. We take snapshots randomly every hour so we might of missed some users but at the very list there were 15 market makers on the Eth pair and the ALCX pair had at minimum of 9 wallet market making (worth noting this pair was alusd/ALCX instead of DAI so entry barrier was higher. ).

I know this is not ideal information to answer your question, so if you think you need additional information we will write the parser. Just wanted to ask prior allocating sparse dev recourses to this.

2 Likes

This is helpful. I actually meant ‘takers’, meaning wallets filling those orders. Do you guys tag orders with a specific fee recipient? We could help figure out how many takers there were in your markets.

From what I gather, you would like to continue running a sort of ‘liquidity mining’ program to incentivize liquidity (e.g. open orders) in your books to then attract users to fill those orders (so, takers of those orders).

This is definitely back of the napkin math (and assumes I understand your data right): in the month of August, you roughly allocated ~$86,000 for the entire program (18,600 * 4 for wETH/DAI, $3,000 * 4 for alUSD/ALCX). That resulted in ~$3.5M in trading volume by X users (that’s the number I’d like to know) in roughly 450 trades (assuming 15 daily avg). Roughly 20 wallets were rewarded for their activity.

You propose to like to run a similar program (~100k montly run rate, at least on months 1&2) across more markets and two products.

Assuming the orders of magnitude are right, I believe it’s even more important to understand how many unique wallets this program ultimately served, that is how many unique traders (takers) are included in those 450 transactions. Also, are any of the takers ALSO providing liquidity?
Assuming it’s 100 traders, it would mean we should expect a spend ~$1000 per user, too high of an acquisition cost in my opinion.

What I mean is: liquidity is definitely important, but how about getting ‘taker’ users? Believe me, I know it’s a very difficult chicken&egg problem, but good liquidity in itself doesn’t achieve much.
Have you considered for example keeping the program confined to 1-2 markets, and rather allocating the rest of the proposed funds to marketing/user acquisition? I would personally find that a more robust strategy.

Hope these suggestions are useful and productive, even though I realize I come across as ‘bad cop’ here. I encourage others to give their opinion!

2 Likes

Thank you for the patience with us on getting the information you have requested ready. Just to get anyone reading this up to speed, the question was to show how many unique takers there were for each pair that we had in July and how many of them were active liquidity providers. We were looking at the WETH and the ALCX pair. We could also offer similar information for other pairs as well now.

For the ETH pair we had 23 unique takers and 15 of them were providing liquidity.

For ALCX we had 36 unique participants and 9 of them were liquidity providing.

We definitely would like to make sure that the number of takers grows. Our revenue depends on the amount of takers and not the liquidity in the book, so we are aligned with 0x in that sense.

Here are few things that got done since last post in order to make sure that the number of takers keeps growing:

  1. In August we added an ability to simply enter the amount of collateral you want to borrow against and we will automatically fill that across multiple orders at the best rate. Essentially a one click borrow.

  2. We are having conversations with large protocols that are thinking of offering liquidity in the order books for their own users at a fixed rate. That in combination with one click borrowing will significantly increase the amount of new takers.

  3. We have mock ups for a much more friendly user UI that is currently being developed. That will make borrowing even easier.

  4. We are connecting to the 0x order book on BSC, ETH and Polygon.

We also took into account the previous recommendations that you had and we decided to split the grant spendings across incentives and marketing. We would also want to keep the KPI based structure. Here is the reconsidered break down:

Ruler

Collateral Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6
wMATIC $20,000 $20,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000
ETH $20,000 $20,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

Total Guaranteed Emission: $80,000 (first and second month)
Upfront Marketing: $20,000 (for 2 month)
Total KPI Based: $64,000

Cover

Coverage For Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6
Anyswap $20,000 $20,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000
Xpollinate $20,000 $20,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000
Matic Bridge $20,000 $20,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

Total Guaranteed Emission: $120,000 (for first and second month)
Upfront Marketing: $20,000 (for 2 month)
Total KPI Based: $96,000

Grand Total for Both Ruler and Cover:

Guaranteed Emission: $200,000 (for first and second month)
Upfront Marketing: $40,000 (for 2 month)
KPI Based: $160,000

Breakdown of the marketing budget.

Educational Components - $7,000 per month per protocol:

Ruler is inherently difficult to understand as many of our current users have noted. Simplification, education and discussion are the primary marketing tools besides reduction of gas fees, needed to grow the user base.

We are planning to launch an educational campaign aimed at simplifying Ruler as well as Cover including building websites devoted to this like: https://learnruler.com/ as well as a YouTube pages with tutorial videos. We have already identified partners that we can work with on production. We expect to begin working on these materials prior to Polygon launch.

Advertising Components $3,000 per month per protocol:

In order to attract users to the content that we produce we need to make sure we also invest in the advertising of it. Here are a few thing that we are planning on doing in order to attract attention to our protocols:

  • Two (2) AMAs on order books for both Ruler and Cover communities.
  • Two (2) live podcast episodes with @DefiExpectations on how to take advantage of our protocols.
  • Two (2) collaborations with @Defislate A “Deep Dive” thread on Twitter, linked to our Discord and Telegram servers.

We will also consider doing airdrops for our users in order to encourage the spread of our educational content as well as the live sessions.

We are open to any feedback in regards to this suggestion and would love to answer any clarification questions. We are also open to scheduling an open session for the 0x community where we can answer all of the questions about our protocols or how this grant allocation aligns with the 0x interest. Thank you!

Thanks @cryptocorgi555 - imo the upfront investment feels still too steep for a strategy that didn’t bring convincing results so far.
I welcome greatly the suggestions around budgeting marketing activities.

My suggestion - would love to hear what @nikita thinks here - would be to craft a plan with a current 0xEVE grants ($50k), to be renewed if KPIs look promising.

For example, how about starting with 2 market @20k + 10k marketing for one month, and then re-assess as we measure impact?

Alright looks like this can be closed.
Best of luck @cryptocorgi555 and team!