RFC Strengthening our foundation for protocol owned liquidity

Notice This proposal has been formalized into PTIP-85 PTIP-85 Strengthening Protocol Owned Liquidity and is live for voting https://vote.pooltogether.com/proposals/62

TLDR: Proposal to increase the mainnet active trading range POL with $100k USDC (swapped to ETH) and 200k POOL, to be executed by the executive-team and custody returned to treasury.

Please have a read of the proposal specifics and vote on the poll, any other ideas, questions or concerns, please share.

Do you support this proposal to increase Protocol Owned Liquidity?

0 voters


Approximately 4 months ago, PoolTogether deployed its POL on mainnet: PTIP 82 - A foundation for protocol owned liquidity.

The deployed POL liquidity ranges have behaved correctly as expected (more info can be found in this post: Ethereum Mainnet POL - Review. However, the depth of liquidity for trading can still be improved to make sure that traders can have a better experience with less slippage. Therefore it is time to solidify our POL position.


Since our initial POL deployment we have seen an increase in trading volumes: Uniswap Info.

Adding to the active range will support more trading volume growth.

Moreover with the Hyperstructure planned to launch later this year, the protocol needs to strengthen its POL position, as POOL liquidity becomes key infrastructure to the protocol. The PoolTogether Prize Savings Hyperstructure


$100k USDC swapped to ETH and 200k POOL added as liquidity in the active range (.0004 WETH/POOL - .0012 WETH/POOL). POOL that does not balance with the WETH will be added in a second position from current price to .0012 WETH/POOL (active range upper-tick).

With current pricing - $100K USDC would be converted to 60.79 ETH and paired with 96.3K POOL. 103.7k POOL would be added in a second position.

We propose this to be executed by the executive-team and both NFTs would be returned to the timelock for custody.

In the event that price falls below .0005 WETH / POOL between proposal and execution - the USDC should be returned to treasury and only POOL added over the current price at the time.

The proposed change would mean a 166% increase in ETH and 136% increase in POOL compared to our current position in the active range.

Building a stronger foundation for liquidity will prepare us to support the launch of the hyperstructure. Liquidity on other chains will still need to be considered as we get closer to a hyperstructure launch and have a better idea of the go to market plan.

Thanks to @BRONDER and @Lonser - this is a Finance Team post.


Thanks for the RFC all. Do we have any numbers showing how the difference in slippage numbers now vs what this will do for traders?


I support this, though I’d love some more clarity around the range.

I find it hard to think in Ether terms! It looks like the USD range you’re proposing is $0.12 - $0.62. Why so low? Would be helpful to hear your thoughts.

Seems like we’d want to provide more support around the current price, no?


Good question! Sorry there was a typo, not .00012 but .0012, same as our current active range. Here is a one year ETH/POOL chart that I hope will clarify the range

.0004 – .0012 ETH per POOL


We do not. We have not found a tool to estimate this and have even asked on Uni discord but no reply. Let me know if you find anything. It will of course depend where the price is and how much is being traded. It’s not linear but we are proposing to more than double the liquidity in the active trading range and can assume that will greatly improve slippage making larger buys more inviting.


In general I support the idea of increasing the market liquidity for POOL. Similar to the stETH proposal though I get the impression the treasury is looking to move USD into more ETH… for no good reason. The first thing that comes to mind is, the 100k additional ETH that was bought, converted to stETH and returned to treasury; why would you not just have used that for this? I don’t understand why there’s a need for this risk on approach.

And one question, how much fees has the current POL earned and over what period? Thanks.


I believe those are 2 different topics. The decision to increase ETH exposure was suggested by the community and approved on a recent PTIP.

I can clarify why we prefer adding POOL/ETH liquidity instead of POOL/USDC liquidity though. First, we’ve seen that POOL has more correlation with ETH than USDC. This allows us to deploy tighter ranges and thus improve liquidity and slippage. Moreover, thinking about the hyperstructure, we believe that ETH has better liquidity than USDC with other tokens that might be added as yield sources. This will allow the liquidators to avoid an extra step when converting the yield into POOL, which will save the AMM fees of that extra trade.

Regarding the fees, you can take a look at our recent post where some numbers where shared: Ethereum Mainnet POL - Review.

You can also take a look at live numbers in poolexplorer: Pool Together V4

The POL on mainnet was deployed on the 22nd of September 2022.


To increase with 250k USD, not 350k USD equivalent which this proposal effectively achieves. My point is we already have the ETH to do this, why would we buy more?


+1 agree with proposal as well as @Brendan’s point re: clarity on range.

How are you guys executing the swap & what’s the slippage if any?


The Executive team most recently used Cowswap and I think it worked well enough. No worries for slippage from USDC to ETH.


This proposal seems to be strongly supported. The Finance Team will move to putting this PTIP up and onchain for voting.


Adding to this, I think we used swap.defillama.com to get the aggregator with the least slippage (at that time Cowswap) and would probably use it again.

1 Like

I have edited the original post to indicate that the proposal has been formalized into PTIP-85 PTIP-85 PTIP-85 Strengthening Protocol Owned Liquidity

I invite any further discussions on the proposal to continue here


Status update: Proposal is live for voting PoolTogether Governance