You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One of the frequent mistakes in new weighted pools has to do with the token composition. A common example is a user creating a 33/33/33 weighted pool with XYZ / WETH / USDC (where XYZ represents any arbitrary token). The thinking behind this is by adding both WETH and USDC to the pool it makes it easier to swap XYZ into either. In a vacuum this may be true, but by doing so this actually hurts slippage for this pool and also is not ideal for overall platform liquidity. Instead a better option is to pair XYZ with a WETH/USDC pool BPT (or even more ideally a bb-a-USDC/(wstETH/weth) pool BPT). Now if a swapper wanted to go from WETH->XYZ, for the same dollar amounts the 50/50 pool will have more liquidity and therefore better slippage for a given pair than 33/33. All of the frontends, aggregators, and arbitrageurs can automatically see the underlying tokens of the BPT paired and create direct paths from WETH->XYZ and USDC->XYZ with minimal gas costs.
Fees
There a few choices to make when setting the swap fees for a new pool:
Should the fee be permanently fixed?
If variable, who should control the updates?
Balancer Governance
A set address or contract
What should the swap fee amount be?
To set a permanent fee, an owner of 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 is set upon pool creation. However in general the recommendation is to allow Balancer governance (and delegated addresses) to dynamically adjust the fees. This is done by setting an owner of 0xba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1b.
There are lots of discussion and research around how to best set a swap fee amount, but a general rule of thumb is for stable assets it should be lower (ex: 0.1%) and non-stable pairs should be higher (ex: 0.3%).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Token Composition
Weighted Pools
One of the frequent mistakes in new weighted pools has to do with the token composition. A common example is a user creating a 33/33/33 weighted pool with XYZ / WETH / USDC (where XYZ represents any arbitrary token). The thinking behind this is by adding both WETH and USDC to the pool it makes it easier to swap XYZ into either. In a vacuum this may be true, but by doing so this actually hurts slippage for this pool and also is not ideal for overall platform liquidity. Instead a better option is to pair XYZ with a WETH/USDC pool BPT (or even more ideally a bb-a-USDC/(wstETH/weth) pool BPT). Now if a swapper wanted to go from WETH->XYZ, for the same dollar amounts the 50/50 pool will have more liquidity and therefore better slippage for a given pair than 33/33. All of the frontends, aggregators, and arbitrageurs can automatically see the underlying tokens of the BPT paired and create direct paths from WETH->XYZ and USDC->XYZ with minimal gas costs.
Fees
There a few choices to make when setting the swap fees for a new pool:
To set a permanent fee, an
owner
of0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
is set upon pool creation. However in general the recommendation is to allow Balancer governance (and delegated addresses) to dynamically adjust the fees. This is done by setting an owner of0xba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1ba1b
.There are lots of discussion and research around how to best set a swap fee amount, but a general rule of thumb is for stable assets it should be lower (ex:
0.1%
) and non-stable pairs should be higher (ex:0.3%
).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: