Proposal: Whitelist Silo Finance (SILO) + 200K Trading Liquidity / Treasury Match

Proposal: Whitelist Silo Finance (SILO) + 200K Trading Liquidity / Treasury Match

This proposal is expected to appear on Snapshot for voting on Sunday at 11:00 AM . Make sure to stake your vBNT for voting before this date and time to participate in the DAO decision.


  • This proposal seeks to whitelist the SILO token.
  • Requested Trading Liquidity of 200K BNT
  • This proposal will be run parallel to its sister proposal on SILO Governance and is contingent on Silo Governance committing 100K BNT Worth of SILO to the Pool Filling in Half the initial Liquidity.
  • The SILO Dao Agrees to not pull its liquidity for a year’s time as a show of good faith.
  • There is no Reason to doubt the legitimacy of the project/team. Previous Concerns are addressed below.
  • Liquidity should be activated after April 21st since this will mark the beginning of CVX/CRV emissions and will act as a catalyst event for price. This is being done in order to avoid IL costs to the BancorDAO.
  • Silo is a lending platform focusing on single asset pools that interconnect via a bridge asset, removing the security issues seen in shared market lending.

Contract Address: 0x6f80310ca7f2c654691d1383149fa1a57d8ab1f8

Project Website:


Silo is an isolated-markets lending protocol where all pools are plugged together through what is called the “Bridge” asset. Much like Uniswap pools, all lending pairs are paired with ETH and the ecosystem’s native stable-coin USDs (Working Name). Silos can achieve cross collateral loans in the same way a DEX router does by going for example from WBTC → ETH to ETH → LINK. This novel design allows each market’s risk to be isolated while also preventing fragmentation of liquidity.


SILO does not have an elastic supply, or rebase mechanism. The SILO token has a current total supply of 103,250,000.00 SILO. Contracts are standard ERC-20 OpenZeppelin contracts. The contracts don’t have admin privileges that grant unrestricted burning of tokens.

The top 15 contracts and addresses with the highest concentration of SILO are Token Distribution contracts, wallets with 3.1122%, 0.6133%, 0.4667% of supply.

Figure 1 - Top 15 contract and address with the highest concentration of SILO

Over the next 4 years, 1B $SILO tokens will be minted without the possibility of future inflation. Here is an overview of how the tokens are allocated along with the release schedule:

Only 10.2% of total token supply will enter circulation in the first 6 months.

  • Genesis Protocol-Owned Liquidity (10%) — Distributed in the public auction; claimable immediately after the auction

  • Community Treasury (45%) — Linear vesting for 3 years; controlled by the community through governance

  • Early Contributors (6.75%) — Linear vesting for 4 years with 6-month cliff starting after TGE

  • Founding Contributors (21.75%) — Linear vesting for 3 years with 6-month cliff starting after Token Generation Event (TGE)

  • Early Community Rewards (0.2%) — Airdropped to community members in January 2022

  • Early Investors & Early Advisors (6.30%) — Linear vesting for 2 years with 6-month lock starting after TGE

  • Future Contributors & Future Advisors (10%) — Linear vesting for 4 years with 1-year cliff starting after joining the DAO

Trading Liquidity Reasoning

The SILO DAO will match a great amount of the BNT provided by the DAO. In addition it is important we seed this pool with a reasonable amount of liquidity given its concentrated curve pools are at 2 Million USD currently and with the CVX incentives going live on the 21st we should see that raise tremendously. Here are some projections for Curve Liquidity after incentives are applied:

Besides the Curve Pools we also see a substantial amount of liquidity currently in UNI V3 and the volume numbers are also incredibly lucrative:

Price & Stats

Silo Finance Price $0.765466
Market Cap $79,104,540
Market Cap Dominance 0.00%
Trading Volume $3,289,743
Volume / Market Cap 0.0416

Community and Communication





Silo Finance is currently undergoing a variety of different audits by quality firms and individuals:

  • ABDK is Auditing the Protocol.
  • Quantstamp is Re-Auditing the Protocol.
  • Formal Code Reviews by known developers such as Mudit Gupta.

The Protocol is also launching an Immunify Campaign currently being finalized.

Previous Concerns

I believe there was a breakdown in communication here, From reading that one might think the treasury was selling SILO to CVX but this is not the case. The CVX acquired by the treasury was purchased with USDC from the original raise and furthermore the purchase did not come out of left field. This had been discussed with the community extensively through discord (the idea was brought up by community members) and since the convex/silo ecosystem have great overlap there wasn’t any contention to this buy. As I see it there is no reason against listing, especially due to the Project’s high commitment to conservative emissions.

To further address these concerns we also propose that the Whitelisting is applied after the activation of CVX/CRV rewards. This will likely be a catalyst event for price and we would like the Pool to be activated after some price discovery has occurred to avoid IL costs to the BancorDAO.


  • FOR
1 Like

Sister Proposal: SILO Liquidity Pool on Bancor V3 - Silo Governance


Thank you @tenzent for the proposal.

Hello everyone, this is Aiham from Silo. I am happy to answer any questions/concerns.


Hi, my concern was not the selling of SILO - it was this line " we decided to buy with dev fund and ask the DAO to reimburse it.

It seemed a bit odd to me to be using the dev fund to buy a token, and then asking the DAO to pay you back.

What would have happened if the DAO did not pay you back? Would the dev fund have later sold the CVX? Or would dev funds have been sold for CVX?

Should dev funds be used betting on markets?

@aiham.eth - Can you please provide clarity on this?

1 Like

The Dev Fund could be used immediately while the DAOs funds I believe had a constraint of 10 days. This was all happening during the convex unlocks (Price was at 17$) so it was time sensitive, I don’t think you’ll find one comm member in SILO that wasn’t on board though. If the DAO did not pay the Dev fund back it would have been sold back to the original USDC to fund operations but there was great agreement on the matter as can be seen by the tally vote (No one voted against) Tally | Silo Proposal.


Thank you - I hope this provides some context.

Leading to the day we purchased CVX, the community had been discussing the best way to build liquidity. Several proposals had been published in our governance forum, then summarized in medium posts, and socialized heavily in our discord. Between using SILO to incentivize liquidity, getting a Tokemak reactor, purchasing CVX, the community had settled on the idea that purchasing CVX was the right move.

On the day we bought CVX, the token had dropped significantly in price. It was a great opportunity for the DAO to get in. We were faced with a major problem: If we wait for governance to clear funds - that would take 11 days - and opportunity would be missed. If we buy with development fund, we bypass governance and might not get reimbursed.

We consulted with our most active token holders, other projects involved in Curve Wars, and then decided to buy CVX immediately, knowing there is a possibility that the DAO would not reimburse - the event we were prepared for knowing CVX was oversold and that there was a slim chance we would not be able to sell off CVX to recover funds if needed.

What we did was part of the community plan but sped up by 10 days. Since then we have asked the DAO to authorize $2m for special use to avoid such events.

To your questions:
1- No, development funds should strictly be spent on development and protocol growth. That’s why we have asked the DAO to authorize the discretionary fund.
2- We would have sold CVX to recover funds had the DAO not reimbursed us.

Several proposals discussing building liquidity, including buying CVX
Forum conversations:

we summarized options in two medium posts