Stablecoin pools - Fee changes

[tfns]

@tenzent

Very interesting over all, why is 1% more ideal than .2% for USDC? are we looking at Volume to Fees Ratio here exclusively ? at 0.2% we are seeing close to the same revenue with higher volume which might translate into swaps elsewhere in our pools.

@NIX is probably the best to expand on this, but I should note that the graphs above don’t include market share above and below the swap fee changes and capture relatively long periods of time. The fee was set at 0.2% on the stablepools during periods of higher volume/volatility. Therefore, although a good benchmark to analyse pool performance, average daily volume and fee at different swap fees shouldn’t be taken solely into consideration when deciding what fees to set the pools.

Furthermore, the experiment is ongoing and the goal to maximise profit for all LPs in the USDT, USDC and DAI pools is still being pursued, with more data analysis to come in a near future.

Finally, from Proposal: Change stablepool fees USDT/USDC/DAI to 1.0%, 1.0% and 1.5%, respectively

@tfns

This proposal is a continuation of the latest stablepool fee experiment. Data obtained from the experiment suggests that the revenue was maximised for the USDT pool, which had a 1% pool fee set, with a 170% increase in fees accrued compared to when the USDT pool fee was at 0.2% (Figure 1).

This proposal seeks to continue this experimentation by changing the pool fee for the USDC pool to 1.0% and DAI to 1.5%. The goal is to maximise profits for USDT and USDC, and experiment with the DAI pool to find an upper limit where we observe a decrease in fees obtained.

Figure 1 - Fees accrued in the USDT, USDC and DAI pools during the 12 days before the pool fee change and 12 days after the change.