|
|
|
|
@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
|
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
type: entity
|
|
|
|
|
entity_type: decision_market
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Sanctum: Should Sanctum use up to 2.5M CLOUD to incentivise INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults?"
|
|
|
|
|
name: "Sanctum: Use up to 2.5M CLOUD to incentivise INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults"
|
|
|
|
|
domain: internet-finance
|
|
|
|
|
status: passed
|
|
|
|
|
parent_entity: "[[sanctum]]"
|
|
|
|
|
@ -11,30 +11,31 @@ proposal_url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/6mc1Fp6ds8XKA2jMzBDDhVwvY6ZCGg6SNq
|
|
|
|
|
proposal_date: 2025-03-05
|
|
|
|
|
resolution_date: 2025-03-08
|
|
|
|
|
category: "treasury"
|
|
|
|
|
summary: "Allocate up to 2.5M CLOUD tokens to incentivize INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults with 20% initial APY dropping to 15%"
|
|
|
|
|
summary: "Treasury allocation to deepen INF-SOL liquidity through yield incentives on Kamino managed vaults"
|
|
|
|
|
tracked_by: rio
|
|
|
|
|
created: 2026-03-11
|
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Sanctum: Should Sanctum use up to 2.5M CLOUD to incentivise INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults?
|
|
|
|
|
# Sanctum: Use up to 2.5M CLOUD to incentivise INF-SOL liquidity via Kamino Vaults
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
|
|
|
Proposal to allocate up to 2.5M CLOUD tokens for liquidity incentives on INF-SOL Kamino Vaults, offering 20% APY for the first month then 15% thereafter, targeting $2.5M TVL cap with minimum 6-month duration. The goal is to deepen INF-SOL native liquidity to support larger depositors and position INF as the liquidity nexus for Solana LSTs.
|
|
|
|
|
Sanctum proposed allocating up to 2.5M CLOUD tokens to incentivize INF-SOL liquidity through Kamino Vaults, offering LPs 20% initial yield for the first month, then 15% thereafter. The proposal aimed to address insufficient SOL native liquidity depth for INF, which despite strong performance (outperforming mSOL and jitoSOL), lacked the liquidity needed for large depositors and to serve as Solana's LST liquidity nexus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Market Data
|
|
|
|
|
- **Outcome:** Passed
|
|
|
|
|
- **Proposer:** proPaC9tVZEsmgDtNhx15e7nSpoojtPD3H9h4GqSqB2
|
|
|
|
|
- **Resolution:** 2025-03-08
|
|
|
|
|
- **Proposal Account:** 6mc1Fp6ds8XKA2jMzBDDhVwvY6ZCGg6SNqvHy4E6LS7Q
|
|
|
|
|
- **DAO Account:** 5n61x4BeVvvRMcYBMaorhu1MaZDViYw6HghE8gwLCvPR
|
|
|
|
|
- **Autocrat Version:** 0.3
|
|
|
|
|
- **Resolution:** 2025-03-08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Rationale
|
|
|
|
|
INF has consistently outperformed mSOL and jitoSOL but lacks deep SOL native liquidity for large exits. Over 95% of xSOL-SOL liquidity on AMMs comes from Kamino managed vaults, indicating user preference for automated position management. The INF-SOL Kamino vault has historically outperformed 100% INF holding due to high capital velocity. Industry standard is 15% combined APY for LP incentives; proposal offers 20% initial rate to bootstrap liquidity.
|
|
|
|
|
INF demonstrated strong performance relative to major Solana LSTs but lacked sufficient liquidity depth. The proposal noted that >95% of existing xSOL-SOL liquidity on AMMs comes from Kamino managed vaults, indicating user preference for third-party managed positions. The INF-SOL Kamino vault had already outperformed 100% INF HODL strategy due to high capital velocity (trading volume relative to TVL). Industry standard LP yield is 15% combined (fees + incentives), with 20% offered initially to bootstrap liquidity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Significance
|
|
|
|
|
Demonstrates futarchy pricing infrastructure spending where benefits are strategic (liquidity depth, institutional access) rather than direct revenue. Markets evaluated token dilution cost (2.5M CLOUD) against positioning value (becoming LST liquidity nexus). Shows futarchy can handle proposals with indirect, long-term value propositions.
|
|
|
|
|
This proposal demonstrates futarchy governance applied to treasury-funded liquidity incentives, a common DeFi governance decision type. The structured approach (time-limited higher yield transitioning to standard rate, capped TVL, managed by Kamino) shows how futarchy markets can price complex treasury allocation decisions with multiple parameters. The proposal passed without significant market contestation, reinforcing the pattern that futarchy markets show limited trading volume on uncontested decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Relationship to KB
|
|
|
|
|
- [[sanctum]] - treasury allocation decision
|
|
|
|
|
- [[MetaDAOs-futarchy-implementation-shows-limited-trading-volume-in-uncontested-decisions]] - market dynamics example
|
|
|
|
|
- [[futarchy-markets-can-price-cultural-spending-proposals-by-treating-community-cohesion-and-brand-equity-as-token-price-inputs]] - infrastructure spending pricing
|
|
|
|
|
- [[sanctum]] - parent entity governance decision
|
|
|
|
|
- [[MetaDAOs-futarchy-implementation-shows-limited-trading-volume-in-uncontested-decisions]] - confirms pattern of low volume on uncontested proposals
|
|
|
|
|
- [[futarchy-markets-can-price-cultural-spending-proposals-by-treating-community-cohesion-and-brand-equity-as-token-price-inputs]] - related mechanism for pricing non-financial proposals
|
|
|
|
|
|