Diversifying Treasury ETH holdings with LSTs
As of the last 14 Epochs, the DAO has begun accruing a significant amount of ETH as part of their treasury. This has helped diversify the treasury available for the DAO, and opens additional possibilities for the DAO to participate in securing the Ethereum network and receiving ETH rewards as a part of this.
The following research thread aims to open the conversation of considering to use part of the ETH treasury of the DAO towards LST diversification, as well as the choice of LSTs, its conversion methods to minimise the amount of manual work.
Assisting with staker diversity of the Ethereum Network
Ethereum and its related L2s constitute the vast majority of ParaSwap’s volume, and as such, the health of the network is also important for the long-term health of ParaSwap. For this reason, there are different factors that are worth considering when selecting potential tokens for LST diversification.
In addition to the degree of decentralization of the validators being used, another important factor that has recently been gathering more attention is the importance of Client Diversity, especially towards the avoidance of a supermajority client. While it is difficult to monitor what client a validator is running, there are different sites that can help report on this as well as the importance of the diversity, such as https://supermajority.info/
Automation Considerations
Unless this diversification is a one-time event - which comes with many downsides, such as slippage, potential premium, and the stake ever decreasing -, it’s likely that if a diversification proposal were to pass, it would require multiple conversations over time. Doing such conversions, or any swap for that matter, is currently challenging to coordinate on MultiSignature solutions such as the one the Governance Committee has.
Because of the coordination challenges, as well as the potential need of rebalancing of different assets, options for conversion, such as:
- LST Liquidity Pools: Automatically balance the assets within the pool, and give swap fees whenever the pool is used, as well as potential rewards on top of it. However, they might also increase the smart contract risk and impermanent loss from asset deviation. Additionally, the best solution would be to add liquidity to an existing pool, which also means less choice by the DAO of the assets.
- Automated Vault Conversions: By depositing the assets to the pool, these are then converted depending on the parameters set by the vault creator. The amount of fine tuning needed, as well as the degree of trustlessness of the vault, vary greatly from product to product. However, once it is setup it would simplify the epoch-by-epoch process (would have to simply deposit ETH to the vault),
Asset split, and deciding conversion percentage
Despite everything that has been discussed above, having a certain amount of unstaked ETH could still be preferable , as it both carries a lower degree of smart contract risk as well as more versatility of usage for future proposals. Prior to the final version of the proposal, different factors are going to have to be considered, such as:
- Should the conversion to LSTs be a one-time event, or an ongoing epoch-by-epoch distribution?
- What are the advantages of holding a basket of LSTs, as opposed to a single one?
- Are there other major usecases that could be placed on the ETH assets? Eg. Depositing them on AAVE, incentives, gauges for sePSP2 pools.