20° AVC Subcommittee meeting | Stability Scope | Sovereign Finance | Maker DAO

Transcript

[Music] [Music] hi everyone welcome welcome today it's  our 20th ABC super comedy meeting we are already in week H week four so today's focus  on is stability stability scope we have some special announcement before we begin but let  me go to the next slide well this is as always

I'm going to share our notion with all the  information from Sovereign Finance ABC so there you have it if this is your first time  there you can find all the useful information to understand more of our work and I see a lot  of familiar faces thank you for coming um and as always if you appreciate our work and share  our values be an align delegate of our Sovereign Finance AG ABC you can find also our align  governance strategy document on our in our notion this 20 ABC Su committee meeting  has been organized and prepared by the

two members of sovereign Finance ABC sit ladam  and Ox rout and these are the topics for today before before I mention this there is something  else today as well in just a couple of hours and three hours we have our fourth call in  Spanish we are really happy about it and so if anyone speaks Spanish or not would like to  join us that's going to be at 1 pm UTC if you want to know our our laugh Community uh we're  going to be discussing what's been happening in this last two months uh the most relevant  information from maker from the Scopes from

the subd from the work that we've been doing so  that's going to be um that's the first thing and um course we have seen kianga fori we have seen uh  retro from yes so it doesn't matter if you really don't understand Spanish but you want to connect  with the Latin Community you can join us well having said that um these are the topics for today  since it's a stability scope which personally is one of the more complex Scopes um we have invited  a guest to explain us um about his insights on on

thatas proposal and uh how balancers technology  can be beneficial for for maker as always a big shout out to our 80s uh to Blue Clocky p uh for  sharing his their comments on this scope we have also are going to discuss this later and those are  like the the main topics so before we start with with our guest before I am going to give like a  very simple um context of what been happening and then uh Mike which is also here and already here  thank you for your time is going to give us uh

uh his presentation so before that um yes there  I'm going to like explain in a very briefly way um we have of course a proposal that is been  shared by jadas and the Forum that it's involv improving mechanisms that impact security um to  economic aspects Capital efficiency and let's go further into this so he's been sharing uh four  poost explaining in detail about this I am going to share it here so this is all the post so far  about the proposal and um let's just start with

the first post um which very briefly I'm going to  say this um about the the usage of D um it it's efficiency the losses incur um and the advantages  of using e as a pairing so this what what do you think about this about um switching to to e um  because this suggest that uh using IF as a pairing for mkr token uh we believe that it is a better  performance uh and it's would make like more appealing for for L LPS um and then the second  post which is also the the one that I'm showing

the slides about um okay so let's bring the  problem the there is a concern that the proposed model of using mkr tokens as coll Lal for d for  Dions isn't good for the system well we actually believe uh that it's a good idea uh of course with  the right conditions um and that we believe that any asset could work as collateral as long as the  rules are well designed um in this particular post is all also uh it's about the the quality of  collateral and how this depends on how easily

this can be traded so using mkr as collateral  might reduce its trading activity and this of course could lead to to to problems um here we are  uh in mentioning about the case of uh CRV um which has most of its tokens locked up and this makes  it volatile and in makes it not suitable for use as as collateral so we uh it is mentioned this  specific case since we want to avoid a situation where um mkr becomes like uh CR uh so what's the  the the proposal what's the the the solution uh

well instead of using mkr directly uh let's use an  LP token and we mention it here Vall which is uh this is go Mike is going to explain a little bit  better about the 80 ball 20 with like 8020 the strategy and um well I mean this way mkr holders  can keep their assets locked but uh main maintain liquidity uh which is of course important for  stability now some of um benefits from this proposed approach first is that there's going to  be um more liquidity um Less Price volatility the

potential for earning extra rewards and um lower  risk of losses due to price change now let's focus on the the next part that it's about improving  governance so um with this proposal governance can be improved by bringing in more liquidity and  linking it to governance decisions uh here also to mention about um how this let's say like more in  simple terms this is in order to use mkr tokens as collateral for loans and how this is important  to maintain liquidity um of course using like a

different approach with the to I just mentioned to  keep assets locked while also ensuring liquidity in order to as I mentioned before to improve to  governance and well um generate um profits so I'm not going to get into very technical stuff since I  that's why we have a mic in here um so I encourage everyone I encourage all EOS system actors that  I uh I guess that I also understand way better um to command to get feedback to ask questions  so we can get um the most relevant information that could help us improve our proposal and in  general imp improve the the scope so I'm gonna

go back to Mike thank you for for being here now  it's it's your the stage is yours first I would like you to uh give us a bit a brief introduction  uh beef U comments about your background and then please start um explaining why I mean on on  on jm's proposal and your insights about it why balancers Technologies can be beneficial for  maker uh don't if you have any slides prepare if not it's okay let me know yep uh I don't have any  visuals so I'll just get talking hi everyone my name is Mike B I have been working with balcer for  over three years uh I'm a longtime Dex maximalist

I have been working in dexes ever since 2015 when  Atomic swaps were a thing back in Bitcoin so I like to think I'm pretty educated about the space  of onchain Market making um I've been working with jadm team on potentially using bouncer technology  in the maker ecosystem as it uh transitions to endgame so yeah with that introduction I'll just  kind of get into it um bouncer is a customizable generalized amm with the ability to quickly build  new pool types in a on a safe battle tested base layer called the balancer Vault I'm here to  voice my support for the proposals that jmat has put up thus far so the first topic that Jad  matat brought up is the proposal to replace the maker die univ V2 pool in the Elixir module with  an 8020 pool made up of maker eth I know there are

a lot of people on both sides of the argument  some people arguing that it's good to have Dy paired with maker but uh I think it's evident  that there are possible scenarios in which die dep pegging could negatively affect the maker die  pair to the point where it's no longer able to be utilized as a efficient liquidity Source or as a  security layer to help restore die peg in addition there is a large impermanent loss risk of the  make or die pair simply due to the two assets being uncorrelated every time the price of maker  moves even in line with the greater Market it will result in LP's exposing value for arbitragers to  pick off pairing maker with a correlated asset exogenous to the maker ecosystem in this case  eth could have beneficial effects from a risk management point of view as there's now guarantee  liquidity that is entirely separate from the state

of die in its Peg uh speaking from a personal  perspective I actually don't think that having a maker die unv2 pool is really that efficient to  help onchain die liquidity given how ubiquitous it is across defi is a stable quote asset uh there's  basically dying every stable swap out there for the most part so uh and eth is definitely one  of the most liquid onchain assets and it routes easily to other major assets so allowing to be  allowing maker to be paired with eth would allow maker to be directly routed across various major  asset classes just by being paired with eth um so yeah and uh another proposal to go over is jm's  enhanced Sagitarius engine which helps solve the issue of onchain maker liquidity by replacing  single stake maker with an 8020 pool of maker

eth the 8020 pool has an exposure quite similar  to just holding maker on its own assuming maker and eth remain relatively correlated um I can  post in impermanent loss calculator in the in the comments after this if you want to play  around with the numbers but uh in a scenario where maker gets locked up in a single-sided  manner to participate in governance there is less liquidity for maker available on the market  this means as governance participation increases the liquidity of maker could actually decrease  which uh I consider Pro problematic uh this is along the lines what happened with curve where  most of the supply was locked up in V curve and curve had to separately incentivize curve  liquidity at Great cost the total protocol emissions and that means lping with curve sort of  always had an opportunity cost doing so because it wouldn't be locked um and that liquidity obviously  dried up when they got hacked um it didn't have to

be a hack though it could have easily just been  the LPS just withdrawing because they're free to withdraw at any time they want and it's probably  liky that LPS would withdraw in times of great volatility um so what happened was that there  was basically no curve liquidity left on chain which meant that all protocols that had curve as  collateral were in a very bad place since they would be unfit to perform liquidations uh luckily  it never really got to that point but I think we can all really imagine how bad it would have been  had that had that actually uh happened had it hit the liquidation price on these major protocols you  would have had a left with a lot of bad debt and obviously with maker cdps having bad debt really  is uh not a good thing because it threatens the die Peg so if the 8020 enhanced sagarius engine  becomes a standard means of participating in maker

governance it means that liquidity will actually  increase as participation in governance increases on top of that that liquidity would be guaranteed  because it's locked this means that people can't really withdraw it the moment there's a little  bit of volatility it means that that liquidity will always be there on chain and you can kind of  almost see it akin to protocol own liquidity uh for a short period of time since it is forcibly  locked uh that guarantee would allow for more flexible parameters on the CDP module given  the guaranteed onchain liquidity of maker which allows for greater Capital efficiency for those  participating which I think we can all agree is a good thing uh another thing too is maker can  also control the swap Fe On The 8020 pool which can allow for greater flexibility for various  market conditions um making an 8020 pool core to

governance participation has worked very well for  Bouncer and other projects like a radiant and many others we have over over aund million of onchain  liquidity without having to spend a dime of indal incentives which I think is uh pretty powerful  um for those a little bit scared about getting into the 8020 model it's possible to have a sort  of uh like a dual model where some governances single stake and some of is 820 stake that's  what a did that's what Paras swap did and it can provide better flexibility from a participant  perspective uh to summarize if this model were to go into place there would be always be sufficient  onchain liquidity to liquidate maker through a pool with an asset that is exogenous to the maker  ecosystem which can help partially segregate the risk of die pegging for maker liquidity and given  how much maker and dial are already so inherently

connected I think the segregation of risk is  a desirable property uh additionally bouncer has a program to supply projects integrating  820 governance systems with a pool of bow for free so they can begin directing B emissions to  their governance system uh which will obviously be a source of revenue for maker they were to do  this for free um and yeah that's sort of uh where I stand on the 8020 thing um yeah I have another  topic to discuss too if uh it's apt to do so but if anyone has any questions on any of that I would  love to hear it um highly recommend reading jm's proposal it's very in- depth I try not to go  too into detail about it but um yeah very cool stuff there are some comments on the chat uh let

me bapa says I think B 8020 has experienced  exactly what the percentage is currently describing that CRV pool was controlled  by one individual well the mercy of one individual you would you like to add  more details into this sorry what's the question was it was not a question  it was more the comment about the the B 8020 on the CRV poll I don't know if you  can see the chats yeah what what chat am I looking at uh let me give you the link  oh wait I all right all right I found it um I'm not really sure I understand what's  being asked oh oh if you could give us more

in more details on the ball 8020 okay yeah so  the way bouncer works is we have a v system and in order to participate in uh directing emissions  through holding bow you have to basically deposit into an 8020 pool and then that 8020 pool  is locked just like curv is on their side and uh you get all the power of governance  that you would through a normal base system by basically locking the 8020 token so instead  of providing B to lock you're providing an 8020 pool token to lock and that's how emissions  are directed and that means that we do not need to incentivize bow liquidity because  it is inherent to the system I'm not sure if that answers your question but I hope that  gives a little bit of insight on sort of how it

works yeah thank you and yes actually I forgot  to mention at the beginning but yes like I If there is like a I know that you understand  it pretty well and a lot of people in here understand it way better um so yes that's why  I was gonna ask I asked again to kind of like in in more simple terms but um yes saona says my  point being that b 8020 took a lot of losses in 2022 and sleep page I know quite a few people  in that I I think that's probably due to the bow price going down as opposed to any sort of  impermanent loss I'm pretty sure impermanent

loss has been relatively minimal in that pool  um obviously if you're providing liquidity in a pool with tokens that go down in price there's no  magic formula that can save you from that um but yeah I was also um okay so this is about uh  a parity for sopie ABC it's like a yeah it's more like a longterm idea that but we're like  starting with with data with a lot of research uh actually that's also in in in jma's post about  he's been Mak I mean they're making like a huge research on this and so it's I I wouldn't say  it's more of a shortterm I wouldn't and yes so

PB says jetma has been conducting research yeah  on how to improve the proposed new mechanism it is just bringing different Alternatives and  points of view on how things can be done exactly it's not a short-term priority uh I mean this  is not um like an easy task or research so no was see there people typ in I'm pretty sure  there more questions since the the the whole point about this is like actually with the  current module that maker has and how this change of course why would be necessarily to  change let me read Marian's comments um oh yes that's exactly what we believe there's also  bonap that is typing and also I am going to

we have have some slides about this uh let me  go this was the one that I did explain or kind of okay so is there anything that you would  like to about this specific when it says like un V2 die mkr can effectively  over collateral die in a depe scenario yeah I mean I I think it's obvious  that in scenarios where D were to deeg uh

your source of protocol and liquidity  that is paired with d would also become imbalanced and you would be in a worse  off position than if you had exogenous uh assets within that pool uh that's like  just like a math thing if the price goes down in a pool you have more of that asset  so the pool would basically accumulate die and you would have less like hard assets  to be able to help with the recovery of die well thank you I I don't know if  there's any other com on what M has mention and how do how would you see so far smart  burn engine what we know uh and the enhance uh Sagittarius engine yeah I mean it's it's an option  from a mechanism design point of view how you want

to sort of balance the sort of disincentives in  the system I think a governance exit fee is one of those ways to do it um it's really that that  sort of isn't really something I can advise too much on because it really depends on how you  guys set up your sort of tokenomics system but uh yeah governance exit fee would definitely  be a source of revenue for the rest of the holders and it sort of encourages people to stay  participating in governance and I believe Jad mat brought up the possibility of potentially using  that governance exit fee as a means of bribing to get more incentives on the pool but uh that is  really dependent on how you guys want to go about strategy yeah uh we encourage everyone actually  to to read throughout jman's propos I mean jman's posts about the proposals and give feedback  about it now a question another question is

about can you tell us more about the success  cases in protocols that Implement in this 8020 strategy yeah so obviously a has been  doing it for a couple years and it's worked out well for them I believe they have a dual  model which also allows for St do on its own I would say the most impressive recently  uh recent case of a 8020 really taking off has been radiant Finance on arbitrum uh  they've managed to acquire over $40 million in liquidity on arbitrum by basically making  this 8020 uh pool inherent to their toonomic system instead of just locking up radiant  so they were able to acquir it's actually almost $50 million now uh of radiant e liquidity  without to spend a dime on incentives and to make

sure that everyone who is participating  sort of has a a leg in the game so to speak that is important to know what other  like success cases has been so yes that's that's great now let me read about uh  one Comon Clocky says borrowing against mkr will be conducted with highly cautious  parameters for a Tyson risk aversion that that's I think that's the the goal um there has  been like a lot of U issues so far as well about this and then we have um another question  from Blue it says any proposals for us to

mitigate the risk if we end up sticking  with the mkr as collateral plans I mean I would say this proposal does help mitigate  the risks by guaranteeing onchain liquidity I mean the real issue comes when you have  to liquidate that maker and if you're not able to find anyone who's willing to take it  uh then it sort of uh degrades the backing quality of D so uh I would say that having  sufficient on onchain liquidity is probably the best thing you can do in order to  make maker a better collateral asset okay

Alternatives okay oh potential do you want to comment on this  or any of any potential Alternatives about this uh I me or do you stick up with a  with jm's proposal I mean I I think the Alternatives would just be either a uh more  conservative risk parameters that's obviously one alternative to keeping maker safe as  collateral um another option would be to acquire a lot of protocol and liquidity make  sure there's I I really as I said earlier I think having maker liquidity on chain is the  single best thing you can do to make maker a

better onchain collateral asset and any way you go  to approach that that problem is sufficient in my view and also you could do like caps  and stuff like have a barrowing cap Supply cap to make sure that it never gets out of hand perfect I don't know if there's any other  question well if not well that would be it I don't know if there's anything else that you  would like to mention that it's relevant and you haven't said it yet but it's about about dma  proposal um I do have one other proposal I would like to draw attention to is the uh smarter burn  engine proposal by PBJ let me just post this in

the chat real quick um I'm not sure if this  guys falls under your responsibilities but I would just like to touch on it while I'm here  in the maker Discord uh basically this guy has created a project that has built a functional  twam TM time weighted automated Market maker on top of balancer according to the specifications  from the famous Paradigm TM paper from years ago uh they work like a normal amm with the exception  of being able to essentially make DCA style orders in a programmatic way without having to split  the orders up to get price best price execution so basically it does sub orders in between blocks  you make it they call it long-term swaps you make a swap and over the next X amount of blocks  it will slowly go from one asset to another without you having poke the pool at all and  I know that um maker does a lot of onchain

sort of market operations and uh in the proposal  by PBJ he uh notes that maker was spending six figures on gas to execute some of these buyback  transactions and there had previously been some parameter changes to reduce the frequency  of the BuyBacks to curb high gas costs and I think utilizing a twam maker can foro these  parameter adjustments and Achieve High granularity execution without being constrained by high gas  costs uh I think that that really the optimal way to twap on chain and they don't require  split execution uh I just recommend everyone giving that proposal a read over because I  think it's kind of gone under the radar so far uh and then yeah just to finish everything  up from Mar side uh bouncer is very happy to support the maker Dow ecosystem with whatever  needs you guys might have like I mentioned we

are very flexible amm and we would be willing  to work with you guys to do whatever it takes for your liquidity needs uh we have a lot of  technology to work with and there's really no project doing as much onchain mechanism design  Innovation as maker Dow is right now so if anyone is interested in discussing amm designs  Integrations or further tokenomics discussions please feel free to reach out to me on telegram  uh at Mike isbin I'll post my ad in the chat and uh thank you everyone and thank you Jad matat  for his in-depth proposals and uh yeah thank you thank you Mike for your time and thank you  for sharing this um where going to dive further into uh PJ's post and probably we can get uh I  don't know if merge them but it's going to be

interesting to have more insights that could  be uh beneficial also to to our proposal uh everyone Mike has po has written in the chat  his telegram user so if you have any further questions about this or in general please reach  out and again thank you so much for your time Mike I'm going to read some comments about here  it says whena that twwm Concepts interesting I like to see an ecosystem after build build it  or the end game for the grown up let's that will be let's make this a thing let's make  it happen um and yes shout out to jmma for

for his research um want to read a comment he  says original mechanism uh propose SE propos a single mkr The Proposal enhance uh SE seeks  to mitigate Risk by maintaining liquidity and giving greated liquidity greated quality to  mkr uh yes please it's if you want farther detail it's very explain um jma's post on  the Forum so there now we're going to move on okay uh let's go now to our 8's comments  so let me share first from Blue comments about this scope and I want to point  out in here so uh about you remember

we had a call with Alan Peterson from  from monal a few weeks ago and if you haven't we recommend you to watch  it I'm going to share the link in here and he has made some comments about this  uh that we would like to work more into this so um this is regarding the new policies  procedures and guidelines the the PPG so he kind of um well in blue comments they gave  us their insights on the comments that Alan

mention during the the call and we're going  to work further into this because um I think it's I might say that it's obvious it's  that from Sovereign Finance ABC we believe that everything should be or they will be  improve the transparency communication so there is something that we are very involved  in so this is something that we're going to um bring and dive deeper and so uh we're  going to work on this blue if you would like also to to to work with with us in in this  particular topic that'll be great um this is one thing and then from or I don't know if there's  anything in particular that would like us to

to dive deeper also in the comments let us know  and now from Clocky uh doc public document uh we have some questions or in comments clucky  that we would like f uh more information about this and uh your insights also  so thank you for sharing it with us now let's move on to pulk and uh we're going  to focus on this we are actually quoting from Parts document and it's the D stable coin it's  stable relative to a referent asset currently this asset is the US dollar but I believe the  maker out should Finance research to explore

other Alternatives pegging to the US dollar  presents certain regulatory risk to the Dow um which could be mitigated by considering other  reference assets so um and please P if you would like to dive further into this please go ahead  but this is a question from for every one um what other assets could be considered as reference and  if there are specific ones that come to mind for mitigating regulatory risks and so we we agree  with this um that's why we're we're mentioning um diversifying the reference assets for die  stability could be a a wise move it could help make her um reduce H exposure to we all are aware  about regulatory risk uh and with the with the US

dollar um so um it's important to think in long  term and consider different um assets especially in uh yeah quickly now very quickly changing uh  Financial landscape and so we believe that this um diversification could potentially make D even more  resilient um and well something else to mention about this is um maybe that while the US dollar is  a strong reference and uh a lot of uh people from Latin America we would do consider as a strong  strong reference uh and exploring alternative is

a smart strategy it could um enhance the overall  stability and flexibility of the dice St coin so is there anything what first of all what do  you believe what do you believe about this about pulse common and if there's any other asset  that you could consider pleas write it uh on the chat uh okay so there's in the chat uh are the  questions in the comments of the Google yes yes Clocky uh they are in the Google Document um you  can respond on the document on or this channel uh the way you prefer if you can tag us I would say  that it's better if it's in the document that'll

be great thank you um oh lues will also work  oh perfect you also want to work it in with the case good good um I'm going to read dma's comment  uh to this is to are 80s uh well bonap as well if you are interested in moving forward with  this ideas you can comment on any of the four proposals in the Forum as they say there is still  time for the phase where these mechanisms could be applied but dedicating time to study and investig  yes the study and in investigation of the main mechanism is key to the health and efficiency  of the protocol so please everyone that is very

interested and more importantly that I'm pretty  sure that a lot of you understand way better so please uh ask questions and give feedback continue  debating as Jetman mentioned in his comment on the chat okay flat pal says it's an open question  so if anyone would like to answer to this uh or to think about it PA says the outa states  that the DI stable coin must have predictable stability relate to a suitable reference asset  which can be a widely adapted world currency or Diversified basket representing the cost of  goods or other relevant metrics or of stability and utility as a currency P do you have any  other asset in mind it could be uh a good

option I'm going to move on our next  part which is about the Makow parameter adjustments and first I'm going to uh  share the Forum post from the ba Labs team I see perfect p is Type in and this is two so these are topics that we find IR  relevant for this scope that's why mentioning in here so the first one it's related to the PSM  to the peg stability module and how this there

is this usdp PSM and the dep sailing with this  Su of everything it's increased from zero to 120 million um and in this proposed proposes this  particular change and then about the the well removal or the offboard the reath a b type from  M that basically this is a specific type of bul that involves um real estate tokenized assets  and um of course the decision to of course it's based on a specific criteria or requirements  um what's the thing is that currently r a is

missing about 12.29 million die depth to much  the revenue share it should have compared to wst volts uh based on um on their Market  value so I don't know if anyone would like to share a comment into this we mention  it because for us it's relevant to point it out and also that the r a Deb would need  a 47.1% increase to meet this uh the minimum criteria topics okay PA there no options right now I would support perfect I would  support conducting research on

Alternatives oh dadman says the right case  maybe makes sense what everyone thinks about this okay then um about they maker the B yeah the  parameters are adjustments as always the base rate to 4.45% the DI saving rate to 4.20 the edsr  5% the E Vol type stability fee that has been increased by 1.55% wbtc B types SV increased  by 0.06% with a of board for maker core that

remains in the maker ecosystem and with Supply  C on park that is also increased from 20K to 60k we also put in here uh about the D multi-  change update uh the first allocator D deployment outside ethereum this was deployed back  in early October and the launch is uh the launch of SD from nois chain that was was  I think one of the uh let's say like more most I don't think if success but in but was  really interesting to see this happening so I don't know if anyone wants to comment or  have tried this also let us know and then

about the first particle to provide a front end  agave and the SP particle int introduced after I okay so in the comments pal says I understand  scalability tray of though but I believe that regulation are higher risk and we should  be prepared yeah regulations are heart risk everywhere more specifically I think in the  US with everything that is happening so yeah that is that must be something that we should be  uh I mean we should be prepared and taken care of okay then we have The Spar deployment which  announced launch on polygon CK evm introducing ngt

and sndt that it set for the first quarter in 2024  uh the token Bridge which is the phase zero and we have here summary new change to use standards  canonical token breach before new stable launch connect die and optionally S die via canonical  token Bridge L1 die DSR yield usage is up to the domain team after NST launch and S snst their  interest varing NST receiving DSR is recommended for particles fenis labs to provide the SR  Oracle for UI conversion and support for legacy

tokens well here we have the the first phase that  is the permissionless implementation and we here talk about the deploy of new parland uh on the  remote change in collaboration with the chains Dev team then we have the admin access to the  part executed proxy in ethereum to reduce user risk uh before new stable launch to add die Market  using the DSR Oracle for rate updates and after new stable uh two markets the S NSD ason and the  Ws NST as collateral um another asset which is of

course commonly if it's required with a chain link  compatible article feed chain makers is strongly Ed to create liquidity via temporary deposits  yield farming Etc then we continue with the second phase or phase number two which is sparkline  Conduit implementation and this um is to activate the cross chain conduct model allowing allocat out  to deposit and withdraw from implemented expland instance and uh the last topic will be the  smart engine transaction analysis this is uh from these specific dates from August 1st  to October 5th and well basically this is uh

the documentation provided from The Forum and  um yes so this what says is a drop mainly due to reverse Surplus not exceeding the 50  million th hold which activates the Smo engine and the current marber and activity  which is the transactions below the theorical accumulation rate Surplus buffer it's below  the 50 million di dir hole and about the performance and impact the smart engine  activity impact decreasingly as liquidity poll grows parameters optimized to reduce  costep to 30% in MK prices and when it comes

to parameter sensitivity bomb parameter below  the dir hole for profitability MBE activity even during sudden mkr price drops optimal  parameters highly influenced by eth price and gas cost suggesting bomb increases might reduce  estimated losses if if price and NW activity rise okay so these are um some news uh that uh  we and our 8s consider that it's rant to also mention these are from past few weeks in the  Forum so the first one it's about gfx Labs has put forward the m102 cs8 and this basically aims  to provide Clarity on the definition of a stable

asset in relation to arer fees um and as well it  proposes a slight modification to the definition of a cash stable kind um recently we have shared a  risk assessment and parameter recommend ations for sparland on polygon CK evm uh they also provide  an update on market conditions highlighting a consistent supply of both CRV USD and go  additionally blabs conducted a second analysis of SM bir engine transactions highlighting that the  Surplus buffers fluctuation below the 50 million dollar limit was constraining the Smartboard  engine um and as well they published their six

stability code parameter parameter change with  the notable adjustment being a one 55% increase in e b stability fees we also in just some minutes  ago um mention it in detail and about stay housee share details about the USP PSM facilitation  incentives providing CL on the incentives that will be received based on the balance in the usdp  PSM something related we also mentioned it in here okay well uh inp our Sovereign Finance  ABC uh Q3 Alliance co- proposal document uh this this is p m 102 C2 sp19 and so we have  this MP component two three four five and

six that second component regulates the atlas  interpretation process uh comp company number three regulates this scope Artic artifact appeal  process number four regulates the alignment conserver the recognition process number five  it establishes the requirement for ABCs to be considered active and what happens and how to  become inactive and uh number six establishes how 8s should change an ABC they follow so this  is it um again we have for open comments our Q4 draft with our proposals that we're working on for  this quarter so yeah I'm going to share the link

again well I see some comments on the chat I don't know if there's anything any other  topic you want to bring up before we finish the call this is the moment oh um something else uh  to our specifically to our 80s um not of course not for the next scope that's okay because I will  be too too short um but I mean to previously with no further uh time to to mention to you but from  the the governance cope the next governance scope

please uh and we're going to also mention this  probably in in in the chat in the general chat uh if you could send your comments your feedbacks on  the on it scope uh be uh before Monday if that's okay I repeat this is not for next week scope  this is for governance scope which let us time for like prepare and everything so that way  we can include more of your proposals so that it that we can it could be improve the world  that we're doing and so if it's clear please let me know also this is going to be added on the  general H chat I repeat again or the governance

code which is in two weeks um it would be better  if you could send us your public documents prior Monday like before Monday that will be great  since we finish our slides Monday Tuesday so that way we can include them and well there's  no comment so that will be all for today's scope and see you I hope you can also join us for our  Spanish call know that's okay see you next week we have our last C accessibility um so that will  be all before Monday would be Friday or Sunday no Sunday thank you for asking that question pul  Sunday it's perfect that will be all thank you all

[Music] bye-bye