In my opinion the focus of Mars should be to enable IBC-Token like Atoms and Osmos pretty soon.
The Mars Protocol basicly allows to go long and short on the enabled assets which is new on the established IBC-chains. The mars team should use this first mover advantage which could result in a lot of TVL for the terra chain. Also These coins have a much higher marketcap comapred to Terra-Altcoins so they should be prioritzed.
7 Likes
Good point
Having these tokens on Mars would also be the first step to C-2-C in the fields for leverage farming with these tokens and UST, while Mars has a lot of UST compared to the dexes that utilize these tokens - meaning Mars could make up a huge chunk of the liquidity on IBC-dexes
1 Like
Fully agree. The main challenge here is the oracle. Chainlink is building an oracle feed on Terra, but in my knowledge, ATOM etc. is not their priority at the moment. The question is whether the community is willing to use a centralized oracle until a decentralize solution becomes available.
1 Like
Yes, it would be much easier if they would be traded on Astro. But on the other hand SOL, BNB, USDC, Ether and others are bridged and also tradet on Astro, so I imagine getting an oracle for these should be easier, right?
Loop already has SCRT ATOM OSMOS already on the Terra chain. However I cannot speak the the liquidity of the pools.
This can be a good starting point as Mars does not need to worry about the IBC channels.
2 Likes
Larry, I’d be in favour of using a centralized oracle until a decentralized solution is available.
I think most people in the community would agree as well, since as Luna/Terra alt holders we have already conceded some decentralization in favour of growing. It makes sense to start off somewhat centralized and then slowly move to decentralization to garner growth for the protocol.
1 Like
Doesn’t Anchor allow bAtom and bEther as collaterals? Im not too deep in the technology, but it seems like it should be doable to get an oracle for these two.
If we can get the oracle problem sorted then why not have the liquid staked derivatives instead of the bonded assets added to Mars instead? currently we have stSOL, stLuna, LunaX, wewstETH, Matic(no stMatic yet) and wawstAvax instead? There is also a liquid staked derivative of Secret available now and prob will be for Atom aswell soon? This would give an alternative to anchor for depositors, would create a situation where we are not competing for the same market, and would make more sense since these assets would generate higher yield in the fields strategies? I think depositors would rather deposit an asset that accumulates value and fields users would benefit more from the higher LP rewards… any thoughts?
I would agree, liquid token would make sense in the fields strategies, but only to some degree. It really depends on the user (trader). If they dont want to trade LunaX but Luna, the APR of a UST-LunaX-Pool won’t be that high, if the pool is big. But for Mars it makes sense that you would enable the pools with the biggest volume first, so that the utilization is high. Apart from that, you also need big pools to get a good oracle, so dervates with small pools are not that well suited.
On the other hand, it may be interesting to use the fields with bridges/IBC. Osmosis for example has a massive TVL in pools, and you would have many useful oracles as well as pools for the fields of mars.
True, but someone could add a strategy for LunaX-Luna on for ex: Astroport(if stader get’s the dual-generators on the pool passed astroport governance) and basically get swapfees plus external token incentives compounded into your position. This should also be a low risk strategy with anything from low-high yield potential.
Agree on the second part too, IBC tokens on fields could really be a good addition, only the Oracle fact that @larry mentioned that could get some resistance. Also with Crescent dex now live giving really high returns on their native token pairs and Luna, Atom and UST pairs it could be good opportunity!
One thing I did start having some concerns over though (if I’m wrong im hoping @larry can correct me i’m wrong) but Osmo rewards and Cre rewards are distributed once per epoch and on Osmosis you need to bond for x Amount of days to get the optimal yield, so in theory just how would that work? I’m kind of curious how would a position get liquidated if it’s bonded for 14days and could an option be to actually have a grace-period on liquidations until after the end of the epoch so that the rewards can be compounded to avoid liquidation?