Changing key pair reward multipliers

What are we proposing
As part of the upcoming boom on Avalanche we want to ensure that Pangolin retains high liquidity for some key strategic pools. These pools are:

  • AVAX - ETH.e
  • AVAX - USDT.e
  • AVAX-DAI.e

Due to the competitive nature of the space, a lot of rewards have been offered by other platforms to capture these key pools.

As an example in today’s USD terms Trader Joe offers $236K daily to those three pools. This has seen a lot of liquidity move off Pangolin. Currently Pangolin has only been offering $26K worth of rewards to these pools. This has resulted in some of the exodus of capital.

This proposal is to increase the rewards for those key pools to ensure we remain competitive and capture high TVL in what we consider strategic pools.

What changes are being made?
Currently the pools have the following weights:

Pair Joe Emissions (In USD) PNG Emissions (In USD) Proposed Multiplier Change
AVAX-ETH.e 86,400 15,000 10x
AVAX-USDT.e 107,136 7,900 10x
AVAX-DAI.e 43,200 3,300 10x

As you can see TJ has very aggressive emissions. So we need to ensure that we can be competitive.

In our prediction of moving these weights up, we should see our PNG rewards start to equal Trader Joes and still only make up 32% of our daily emissions.

These pools are very important with the massive influx of lending and borrowing protocols launching on Avalanche. They are highly prized and we need to ensure we’re protecting them.

As such we will be putting up a snapshot vote in the next day or so, so that we can move quickly with this change.



Definitely needed. Pangolin needs to stay competitive in these pairs.


Let’s get it done! TJ will constantly be trying to eat our lunch. Let’s keep building and be the best!


I agree to change it, but more importantly I would like us to be the leading one.
Of course we can follow our competitors and act considering their positions but is this the case it should be ?
We will always change stuff slower compared to others, because we need to vote or bla bla.
What do you think of future moves ?
What if Lydia comes up with a higher reward pool the day after ?

1 Like

Is there a reason to not create rewards for TUSD?

Do they not meet the criteria for incentives? Technically they aren’t a pair covered by BenQi yet, but it would seem worth consideration as another fiat on-ramp/off-ramp in the Avalanche ecosystem.

Regardless, this is an understandable change and seems worth supporting. I guess the real question is how does this impact the current allocations for other pairs?

1 Like

Unfortunately nobody is using it…total liquidity for TUSD is 500$…

Great and necessary proposal. Let’s show people that a DAO can be quick in responding to changes if needed :wink:

1 Like

I have a lot of love for TUSD, but from a strategic point of view, these pools are integral to BENQI, AAVE and another cool project also coming in the lending space :monkey:

So this is key for us having strategic ownership. Adding rewards for TUSD should be fine as long as they meet our universal guidelines

1 Like

Good idea.
My only concern is how can we move faster in decision making and execution. being decentralized is the key in this space, but as we are too early maybe some kind of Centralized council with delegated power to make Pangolin Move and Run then even fly faster.
We can be more than just a DEX.


Open to suggestions. What kind of decisions would you like to see be made faster?

This is a good idea, but we also need to think more broadly about how to cement pangolin’s position as the go to AMM. Competing just with rewards is jist a race to the bottom.

Things like superior tokenomics, lower slippage, etc., all need to be part of the strategic mix.


1: Marketing
2: Apy adjustment due to market Conditions(competitors etc)

1 Like

I have just made a proposal idea Here

1 Like

Universal Guidelines

  1. $50k+ in token liquidity on Pangolin
  2. $25M+ current market cap (across all networks) - $1 Billion
  3. Avalanche Native or Building on Avalanche - C-chain integration for on-ramp and off-ramp of fiat
  4. Partnered with Pangolin

I think meets 2/4… Easily could be all 4.

The integration with other platforms is a real consideration.

1 Like

Hello all,

Good to be active on the forum back.

I am afraid this is a very bad strategy. The reason Joe got the liquidty is our nemesis Sam has decided to go there and manipulate it. Only in 3 Joe liquidity pools (namely eth-avax, btc-avax and link-avax) Sam has 34 million USD worth of balance with an average of approximately 80% apy.

I don’t want Sam back. Right now he earns around 15K png per day. Please do not give him any chance to manipulate png price anymore.

As you always mentioned dear Justin, let’s make pangolin attractive by adding value to it. 10x is just a recipe for another price disaster.

If this is true, and liquidity coming from one wallet or two, then I would have an agreement with this if it is due to manipulation. This may change my original thought of acceptance for this but want to see the proof.

The snapshot vote is up: Snapshot

Voting will last 2 days

1 Like

This is the second proposal I am against. First one was the rushed and not well prepared CEX listing.

I hope I am wrong this time.

A business leaders should try at all cost to avoid making decisions with immediate stock price (token) as the priority. This is an example of “agency cost”; agency cost is where leaders make decisions that appeal to themselves rather the firm: e.g. a CEO locates an office closer to his home rather than where best for the business; or where managers who are compensated based on quarterly stock price performance forego beneficial R&D projects that pay off in the longer term (when that manager is possibly no longer at the firm). This then leaves the firm (and price) vulnerable to entrants with newer technology.

This proposal speaks to the longer term strength and competitiveness of Pangolin, and ultimately a stronger token price.


It’s a great point. Do you know the project team? If you could introduce me I could follow up

My personal take is that without volume and liquidity, we’re not a viable DEX. It’s our foundational aspect and everything builds from there.

If you look at the Liquidity in AVAX for Pangolin

You can see a sharp decline.

What this means, is that bots and automated trading will naturally progress to the DEX with the least slippage and price impact. That then means we lose volume, which means we lose revenue. It’s a vicious cycle and one we have to manage proactively.