🆕 Uniswap Foundation Q2 2025: $110.1M in tokens, $49.8M stables, 5M UNI posted as collateral for $29M loan; runway to Jan 2027 and $110.2M in grants earmarked
An unaudited summary of the Uniswap Foundation’s Q2’2025 financials for the quarter ended June 30, 2025 shows $49.8M in USD/stables on hand, 15.4M UNI and 241 ETH (tokens valued at $110.1M at June 30, 2025 rates), an additional 5M UNI posted as collateral for a $29M loan, an expected runway through January 2027, $110.2M of grants/incentives earmarked (with $93.3M to be committed in 2025–2026), $35.5M allocated for operations through January 2027, Q2 commitments of $6.5M and disbursements of $4.9M, YTD revenue of $141.3M, and Q2 operating expenses accrued of $1.8M (YTD $3.7M). \n\nThe benefits are clear liquidity and capacity to fund large grants and operations through January 2027 supporting ecosystem stability; the costs/risks include leverage and market exposure from the $29M UNI-backed loan and general token-price sensitivity; there have been no community discussions reported, and Q3’2025 results will be provided in the next update.
⏩ More details
An unaudited summary of the Uniswap Foundation’s Q2’2025 financials for the quarter ended June 30, 2025 shows $49.8M in USD/stables on hand, 15.4M UNI and 241 ETH (tokens valued at $110.1M at June 30, 2025 rates), an additional 5M UNI posted as collateral for a $29M loan, an expected runway through January 2027, $110.2M of grants/incentives earmarked (with $93.3M to be committed in 2025–2026), $35.5M allocated for operations through January 2027, Q2 commitments of $6.5M and disbursements of $4.9M, YTD revenue of $141.3M, and Q2 operating expenses accrued of $1.8M (YTD $3.7M). \n\nThe benefits are clear liquidity and capacity to fund large grants and operations through January 2027 supporting ecosystem stability; the costs/risks include leverage and market exposure from the $29M UNI-backed loan and general token-price sensitivity; there have been no community discussions reported, and Q3’2025 results will be provided in the next update.
⏩ More details
🆕 Proposal to evolve Jupiter into community-powered ecosystem with JECF, 3,000,000 JUP liquidity incentives and 1,000,000 JUP innovation grant
A strategic proposal to evolve Jupiter into a community-powered ecosystem via three pillars—Jupiter Engagement & Contribution Framework (JECF) with a gamified Jupiter Orbit Portal, Strategic Liquidity Provisioning (SLP) with an initial 3,000,000 JUP incentive allocation, and $JUP Utility Expansion Pilots (JUEP) backed by a 1,000,000 JUP Innovation Grant Fund—aims to boost governance participation, liquidity depth, real-world utility, and brand perception. Benefits: higher voter engagement, improved slippage/TVL/trading volume, and expanded non‑speculative use cases; costs: allocated token incentives and treasury/multisig approvals for funding and program execution; community reaction: no public discussions to date.
⏩ More details
A strategic proposal to evolve Jupiter into a community-powered ecosystem via three pillars—Jupiter Engagement & Contribution Framework (JECF) with a gamified Jupiter Orbit Portal, Strategic Liquidity Provisioning (SLP) with an initial 3,000,000 JUP incentive allocation, and $JUP Utility Expansion Pilots (JUEP) backed by a 1,000,000 JUP Innovation Grant Fund—aims to boost governance participation, liquidity depth, real-world utility, and brand perception. Benefits: higher voter engagement, improved slippage/TVL/trading volume, and expanded non‑speculative use cases; costs: allocated token incentives and treasury/multisig approvals for funding and program execution; community reaction: no public discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 Frax Finance proposes $2,999 one‑time grant to BuildUnion for public project-tracking dashboard (12 months maintenance, ML risk detection)
A temp-check proposes funding BuildUnion $2,999 one-time (includes 12 months basic maintenance) to build a public Project Progress Tracking Dashboard for Frax Finance with milestone tracking, real-time updates, automated alerts, lightweight ML risk detection, visualizations, and role-based admin tools. Benefits: improved transparency, earlier detection of delays, standardized reporting, and easier governance participation; community reaction: vote ongoing with 1 voter (0.25 votes For, 0 Against) against a required quorum of 8,252,476, so participation is extremely low.
⏩ More details
A temp-check proposes funding BuildUnion $2,999 one-time (includes 12 months basic maintenance) to build a public Project Progress Tracking Dashboard for Frax Finance with milestone tracking, real-time updates, automated alerts, lightweight ML risk detection, visualizations, and role-based admin tools. Benefits: improved transparency, earlier detection of delays, standardized reporting, and easier governance participation; community reaction: vote ongoing with 1 voter (0.25 votes For, 0 Against) against a required quorum of 8,252,476, so participation is extremely low.
⏩ More details
🆕 MakerDAO users question status of "Home | MakerDAO Community Portal" after rebrand to Sky and seek where to find funding/grants
- A user asked whether the MakerDAO-branded \"Home | MakerDAO Community Portal\" is still active after Maker rebranded to Sky and migrated resources, seeking where to find funding/grants within the Sky ecosystem; clarifying the portal’s status would help contributors reliably discover funding opportunities. \n- The cost of ambiguity is potential missed or outdated grant information, the community has not discussed this, and no next actions have been determined.
⏩ More details
- A user asked whether the MakerDAO-branded \"Home | MakerDAO Community Portal\" is still active after Maker rebranded to Sky and migrated resources, seeking where to find funding/grants within the Sky ecosystem; clarifying the portal’s status would help contributors reliably discover funding opportunities. \n- The cost of ambiguity is potential missed or outdated grant information, the community has not discussed this, and no next actions have been determined.
⏩ More details
🆕 Frax approves AMO whitelist and allocation caps for sfrxUSD balance sheet — $95M to Curve, $52M to lending, integrations $1M–$30M, external-request cap min($2M, 1% TVL); proposal passes overwhelmingly
- Frax has approved a whitelist of AMO strategies and explicit allocation caps for the sfrxUSD balance sheet (per FIP-430), allocating capital across Curve (sfrxUSD-frxUSD $50,000,000; reUSD+sfrxUSD $5,000,000; sfrxUSD-USDe $40,000,000 with Convex where optimal), lending venues (Fraxlend Ethereum $30,000,000; Fraxlend Fraxtal $2,000,000; Euler frxUSD $10,000,000; Aave USDe/sUSDe $10,000,000), Fraxtal and Ethena integrations (various $1,000,000–$30,000,000 commitments), with blue-chip protocol/T V L and yield-floor guardrails and external-request caps (initially min($2,000,000, 1% of sfrxUSD TVL)).
- Expected benefits are stronger sfrxUSD yield benchmark status, deeper liquidity and peg stability, and improved net returns via Ethena/Pendle exposure, while costs/risks are capped exposure to non-blue-chip venues, potential liquidation/redemption/liquidity risks mitigated by rules, and governance retains discretionary allocation; the proposal passed overwhelmingly with 14 voters and 32,539,492.62 votes cast (For 32,539,492.54; Against 0.08).
⏩ More details
- Frax has approved a whitelist of AMO strategies and explicit allocation caps for the sfrxUSD balance sheet (per FIP-430), allocating capital across Curve (sfrxUSD-frxUSD $50,000,000; reUSD+sfrxUSD $5,000,000; sfrxUSD-USDe $40,000,000 with Convex where optimal), lending venues (Fraxlend Ethereum $30,000,000; Fraxlend Fraxtal $2,000,000; Euler frxUSD $10,000,000; Aave USDe/sUSDe $10,000,000), Fraxtal and Ethena integrations (various $1,000,000–$30,000,000 commitments), with blue-chip protocol/T V L and yield-floor guardrails and external-request caps (initially min($2,000,000, 1% of sfrxUSD TVL)).
- Expected benefits are stronger sfrxUSD yield benchmark status, deeper liquidity and peg stability, and improved net returns via Ethena/Pendle exposure, while costs/risks are capped exposure to non-blue-chip venues, potential liquidation/redemption/liquidity risks mitigated by rules, and governance retains discretionary allocation; the proposal passed overwhelmingly with 14 voters and 32,539,492.62 votes cast (For 32,539,492.54; Against 0.08).
⏩ More details
🆕 dYdX to propose making CoinRoutes an official integration partner, granting 50% of protocol fee share for routed order flow and execution tech — on-chain vote Sept 18, 2025; community replies limited but supportive (2)
- This proposes approving CoinRoutes as an official dYdX integration partner, granting CoinRoutes 50% of the protocol’s share of trading fees for users routed via the integration in return for institutional order flow, best-in-class execution technology, and alignment with dYdX. \n- The benefit is potential increased order flow and reduced slippage for traders; the cost is forfeiting half of the protocol fee share to CoinRoutes, and community reaction is limited but supportive based on two replies; if unopposed an on-chain proposal is planned for Thursday, September 18, 2025.
⏩ More details
- This proposes approving CoinRoutes as an official dYdX integration partner, granting CoinRoutes 50% of the protocol’s share of trading fees for users routed via the integration in return for institutional order flow, best-in-class execution technology, and alignment with dYdX. \n- The benefit is potential increased order flow and reduced slippage for traders; the cost is forfeiting half of the protocol fee share to CoinRoutes, and community reaction is limited but supportive based on two replies; if unopposed an on-chain proposal is planned for Thursday, September 18, 2025.
⏩ More details
🆕 Optimism Season 8 Audit Grants: 123,300 OP approved of 656,560 requested, budget preserved to prioritize open‑source Superchain projects
- This summarizes Season 8 Audit Grants decisions: FinDEX was approved for 90,300 OP and SuperDCA for 33,000 OP, Arcadia Finance (53,950 OP) and Swaps.io (87,500 OP) were put on hold, several projects were rejected, total requested was 656,560 OP, total approved 123,300 OP, season budget 581,726.40 OP with 458,426.40 OP remaining. \n- Benefits: preserves a large remaining budget and prioritizes open‑source, Superchain‑focused, high‑impact projects and ASP contributions to improve code quality; costs: allocated OP amounts for approved projects and opportunity costs from many rejections; community reaction: no discussions reported.
⏩ More details
- This summarizes Season 8 Audit Grants decisions: FinDEX was approved for 90,300 OP and SuperDCA for 33,000 OP, Arcadia Finance (53,950 OP) and Swaps.io (87,500 OP) were put on hold, several projects were rejected, total requested was 656,560 OP, total approved 123,300 OP, season budget 581,726.40 OP with 458,426.40 OP remaining. \n- Benefits: preserves a large remaining budget and prioritizes open‑source, Superchain‑focused, high‑impact projects and ASP contributions to improve code quality; costs: allocated OP amounts for approved projects and opportunity costs from many rejections; community reaction: no discussions reported.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin seeks GG24 pre-ratification for $1.235M across six domain-specific matching pools with $692.5K co-funding and council oversight
Gitcoin is asking GG24 pre-ratification for six domain-specific matching pools totaling $1,235,000 (contingent on each domain reaching at least 80% of its goal) with a planned co-funding of $692,500 and oversight by a GG24 Matching council (MathildaDV, Sov, Luuk); funds are mostly in ETH with a strategy to increase stablecoin allocation and earn yield on idle assets, and Giveth will operate core ops for Dev Tooling & Infrastructure while Gitcoin handles QF payouts after sybil checks.
The expected benefits are faster GG24 execution, stronger operator alignment, reduced treasury volatility, and clearer thematic focus; the cost is the $1,235,000 matching commitment (plus the $692,500 co-funding), and the community vote currently favors approval with quorum met (3,357,036.12/2,500,000) and tallies: For 1,856,122.78, Abstain 1,500,913.34, Against 0.
⏩ More details
Gitcoin is asking GG24 pre-ratification for six domain-specific matching pools totaling $1,235,000 (contingent on each domain reaching at least 80% of its goal) with a planned co-funding of $692,500 and oversight by a GG24 Matching council (MathildaDV, Sov, Luuk); funds are mostly in ETH with a strategy to increase stablecoin allocation and earn yield on idle assets, and Giveth will operate core ops for Dev Tooling & Infrastructure while Gitcoin handles QF payouts after sybil checks.
The expected benefits are faster GG24 execution, stronger operator alignment, reduced treasury volatility, and clearer thematic focus; the cost is the $1,235,000 matching commitment (plus the $692,500 co-funding), and the community vote currently favors approval with quorum met (3,357,036.12/2,500,000) and tallies: For 1,856,122.78, Abstain 1,500,913.34, Against 0.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gnosis pilot: $40K Growth Fund via GNO conviction voting on Gardens to fund community-led initiatives; Gardens Core to operate setup free
A pilot proposes seeding a Gnosis Growth Fund with $40,000 in GNO-controlled conviction voting on Gardens (a Gnosis Gardens community, three governance pools, customizable parameters) to fund small community-led ecosystem initiatives—$10,000 upfront plus $30,000 streamed over three months—with Gardens Core handling setup and operations at no charge while asking Gnosis DAO to provide the $40,000, amplify announcements, and give feedback. Benefits: increases GNO holder agency, funds diverse small-scale growth initiatives, and tests conviction voting and sybil-resistant participation with low overhead; cost: $40,000; community reaction: vote has early support (28 voters, For 5.90, Against 0, Abstain 0) but is far from the 75,000 quorum.
⏩ More details
A pilot proposes seeding a Gnosis Growth Fund with $40,000 in GNO-controlled conviction voting on Gardens (a Gnosis Gardens community, three governance pools, customizable parameters) to fund small community-led ecosystem initiatives—$10,000 upfront plus $30,000 streamed over three months—with Gardens Core handling setup and operations at no charge while asking Gnosis DAO to provide the $40,000, amplify announcements, and give feedback. Benefits: increases GNO holder agency, funds diverse small-scale growth initiatives, and tests conviction voting and sybil-resistant participation with low overhead; cost: $40,000; community reaction: vote has early support (28 voters, For 5.90, Against 0, Abstain 0) but is far from the 75,000 quorum.
⏩ More details
🆕 ENS DAO proposal to reimburse eth.limo $109,818.82 for legal/compliance costs to maintain eth.limo/eth.link free ENS gateway
- This requests ENS DAO reimburse eth.limo $109,818.82 to cover ongoing legal and compliance fees for operating the eth.limo/eth.link free ENS gateway, which eth.limo says is critical public-goods infrastructure providing 24/7 support for Ethereum-native dApps and content. \n- Benefits: sustains the gateway, eases legal/compliance burden on a small team, and supports ENS representation in legal contexts; Costs: the $109,818.82 payout; Community reaction is limited but uniformly supportive across three replies.
⏩ More details
- This requests ENS DAO reimburse eth.limo $109,818.82 to cover ongoing legal and compliance fees for operating the eth.limo/eth.link free ENS gateway, which eth.limo says is critical public-goods infrastructure providing 24/7 support for Ethereum-native dApps and content. \n- Benefits: sustains the gateway, eases legal/compliance burden on a small team, and supports ENS representation in legal contexts; Costs: the $109,818.82 payout; Community reaction is limited but uniformly supportive across three replies.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gnosis DAO vote: $10k bounty for cergyk after disclosure of Nethermind consensus discrepancy that could have caused chain split
- Proposal to award a one-time $10,000 bounty to cergyk for responsibly disclosing a Gnosis Chain consensus discrepancy — fixed in Nethermind on 17 March 2025 (PR #8376) — that could have caused a chain split by allowing a proposer to set coinbase to a contract created-and-self-destructed in the same block; benefit: prevented a potential critical split and large staking losses and recognizes a white-hat contribution, cost: $10,000 if approved.
- Vote is ongoing with 14 voters and 15,196.36 votes For (0 Against, 0 Abstain), quorum of 75,000 not yet met, so community members are urged to vote and, if passed, the DAO will pay $10,000 to cergyk.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to award a one-time $10,000 bounty to cergyk for responsibly disclosing a Gnosis Chain consensus discrepancy — fixed in Nethermind on 17 March 2025 (PR #8376) — that could have caused a chain split by allowing a proposer to set coinbase to a contract created-and-self-destructed in the same block; benefit: prevented a potential critical split and large staking losses and recognizes a white-hat contribution, cost: $10,000 if approved.
- Vote is ongoing with 14 voters and 15,196.36 votes For (0 Against, 0 Abstain), quorum of 75,000 not yet met, so community members are urged to vote and, if passed, the DAO will pay $10,000 to cergyk.
⏩ More details
🆕 ENS Public Goods grants Argot $75k (plus $25k conditional) to fund independent collective to maintain core Ethereum tooling and refactor Core Solidity
ENS Public Goods (PG) Working Group is granting Argot an initial 75,000 USDC plus a contingent 25,000 USDC released via a tranche-based model to fund an independent collective spun out of the Ethereum Foundation that will maintain core Ethereum tooling (Solidity, Fe, Sourcify, ethdebug, Act, hevm) and refactor Core Solidity by moving hard-coded compiler features into a community-stewarded standard library. \nThis aims to reduce key-person and commercial-capture risk and improve long-term security and development velocity, with the main cost being the 100,000 USDC commitment (75,000 USDC now, 25,000 USDC conditional) and delivery risk mitigated by transparent milestones and generally supportive community/stakeholder responses.
⏩ More details
ENS Public Goods (PG) Working Group is granting Argot an initial 75,000 USDC plus a contingent 25,000 USDC released via a tranche-based model to fund an independent collective spun out of the Ethereum Foundation that will maintain core Ethereum tooling (Solidity, Fe, Sourcify, ethdebug, Act, hevm) and refactor Core Solidity by moving hard-coded compiler features into a community-stewarded standard library. \nThis aims to reduce key-person and commercial-capture risk and improve long-term security and development velocity, with the main cost being the 100,000 USDC commitment (75,000 USDC now, 25,000 USDC conditional) and delivery risk mitigated by transparent milestones and generally supportive community/stakeholder responses.
⏩ More details
🆕 Jupiter DAO debates including JupDAO members in Meteora $MET event with minimum-stakes or time-weighted allocations
This concerns questions about how JupDAO members will be included in the Meteora $MET token generation event scheduled for October, with a proposal to use a minimum stake (e.g., 500 $JUP) and equal allocations or time-weighted allocations to improve fairness for non-whales but possibly dilute focus from Meteora users and create tension between staking vs. LP incentives. Community reaction across four replies is mixed—some favor broad inclusion and time-weighting or minimum thresholds, while others insist $MET should prioritize Meteora users, so consensus has not been reached.
⏩ More details
This concerns questions about how JupDAO members will be included in the Meteora $MET token generation event scheduled for October, with a proposal to use a minimum stake (e.g., 500 $JUP) and equal allocations or time-weighted allocations to improve fairness for non-whales but possibly dilute focus from Meteora users and create tension between staking vs. LP incentives. Community reaction across four replies is mixed—some favor broad inclusion and time-weighting or minimum thresholds, while others insist $MET should prioritize Meteora users, so consensus has not been reached.
⏩ More details
🆕 Optimism Token House approves 4.44M OP Seasons 8/9 budget, streams payments via Superfluid/OPx; council cuts and reduced Security Council transparency noted
This reports that the Token House approved a 4,440,000 OP operating budget for Seasons 8/9 (4,520,000 OP including an 80,000 OP Budget Board infrastructure add), transferred to Safe 0x27426F2bd5120Df4ea6570546474b7313ea0c0AB and streamed via Superfluid/OPx with proportional council reductions totaling 17,840 OP and specific allocations (e.g., Grants Council ~485,505 OP, DAB ~484,772 OP, Milestones & Metrics ~492,350 OP, Security Council ~1,510,250 OP); all Season 8 streaming payments will be complete on December 24, 2025 and Season 9 budgets provide stability through May 2026. Benefits include improved transparency, real-time payment visibility, and operational stability, while costs/risks are constrained council budgets due to cuts and reduced public transparency for privately processed Security Council payments; community reaction is limited but generally positive and constructive with minor corrections noted.
⏩ More details
This reports that the Token House approved a 4,440,000 OP operating budget for Seasons 8/9 (4,520,000 OP including an 80,000 OP Budget Board infrastructure add), transferred to Safe 0x27426F2bd5120Df4ea6570546474b7313ea0c0AB and streamed via Superfluid/OPx with proportional council reductions totaling 17,840 OP and specific allocations (e.g., Grants Council ~485,505 OP, DAB ~484,772 OP, Milestones & Metrics ~492,350 OP, Security Council ~1,510,250 OP); all Season 8 streaming payments will be complete on December 24, 2025 and Season 9 budgets provide stability through May 2026. Benefits include improved transparency, real-time payment visibility, and operational stability, while costs/risks are constrained council budgets due to cuts and reduced public transparency for privately processed Security Council payments; community reaction is limited but generally positive and constructive with minor corrections noted.
⏩ More details
🆕 Balancer proposes Q2 2025–Q2 2026 roadmap, requests 2.87M USDC and 166,250 BAL to fund five pillars and target 2x TVL market share by Q2 2026
- This is a unified, year-long roadmap and funding request (covering Q2 2025 through Q2 2026) for Balancer seeking 2,870,124 USDC in working capital and 166,250 BAL for contributor vesting to fund five pillars (Growth; Financial Sustainability; Innovation & Product; Ecosystem & Governance; Operational Excellence/UX) with KPIs such as 2x Balancer TVL market share vs Jan 1, 2025 and multiple revenue, product, grants, and veBAL participation targets by Q2 2026.
- Benefits include clearer governance/accountability, improved capital efficiency and recurring DAO revenue, stronger decentralization and contributor retention; costs are the stated USDC and BAL ask plus ongoing operational budget lines, and the vote has not started so community discussion and sentiment are pending.
⏩ More details
- This is a unified, year-long roadmap and funding request (covering Q2 2025 through Q2 2026) for Balancer seeking 2,870,124 USDC in working capital and 166,250 BAL for contributor vesting to fund five pillars (Growth; Financial Sustainability; Innovation & Product; Ecosystem & Governance; Operational Excellence/UX) with KPIs such as 2x Balancer TVL market share vs Jan 1, 2025 and multiple revenue, product, grants, and veBAL participation targets by Q2 2026.
- Benefits include clearer governance/accountability, improved capital efficiency and recurring DAO revenue, stronger decentralization and contributor retention; costs are the stated USDC and BAL ask plus ongoing operational budget lines, and the vote has not started so community discussion and sentiment are pending.
⏩ More details
🆕 Reserve proposal: adjust eUSD FinTech revenue split to Ugly Cash 20.7% / Sentz 4.6% / stRSR 71.7% using bi-weekly onchain eUSD holdings
- Proposal to adjust the eUSD FinTech revenue-share split from Ugly Cash 18.9% / Sentz 4.5% / stRSR 73.6% to Ugly Cash 20.7% / Sentz 4.6% / stRSR 71.7%, using bi-weekly onchain eUSD holdings to compute allocations based on current snapshot (eUSD market cap $24,414,489; Ugly Cash $5,063,634; Sentz $1,114,667). \n- Benefit: better alignment with governance intent and more accurate, timely allocations with minimal protocol risk due to 85% overcollateralization; cost: a small reduction in stRSR revenue share; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to adjust the eUSD FinTech revenue-share split from Ugly Cash 18.9% / Sentz 4.5% / stRSR 73.6% to Ugly Cash 20.7% / Sentz 4.6% / stRSR 71.7%, using bi-weekly onchain eUSD holdings to compute allocations based on current snapshot (eUSD market cap $24,414,489; Ugly Cash $5,063,634; Sentz $1,114,667). \n- Benefit: better alignment with governance intent and more accurate, timely allocations with minimal protocol risk due to 85% overcollateralization; cost: a small reduction in stRSR revenue share; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 Arbitrum proposal to move 8,500 ETH to ATMC for yield (~204 ETH/yr at 2.43% APY), custody by Foundation; community asks for benchmarks and fee/risk transparency
The proposal requests transferring 8,500 ETH from the DAO treasury to the Arbitrum Treasury Management Council (ATMC) to activate idle ETH for yield generation (estimated ~204 ETH/year at a 30‑day APY of 2.43%), diversify away from ARB without selling, and support ecosystem activity, with custody by the Arbitrum Foundation and OAT retaining granular approval; costs/risks include potential underperformance versus passive ETH staking, fees/operating expenses, liquidity and smart‑contract risk. \n\nThe community (5 replies) is generally supportive of activating idle ETH but requests clear benchmarking, transparent fee/risk breakdowns, justification for the 8,500 ETH sizing, and broader ecosystem allocations (including DVT suggestions); key dates: Forum Period September 16 to September 25, Snapshot September 25 to October 2, Tally move on October 6 and Tally voting October 9 to October 23, with deployments beginning after OAT approval.
⏩ More details
The proposal requests transferring 8,500 ETH from the DAO treasury to the Arbitrum Treasury Management Council (ATMC) to activate idle ETH for yield generation (estimated ~204 ETH/year at a 30‑day APY of 2.43%), diversify away from ARB without selling, and support ecosystem activity, with custody by the Arbitrum Foundation and OAT retaining granular approval; costs/risks include potential underperformance versus passive ETH staking, fees/operating expenses, liquidity and smart‑contract risk. \n\nThe community (5 replies) is generally supportive of activating idle ETH but requests clear benchmarking, transparent fee/risk breakdowns, justification for the 8,500 ETH sizing, and broader ecosystem allocations (including DVT suggestions); key dates: Forum Period September 16 to September 25, Snapshot September 25 to October 2, Tally move on October 6 and Tally voting October 9 to October 23, with deployments beginning after OAT approval.
⏩ More details
🆕 MakerDAO proposal: create non-profit "Star" Prime Agent to channel USDS→sUSDS yield for Accessibility Reward and anti-poverty funding, mixed community response (4 replies)
This proposes creating a non-profit “star” (a Prime Agent) that channels yield via USDS→sUSDS on the Star’s frontend to fund the Accessibility Reward and other anti-poverty work, potentially letting users support the cause without losing yield. Benefits: aligns yield-generation with a social mission and a clear user flow; costs/risks: may divert organizational focus from profit-making and accountability concerns; community reaction across four replies is mixed, with concrete support for the mechanism, enthusiasm from stig and bluemorpho, and caution from misher.
⏩ More details
This proposes creating a non-profit “star” (a Prime Agent) that channels yield via USDS→sUSDS on the Star’s frontend to fund the Accessibility Reward and other anti-poverty work, potentially letting users support the cause without losing yield. Benefits: aligns yield-generation with a social mission and a clear user flow; costs/risks: may divert organizational focus from profit-making and accountability concerns; community reaction across four replies is mixed, with concrete support for the mechanism, enthusiasm from stig and bluemorpho, and caution from misher.
⏩ More details
🆕 MakerDAO: GroveLabs proposes ~$50M ACRDX allocation for Apollo ADCF exposure — on‑chain daily NAV, ~2% fees, quarterly repurchase limits and ~16–17% fund leverage
GroveLabs proposes allocating approximately $50 million to ACRDX, a Plume/Centrifuge‑issued token that feeds 100% into the Apollo Diversified Credit Fund (ADCF) to provide on‑chain, daily NAV accrual and exposure to a largely senior‑secured, floating‑rate credit portfolio managed by Apollo (portfolio ≈ $1.8bn as of July 31, 2025); benefits include institutional service providers and on‑chain recordkeeping, while costs and constraints include ACRDX fee 0.50% p.a. plus ADCF Class I fee 1.50% p.a., quarterly interval repurchase limits (≥5%–25%), KYC/whitelisted transfers, and typical fund leverage of ~16–17% that increases credit, liquidity and valuation risks. \n\nEarly community reaction is limited but positive on yield and access—misher cites returns of “7.7% or higher” and views the 0.5% fee as acceptable—while concerns remain about interval liquidity, redemption suspensions, and other credit/market risks.
⏩ More details
GroveLabs proposes allocating approximately $50 million to ACRDX, a Plume/Centrifuge‑issued token that feeds 100% into the Apollo Diversified Credit Fund (ADCF) to provide on‑chain, daily NAV accrual and exposure to a largely senior‑secured, floating‑rate credit portfolio managed by Apollo (portfolio ≈ $1.8bn as of July 31, 2025); benefits include institutional service providers and on‑chain recordkeeping, while costs and constraints include ACRDX fee 0.50% p.a. plus ADCF Class I fee 1.50% p.a., quarterly interval repurchase limits (≥5%–25%), KYC/whitelisted transfers, and typical fund leverage of ~16–17% that increases credit, liquidity and valuation risks. \n\nEarly community reaction is limited but positive on yield and access—misher cites returns of “7.7% or higher” and views the 0.5% fee as acceptable—while concerns remain about interval liquidity, redemption suspensions, and other credit/market risks.
⏩ More details