SEFI Multiplier and Lockup change


I plan to submit a proposal to change the parameters of the SEFI Staking (V2) pool and the Infinity pool. I would like to increase the multiplier for the Infinity pool by ~ 15-25% and decrease the multiplier for the SEFI Staking (V2) pool by ~15-25%. Infinity pool should have a greater multiplier and it should come from the SEFI Staking (V2) pool.

I also propose that the lockup period increases from 10 days to 14 days. I’m open to suggestions.



I like this idea and would second something along these lines for sure. My initial inclination is to reduce vanilla sefi staking to a 10x multiplier but I’d be ok with as 12 or even 15 I guess. The balance of “multiplier points” (10-5 that would be removed from vanilla staking) would go to the infinity pool (SIP).

I think that we should be generally somewhat willing to move multiplier points around, either moving points to the SIP pool when they aren’t being efficiently used or moving points to new or needy pools as required. In this case, the only real reason to keep vanilla staking is to prevent dump by people who are unwilling to lock up in the SIP. To me, that’s only worth about 10 multiplier points.

With regards to the lockup period, I think 10 days is enough for now given that lockup of any kind is new. I also think that we should generally try to propose only one change at a time. In this spirit, I am making another forum post about the IL-free pools.


Thanks Phil! And sorry I’m getting back to this late.

I personally like the idea of moving more to the Infinity Pool! I think it’s working well. We kinda wanted to roll something out, and then leave changes like this to governance so that the community could decide if it should be the primary one, only one, be deprecated, etc. Here I’ll put some of my thoughts going into its original design:

10-day lockup period: We needed it to be more than 7 days because historically governance proposals have been gamed by people relocating liquidity immediately preceding vote tallies. By having a lockup period of over 1 week this could still be done… but only once. We believed that would be a significant enough deterrent. We’re not personally fans of significant lockup periods, but again aren’t opposed if the community thinks that’s better. Our initial decision was between 10 and 14! In general ALL of these lockup periods, both in this pool, and on other DEXes are arbitrary and easy to change. We don’t have to have a lockup period at all, but believe it’s better, and justify it with governance.

SEFI Staking v2: The other active staking pool has no lockup and is useful particularly in that the dApps can utilize it due to the lack of lockup period. For example one of the primary novelties for the SEFI Lottery (forever built but never deployed, life is pain) is that the prize pools would be staking. This couldn’t be done in the infinity pool due to the lockup. We also thought it would be weird for applications to earn additional tokens, or to affect governance (lowered quorum made this less substantial a threat). There is no reason both have to exist though, and if the community deems through governance that this pool should be deprecated entirely, then it shall be done!

We really appreciate the feedback and are excited to see what the communities thoughts are on the matter! We made them even and decided to let the court of public opinion decide, so it’s time to ramp up the discussions! This could be a primary talking point in our next committee meeting on Wednesday, and we’d love to have you voice your opinions there. It will be hosted in our new SecretSwap Discord: SecretSwap


Thanks for writing back on this Eric! I’m curious to hear what Phil thinks but personally I think we shouldn’t change things too drastically too quickly because it will likely lead to user confusion and we kind of have enough of that with all the changes lately.

I also really like the point Eric brings up about how dapps can utilize the vanilla staking pool in ways they cannot utilize the SIP. Given this point and the fact that many people prefer no lockups, I think it makes a lot of sense to keep the vanilla pool and just lower the rewards a bit. Strong agree that specific parameter settings are pretty arbitrary and I think we should feel OK with iterating on these choices via governance.


awesome! And I think in general we should keep the Infinity Pool perennially more profitable than the vanilla staking (love that name, stealing it!) to incentivize DAO participation and because it has the drawback of the lockup period, but I’m uncertain as to what percentages you guys wanna use to balance that out.

Also to note, the current multiplier on the Infinity Pool is 24x, not 20x. We’re updating that now, but has to do with us redirecting Duplex rewards upon its hiatus.


Of course, this is a good idea for two reasons. First, it takes away the trading advantage of V. 2 stakers. Right now, the APY is not that much different and if SEFI were to suddenly pop, the V2 stakers could immediately unstake and sell. So making this change will also help with price stability. I think the APY for V.2 staking should be like 8%.

The second benefit of doing making this change is it will benefit the marketing and success of the Infinity campaign. Now the visitors asks “Is the lock up period of Infinity staking worth the extra 7% APY?” For many, it is obviously not because look at how how the TVL in V2 has remained high.

With all the hype around Infinity Staking, we need to deliver on that hype with a very attractive APY and as much other benefits as possible.

So I think this is an excellent idea.

I just checked and APY is now 21% vs. 26%. Here is another factor. If SEFI gets a centralized exchange listing, these V2 people can quickly unstake and dump SEFI for the new exchange listing.

I just feel those coin holders who are committed to SEFI and are willing to lock up their coins, should be justly rewarded. Imagine if SCRT or OSMO had this V2 option. If so, I don’t think SCRT or OSMO would see such good price action.

1 Like

@philenigma , I’ve submitted my proposal now that we have governance powers in the SIP. If you are able, I ask that you please submit yours as well. I think the two will go great together in that they will noticeably increase the SIP rewards and should draw more stakers.


@VVega Posted my proposal.