Question about future products

There is so much stuff that still needs to be developed… Synthetic assets, rollup vaults etc. It would be madness to get distracted from the real battles ahead of us that we must win to survive, just because we suffer from not invented here syndrome regarding staking.

There are already multiple high quality staking assets out there and no reason to believe the amount of quality projects won’t grow further, and it is just obvious that tapping in to those in a secure and diversified manner is the way forward for maker to easily and decisively capitalize on staking and become the king of staked eth as collateral.


My sense from your posts is that engineering time would be better spent elsewhere. I’m sure if we went down the path of implementing our own staking service we could make it work and make it profitable but do we want to be in a highly competitive, tangential business or focus on our core goals and competencies and pursue higher ROI projects?

Wouldn’t we accomplish this with the stEth approach Kurt described?

1 Like

Not really, Maker being the interface of the staking service could grant vaults a direct interaction with the ethereum staking economy where we can control the policies and incentives of the yields for minting Dai in a single product. With StEth is all very fragmented because the owner of the interface is someone external to the protocol.

Also is a way to take the lead in case other staking services think of minting stablecoins with this same model, something that sooner or later will happen, since these services will control the best Collateral available, Ethereum.

Regarding “distraction”, I don´t quite get this as an argument since we have the capital to deploy more engineering teams to design and implement this.

PS: Ok, we are late to the party :sweat_smile:


I think maker could benefit from hedging the overall market. It can be used to take leveraged long positions currently, would be nice to expand to customers that want to take leveraged short positions.

Have you considered wrapping an Aave short position into a something Dai can be issued against? Or perhaps instead having the vault contract directly manage its own Aave account that contains a short position?

I have not thought through this yet, I just know offering shorting would reduce system risk and increase customer base.

1 Like
  1. First off, I definitely think we should onboard Lido’s stETH and any others that make sense. Creating our own staking solution is not a substitute for that.

  2. I guess the question is how much more DAI supply we would get if, in addition to onboarding stETH etc, MakerDAO offered a vault type where people could directly deposit ETH with us and we would stake it on their behalf. I believe that the answer is “a lot more supply”; here are a few speculative reasons:

    • If you gave current ETH vault holders the option to magically swap their vaults for ones where their ETH was earning staking rewards (even with the risk of slashing), I believe a significant fraction would want to do it.
    • I think we could offer a lower commission than pools.
    • Many users would prefer to deal only with MakerDAO rather than with a pool + MakerDAO. There could be many reasons for this:
      • MakerDAO has a sterling reputation that’s almost as old as Ethereum. Staking pools are all new.
      • Some institutions require approval for every entity they deal with. For institutions that have already gotten approval to work with MakerDAO, it would be much easier to stay with us than close a vault, get approval to work with a pool, get the other token, and then come back to open a new vault.
      • Less technical users feel some fear every time they click “send”. The fewer transactions, the better.
    • Many less savvy users don’t even know staking rewards are possible. If they were to go to and see a negative interest rate for borrowing from Maker, I believe it would drive growth. (If we don’t do it, someone will.)

But those are just speculations. Perhaps @Growth-Core-Unit could survey current or prospective users to get some data?


( although is not an official survey :stuck_out_tongue: ) one of the things that made me do this original post was that every single person that I asked their opinion about this they said “it would be fucking awesome” :slight_smile:

1 Like

You didn’t ask me. I’m with Kurt. I don’t understand the point of integrating everything. I’d rather the staking be a separate thing.


I agree that it is about core competencies and risk adjusted returns. I think the reward is not worth the effort and risk in pursuing this venture when others have already paved the way. It would be a lot to ask when other ventures like eurDAI are more important.

1 Like

Currently the derivative token market brings problems, Uniswap case Shadowbanning Synthetyx and UMA.

I think that should be measured with tweezers, the purpose of MakerDAO is always to regulate DAI.

But working hand in hand with market makers and other protolos in the area would be great, as it is done with Hegic for example.

Step1: Stake your eth in a maker vault
Step2: Get a Dai loan that pay itself over time with the Eth yield
Step3: Live of off your Eth and Dai
Step4: Conquer the world.



@MarianoDP I think this is an amazing idea, happy to see the community enthusiasm.

1 Like

This is almost identical to Alchemix.


yes, it is their motto, they get the return by reinvesting DAI , we can take it to the next level

1 Like

If this becomes a reality, I will be like this :exploding_head: :flushed: :pleading_face:


We will be the first to use it haha, how great Mariano.


It might be worth noting that Coinbase has been offering ETH2 staking since April (which was our ATH for ETH locked). Binance does as well. Coinbase’s fee is 25%, Binance’s is 0%, and they both have stablecoins that they could in theory start lending against the locked ETH2.

In the very long term, what proportion of the total ETH supply do we estimate will end up being staked? Why would ETH holders not stake their ETH if there are frictionless ways to stake, earn rewards, and take out cheap loans to do whatever else they were going to do? (Note that Coinbase covers the cost of slashing, so there’s no risk to the user; probably why they have the higher 25% fee.)

Who will come to Maker to:

  • open a regular ETH vault, not earning staking rewards
  • or, go to Lido, get stETH, and then open a stETH vault

if they’re able to borrow USDC against a risk-free staked ETH2 deposit at Coinbase?


great point and very similar to what I said that Staking services can mint their own stablecoin too to provide those loans.


Layman’s opinion here. Eth staking is gonna absorb a huge amount of the eth on the market especially from people looking for safer plays. Integrating liquid staking tokens as collateral AND a maker controlled staking service seems necessary to be maximally competitive.

I might not be aware of all of the difficulties so forgive me if this is ignorant, but isn’t the overhead and risks with setting up staking services worth it? RWA has alot of risks and apsects of it that diverged from the original setup, but I think most people are okay with that given the gains, so why not for setting up staking services?