XLP Halvening Completed! We Need Your Feedback to Make it Better #XIOfeedback

Oh boy, I am both sad and happy for this milestone. I won’t see those juicy xlp monthly rewards anymore, but the value of future rewards should go higher since we will have less inflation. A good milestone.

As for the question, I think we should move our xlp program to sushiswap only if we will be able to liquidity - mine sushi tokens as well. That would be nice, on top of the already nice xlp rewards.

The xio/eth pair is good for now, and a xio / stable coin (not tether please) should be only an addition and not a replacement for the current xlp.

Lastly, please consider adding the xlp porgram on the binance smart chain, for the lower fees. I am sick of paying 60$ eth fees every time I claim or stake or move xio or add liqudity :sob:

if we split the liquidity into more pairs there will be 1 problem: slippage (spread) when you place big orders. in this moment there’s a 0,29% price impact if you buy 10.000$ of xio. this increases to almost 3% with a 100k order. this is nice because it allows big money to come in.

if liquidity is splitted among let’s say 3 pools, every pools will have more or less 1M liquidity. this means that a 100k buy has a 8,5% price impact. that’s a problem for the people that manage more money than the average because they are losing instantly money because of the extreme spread.

i’m really against splitting liquidity…

about the second question: don’t lower the rewards. they are already being lowered. and remember: not many people in crypto world maintain a position for 1 year (to get the max multiplier)… 5/15 is ok.

another thing: if you think about it, it’s not 5/15%… is half… the total capital you are committing is the double (for example if you put 1000 xio you have to put the same amount in dollars of ethereum). but the 5% is on top of xio only, not the entire capital. so the real interest is 2,5-7,5 %. which is low for a micro cap crypto project.

i’ve been (and i am) inside many staking and farming projects. for example zero was given more than 500% annually (which is 41% monthly) interest on zero/usdc pair. LPOOL is giving in this exact moment 515% annually on LPOOL/ETH pair. and the 515% is on the entire capital (LPOOL + ETH) so if we compare to xio, it is like 1030% annually.

these last 2 projects aren’t p&d or any kind of money grab. they are legit project (zero is a multichain dex and lpool is an ido launchpad platform).

i’m saying that because i want people to understand that the rewards xio is giving are just “normal” for a micro cap crypto company. nothing special.

i think it is good like it is now. we have 2 more halvenings so the long term is already guarantee.

I Will start with the question of improvement of XLP.
Reducing the minimum amount from 1eth to 0,5eth could really encourage a good number of people to add liquidity. Some of my friend told me that XLP is just for rich people just because of this minimum amount for the first adding.

We should also not neglect this problem of fees. It really reduce the number of people in this XLP program. But if we migrate or add XLP program to binance chain, people could leave Eth network.

And finally, by responding to the first question which is also consider as a improvement of XLP program, we could rewad this pairs: XIO/DAI (in UNISWAP) and XIO/FLASH (in UNISWAP and in the DAPP)


Adding another multiplier of 4x for 24 months is an exciting prospect to me. This would further incentive long term holders, giving everyone a higher goal to reach and from a psychological stand point would make it that much more painful to remove liquidity, losing a 2 year clock reset. The goal is to maintain existing liquidity as much as it is to find new liquidity providers. Kind of like the rule that it is 6x more expensive to win a new customer than to keep an existing one.


According to https://defipulse.com/ , as of right now the Total Value Locked at these top 5 are:
• SushiSwap: 4.9bil
• Uniswap: 4.3bil
• Curve: 4.3bil
• Balancer: 1.8bil
• Bancor: 1.7bil

I like the idea of seeing XIO get on Bancor to be able to:

  1. Only have to deposit XIO (1 sided liquidity provider)
  2. Utilize their Impermanent Loss Staking Insurance protection to guarantee no losses (that matures after around 120 days if I remember correctly)
  3. Earn additional APY% on the staked tokens
  4. This allows our XIO tokens to be part of liquidity and doesn’t require a 2nd token to be able to do so. The benefit to anyone who is a “XIO maximalist” would be: You could hold just XIO tokens, sell your ETH half (from ETH/XIO pool) for just XIO, and now you have 2x the XIO tokens and [I ASSUME] could potentially still earn the 4x multiplier on future token earnings = a way to earn 2x the maximum potential future tokens in the BZ ecosystem vs XIO/ETH UniV2, with the same value. (100 XIO in Bancor vs 50 XIO + equivalent ETH in Uniswap, both earning liquidity provider 4x multiplier on future tokens earned vs just holding them)
  5. It appears that depositing tokens on Bancor is a one way event, meaning you don’t get a receipt token (like Univ2 tokens you do for liquidity on Uniswap) that we could use that receipt token for staking into an XLP contract. However we would still be able to centrally track bancor add/remove liquidity events… not sure if this causes Bancor to not be possible with future XLP smart contract or not.
  6. Note: from some initial research it looks like Bancor requires a price oracle to be created before you can create a liquidity pool in their system. Deploying Liquidity Pools - Bancor Network

I like the idea of seeing XIO get on Balancer to be able to:

  1. Put a really high LP fee on that pool, which can be up to 10% per balancer’s maximum allowed value when creating a pool. Uniswap only pays 0.3% fees.
  2. I would want to see us create a way for existing Uniswap XIO/ETH XLP providers to migrate to this Balancer XIO/USDC pool without losing their multiplier.


I definitely want to see us move to making the XLP a smart contract based system as soon as we are able to. This has so many pros and practically no cons.

I am hoping to see some more discussion about this in particular of other possible nuances or math tricks or tokenomics the XLP smart contract could have to possibly improve it. Although it’s possible that replicating the existing XLP structure might be a great answer as is, we know it works!



I would like to see all of the Blockzero Labs projects in XLP program, i.e XIO/FLASH, XIO/AUQA etc.
On putting stable coin pair into XLP, I would not pair my XIOs with dollars because of imperment loss risk is too much for me. And also by pairing XIO with stable coin we won’t able dodge bear market downturns.
To sum up IMO we don’t need to put stable coin into XLP mix, but we should add all of the BZ project tokens.


  • We should decrease minimum entery to 0.5 ETH at least.
  • To improve XLP and decrease the emission, I think we may consider to lower the rewards for new comers but increase rewards for the long time holders.
  • XLP program in its self is very good.


I post this chart in another thread, but I think there’s too much liquidity for the volume.

Holders of XIO are incentivized to HODL (to acquire claims of future Blockzero projects), or are rewarded even further for providing liquidity, neither of which address volume.

  1. All this to really say that I think splitting the liquidity is completely sustainable. Echoing many previous comments, pairing with other Blockzero tokens (FLASH, AQUA, etc) should be acceptable, and honestly, I’d like to see a stable coin thrown in the mix too (USDC/DAI) for those that would like to go that route.

  2. Lowering the threshold makes a lot of sense. Instead of pegging it to ETH, perhaps peg it to XIO. So the threshold could be 1000XIO, then it doesn’t matter what it’s paired with. Additionally, I think opening liquidity incentives on other protocols like Balancer is again very sustainable for the volume. Currently, 2% depth on UniSwap is ~$70,000, which is high for the market cap. Splitting that in half is still sustainable, if half went to other protocols / other token pairs.

  1. Like others have said I believe some sort of stable coin would help out and could motivate people to become liquidity providers.

  2. Since ETH is at a high USD price I think lowering it to .5 ETH or .75 ETH and the equivalent to any stable coins would motivate for more liquidity. Like maybe do an average ETH price for the past month to set the bar. The reason why I joined the liquidity program is for the 25x multiplier for AQUA tokens. Had I been paying more attention I would have done this awhile ago especially considering how well FLASH is doing. And the bonus XIO doesn’t hurt. Lowering the threshold would help out people that don’t have 1 ETH plus the equivalent XIO tokens as that adds up to almost 4000 USD, which many people don’t have lying around in crypto money. Also considering the gas prices it’s good that it is not something you have to stake on a monthly basis. That would harm the program, it doesn’t look like anyone wants to do that.

Maybe a lottery of some sort like a random person or a few random people get 100 XIO or 50 XIO bonus or AQUA etc. or upcoming tokens. I saw on Telegram someone was saying what if we just hold AQUA can we get a bonus on future tokens. I like the idea although I can see why Zachary was questioning it as in what would holding AQUA do to securing the platform. I can see it both ways. Holding AQUA as well as XIO or FLASH to secure a bonus would prevent dumping temporarily but could promote dumping as soon as a bonus is activated. As in, on the release of future tokens. Maybe something like an AQUA liquidity program or FLASH. Yes there is already the UniSwap Pool though.

1 Like


• What if when you remove staked liquidity from the XLP Smart Contract, if the total time it has been staked is less than 12 months, there is a 5% exit fee that 5% of your stake is sent to the XIO Foundation, or the XIO Index Fund, or is burned (creating permanent liquidity) instead? Or maybe this % fee could be proportional to time staked such as (5% x [Total Months Staked]/12) such as 9 months staked out of 12 means exit fee is only 1/4th the fee cost sine 3/4ths of the time has matured so far of the 12 month criteria to pay a exit fee.

• What if it allows multiple stakes like Flashstake dapp does, so each liquidity stake can be managed independently? Allowing Unstaking of individual stakes instead of the current all or nothing approach?

• What if we had 2 different staking choices? Locked and Flexible. Locked: you can not unstake for at least 12 months but get an additional % bonus to your APY (such as +20% more). Flexible: you can unstake at any time but maybe if you unstake in less than 30 days you pay a penalty fee (such as a 5% fee)?


Here are my thoughts on the subject:

What new token should we add to the XLP? (Currently only ETH)

  • It would be definitely worthy to include a stablecoin(DAI ?) into the XLP so that takes care of the impermanent loss to some extent in a bear market.

In what ways can we improve upon the XLP? This can be anything from yield rates and incentive structure go lowering the 1 ETH threshold!

  • XIO pairs from XLP should be made available for Aqua awards when it launches.
  • 1 ETH threshold should be lowered to probably be based on XIO (2k XIO)?
  • XLP rewards can be given more systematically instead of a monthly payout…if XIO can be given every day in the claims dapp, it would reduce the sudden selling pressure all at once.
  • I wont change the yield rates as I love the nature and design of the current XLP.
1 Like

I think switching the threshold is a great idea.

If the volume really is this low, then maybe we do not yet need additions/alterations to the XLP program.


Thoughts of my own:

Taking into account Samuels comment, I do not believe that at the moment another coin is necessary as it would spread the already thin volume. I’m not sure adding a coin and thus also spreading/expanding means of obtaining XIO would result to the desired effect.

I believe the current incentives are very strong and should definitely not be lowered, I will always appreciate more incentives (being an LP myself) but I think there is enough of it at the moment. It’s a great way to pull in more members, and our track record/word of mouth has to do the rest.

Just to clarify, the way I read the data was that actually the liquidity was too high for the volume. There is a natural growth in liquidity, but not a natural growth in volume, so the overall natural growth of the tokenomics has become disconnected. So, in fact, assuming a similar volume, split liquidity is sustainable.

1 Like

You are correct, I used the term liquidity but it should have been volume :slight_smile: I’ve edited my post.

1 Like

Awesome milestone!

  1. What new token should we add to the XLP? (Currently only ETH)
  • My opinion, echoing Mindora XID-80B82, is that a XLP with the future AQUA token would be beneficial for liquidity and feeding into what that project wants to achieve (if my memory serves me)
  • Another option would be a well vetted project that would give us additional community on-ramp.
  1. In what ways can we improve upon the XLP? This can be anything from yield rates and incentive structure go lowering the 1 ETH threshold!
  • Lower 1 ETH threshold. Although I don’t see this as being a huge initial priority.

My huge recommendation would be that we look at these initiatives:

If combined with:

Could create a MASSIVE on-ramp opportunity for XIO and create a great new utility for poorer folkers that can’t afford gas fees for flashstaking.

This ties into the XLP as interactions WITH flashstake/Aqua and future Flashpooling utilities could be the ways that people improve there XLP multiplyers! By exploring more things in the ecosystem of blockzero!



I love the idea of daily payout in the claim dapp. I and people ( :slight_smile: ) love watching as our money grows. This way the same way we can check our dapp and watch aqua grow we could do the same with XLP.

1 Like

I would definitely support this Steve. Quality long term investors that keep on adding to their positions builds a very strong foundation for future projects launching out of Blockzero labs. The more value and stability you have in XIO the better for all in the long run!

Yes I do agree it is a bit of bitter sweet but overall very positive. These % could not even be achieved yearly under normal circumstances. You might find a new project that offers higher yield in the short term but with probably much higher risk, not sustainable over a longer time frame and mostly not with the transparency in leadership we see at Blockzero!

Now this is a good idea, haven’t thought of that.
Why would it not work?
We already have enough liquidity and it seems that this will open up the door for new citizens to also get into the XLP very early on.
This is currently a big problem

1- I personally added XIO : DAI pair in June last year and keep it until august if I’m not wrong. I did that to see the difference and at least at this period it was better to have dai instead of ETH. But I really don’t want to have all my XIO paired with usd or any othe fiat after all those money injections. If we create some new stable that pursue a basket of fiats and commodities I would prefer that instead of ETH. But between ETH and USD I go for ETH.

For the first option if we are thinking in long term we should search for some stable not attached with only one fiat.

Terra.finance, just create a bridge to all their tokens to erc20, they have SDT an stable that is a basket of fiat but with the goal of add some commodities like metals, timber and water.

I have some friends that already are introduced to Blockzero but they don’t have or don’t want to concentrate 2 ETH (~ 3.4k USD) just for the XLP maybe we could cap this entrance to 1000 USD equivalent (500 in XIO and 500 on the pair)

Another thing to consider is the possibility of having more options (maybe an official list from BZ) @ UNI with the pairs people would be able to use. This way we can take advantage if there are some airdrop like UNI or 1Inch (perhaps Metamask, or Zerion) and take this opportunity to have those people on board.

When we received UNI I would love to have the chance of add all my UNI with XIO instead of selling it for ETH and then add ETH:XIO.

  1. +1 for an XIO/USDC pair as an additional option. I would jump on it right away! Nice impermanent loss protection.
  2. Don’t think the min ETH is still relevant at this point. Let the gas fees determine the pooled funds, naturally.
  3. I wish there was a regular snapshots of the pooled XIO, because I had the bad luck to add to the LP program when XIO was 0.86 cents. Thus my fixed rewards were calculated at a very low initial XIO and it doesn’t reflect how much the XIO has increased due to the ETH rise and XIO fall. Make the LP rewards calculating on snapshots principle like the AQUA rewards.

Let’s focus on fresh ideas for incentives for attracting new citizens! The current LP has been generous to OGs, but the feeling that you’ve missed the the big gains in the beginning may be a barrier for entry in the project foe some.


1 Like

Probably an unpopular oppinion, but I mentioned before that adding any stablecoin is slightly hypocritical.
In addition to the former suggestion by others of adding our own tokens or UNI I would like to propose DOT. Specifically diversification can be addressed by selecting something different than Ethereum based. And here Polkadot stands out in comparison to the other alternatives.

On a sidenote, I find the 1 ETH limit not concerning. As much as I get that people are frustrated that they have to save several months to buy in, I also think that it is suitable given the risk people are taking. Meaning, those who have to save a lot should perhaps not take big bets in blockchain.
As a safety measure the threshold could work just fine.
More importantly, the gas fees are also a big hinder for small pockets like me. As long as that hinder is not lower it does not make sense to lower the threshold in my opinion.

Other ideas to improve the XLP, make it simpler. I believe addressing the FAQs could be a good approach here. Given that the prediction of ETA for the halvening was rather accurate, how about we communicate APY during pre-defined time periods? That would also be in line with the importance of time in flash.

Another idea is more towards distribution of the rewards. It’s great that XLP rewards long term members. But would it be possible to have the multiplier broken down in smaller steps, for instance 0.1% per month loyal?

Somehow capping the maximum token payout for single holders could also be an alternative. If the long-term goal is to have a decentralized project I guess we have to address at some point the uneven distribution the current model brings.

Also want to mention, the XLP seems to be working just fine so any change should really result in an improvement so that people do not feel this project is unreliable. Please consider this as well in my suggestions above, some might just be too drastic to do any good.

Now let’s celebrate the halving with some cotton candy. I am really happy.