ZKSync Ignite Update and Period 2 Allocations

Hey ZKNation! We’re excited to share an update on the ZKSync Ignite program. Below, you’ll find a summary of key insights from Week 1 of Period 1, which helped shape Period 2 allocations. Additionally, we’ve outlined the high-level strategy for Period 2.


Period 1 Key Insights

OpenBlock Labs is building an in-depth dashboard featuring insights on performance, incentive efficacy, and ecosystem growth. We’re continuously working to enhance the dashboard with relevant insights, so feel free to share suggestions on what you’d like to see included.

You can explore the live dashboard here (more features coming soon!):
https://app.openblocklabs.com/app/zksync/ecosystem

  • Period 1 Total ZK Budget: 6,041,926.14 ZK (excluding bonus budgets for Jumper Exchange and LayerSwap)
  • Number of Incentivized Pools: 54
  • TVL Growth: $120M
  • TVL Growth per $1 of Incentives: $90
    • Most TVL Growth per $1 of Incentives: Aave ($218)
    • Least TVL Growth per $1 of Incentives: Vest ($15)
  • Average TVL Growth per $1 of Incentives:
    • DEXs: $47
    • Lending: $119
    • Perps: $21
  • Native USDC Growth: $40M

Period 2 Allocation Summary

Full details on Period 2 allocations can be found here.

  • Total Budget: 9,564,869.63 ZK
    • Increase: 58.3% from Period 1 (excluding Period 1 bonus budgets for Jumper Exchange and LayerSwap)
  • DEX Budget: 5,343,777.96 ZK (56%)
    • Increase: 102.5% from Period 1
  • Lending Budget: 3,428,360.38 ZK (36%)
    • Increase: 22.3% from Period 1
  • Perps Budget: 792,731.32 ZK (8%)
    • Increase: 32.0% from Period 1
  • Number of Incentivized Pools: 74
    • Increase: 20 additional pools (+37.0% from Period 1)

Period 2 High-Level Strategy

  • Transition TVL from v2 to v3 pools to help improve market depth and slippage.
  • Transition TVL from USDC.e to native USDC.
  • Allocate more incentives to the strongest-growing pools.
  • Focus incentives on pools that are significant targets of trade routing (as identified by Odos).

Period 2 Methodology Overview

  1. Maintenance Incentives for Current APRs

    • Treat all similar pools (i.e., USDC.e–USDC across protocols) as a single unit and calculate global APR, using this to allocate incentives to pools.
  2. Growth Incentives

    • Use TVL growth per $1 of incentives to allocate incentives to pools.
  3. Routing Incentives

    • Distribute ZK tokens across pairs based on Odos trade routing data.
  4. Transition Pools

    • Begin to move select pools from v2 to v3 versions (lower v2 incentives and introduce v3 incentives).
    • Shift TVL from USDC.e to USDC native (lower USDC.e incentives and introduce USDC native incentives).

As we move into Period 2, your feedback and insights remain invaluable in refining our approach and maximizing the impact of the ZKSync Ignite program. Thank you for your continued support!

3 Likes

Thanks for the report. I love this metric.

It’s interesting to see such a big difference between the highest and lowest performers ($15-$218). This metric could help identify which projects are working well and which aren’t. Do you plan to replace the least-performing ones with new projects in the next period?

1 Like

Agreed that TVL Growth per $1 is good, at the same time I have a question about how to analyze the data/ how OBL analyzes the data:

AAVE = highest performer with 218USD growth

Period 1:

  • 723k ZK allocation
  • = 26% of Lending budget
  • = 10% of overall budget

Period 2:

  • 1023k ZK allocation
  • = 30% of Lending budget
  • = 10% of overall budget

There’s probably more we could look into/ data is more nuanced, but

  • Allocate more incentives to the strongest-growing pools

is at least not visible in the data hand picked by me :slight_smile:
(assuming that best performing = strongest-growing)

So basically my question is: Do you think that even with more incentives AAVE won’t perform way better? Or in other words: is that budget better allocated to other pools because it will have a bigger impact there?

1 Like