Proposal to track DApp Incentives using fundamental data

BLIP - Research and Discussion
1

Overview

This post is to receive community feedback for a proposal to track the data for DApps as part of Blast’s latest Gold distribution. This dashboard will help the community understand which DApps are making the most of the incentives offered based on an increase in metrics like – TVL, active addresses, transactions made, and revenue generated to Blast.

Motivation

We noticed this TBLIP proposal to provide “deeper engagement within the Blast ecosystem” proposed by @Omi. The goal of @Omi’s proposal is to build a multi-tiered incentive program that rewards activities across the Blast ecosystem. Among others is a – Points Boost, Degen Bounty, and Gold Allocation Council.

The purpose of this post is to – understand if exercise is something that will help the community. If yes, to source feedback on the parameters for it. Our goal is to better track the – incentive distribution and end result of this proposal and other incentive proposals through data analysis.

Proposal Details

We want to invite feedback from the Blast L2 community for a dashboard on – incentive tracking. Specifically on the following open questions:

  1. What DApps does the community specifically want to track in terms of Gold rewards distributed?

  2. We’d recommend analysing all [19 Dapps] that received Gold Distribution and comparing it to respective bellwethers across the Ethereum market to provide a control.

  3. What metrics does the community want to measure for each DApp?

  4. We’d recommend covering key metrics based on:

1. Operational KPIs: Transfer volume, transaction count, smart contract deployed, etc.
2. User behavior: DAU, MAU, Avg transactions per user, new addresses per day, cumulative address count, etc.
3. Financial metrics: Gas fee generated, gas fee paid to L2, Avg fees per transaction, etc.

  1. What time period does the community want to look at this data for?

  2. We suggest doing this pre and post the airdrop. This is similar to the event-based funding analysis that we’ve done for – Optimism (for their RPGF) and are on course to do for Arbitrum (for their LTIPP program).

Why Us

You must be wondering – why we should be the ones to do this data analysis. Hence, a brief background about us.

I lead the research team at PYOR, a crypto data solutions provider. We are backed by Castle Island Ventures, Coinbase Ventures, among others. We primarily work with crypto protocols [few customers: Compound, ICP, Arbitrum] and institutional investors [few customers: Ribbit Capital, M31 Capital, etc.].

We provide – custom data solutions to our partners.

Examples of what we’ve built for protocols:

  • Protocols: We work with protocols building custom solutions tailored to their needs. Some of the protocols/chains we have worked with include – Compound, EigenLayer, Swell, ICP, QuickSwap, and Osmosis among others.

  • Institutional Clients: We work with large institutional customers supporting their crypto analytics and research needs. Our customers include Ribbit Capital and [M31 Capital], etc.

  • Product: We have built an interface XRAY for institutional investors to give them an in-depth look into the business and financial metrics. Our platform includes metrics around retention, LTV, user activity, stablecoin volumes etc.

Proof of work

In addition to the work mentioned above, we’ve analyzed Optimism’s retroactive public goods funding (RPGF) round 3 based on the following metrics:

  1. Total value locked
  2. Total fee generated
  3. Volume: DEX and Bridge
  4. User activity: Based on wallets created

Check it out here.

Open to feedback

We’d like to ask the community for their feedback to understand – whether this analysis would be useful and if so how to precisely structure it based on – DApps, metrics, and time period of analysis.

2

Hey! Just read through and passed along to folks at the foundation.

Full transparency, this falls outside the purview of governance but will definitely make sure the foundation team sees this- they do review all the posts in the forum anyways as feed back.

I know that the incentive system to date more or less happens behind closed door and at the foundation’s discretion, but they do currently outline the things they are looking for when awarding gold and have a weekly office hours for devs who may be looking for feedback and one on one catch up with gold receiving teams.

2 Likes
3

Thanks for passing along the post to the foundation.

Is there a way we can speak with the foundation to understand – what is the framework they use to evaluate incentive efficacy? This will help us frame the problem statement better for our eventual analysis.

Let me know how we can help the foundation analyze Gold distribution. :fist:

1 Like
4

Gm @jenn, any update on what the foundation team thinks of our proposal?