@asa , following the recent governance discussion and mention of 10X collateralisation levels, I’m doing a deeper post on collaterisation and ideas for metrics we may feel are valuable to track.
- I’ve calculated the current collateralisation of cUSD based on BTC/ETH lows in March 2020.
- In such a scenario, cUSD is under-collatateralised by 65%+ when one excludes the value of cGLD.
- I propose three collateralisation metrics to monitor: a) BTC/ETH collateralisation, b) stablecoin collateralisation c) cGLD collateralisation - and I discuss how minimum values might be set for each.
Note: I own and plan to hold cGLD for the long term and I own some cUSD in Valora.
Collateralisation of cUSD based on BTC/ETH lows in March 2020 & cGLD price in June 2020
Stable Value Assets (Feb 7 2021): cUSD: $30,198,575
BTC Reserve (Feb 7 2021); Price (Mar 13 2020); Value: 1,349; $3,858; $5,202,706
ETH Reserve (Feb 7 2021); Price (Mar 13 2020); Value: 23,247; $90; $2,092,232
DAI Reserve (Feb 7 2021); Price; Value: 2,095,536; $1; $2,095,536
Total Reserve ex. cGLD = $9,390,474
cGLD Reserve (Feb 7 2021) & Price (June 2020): 122,023,439; $1.50; $183,035,159
Total Reserve ex. cGLD = $192,425,632
Collateralisation ratio (excluding cGLD) = 0.31
Collateralisation ratio (including cGLD) = 6.37
- In a downmarket scenario such as March 2020, cUSD stability is heavily reliant on cGLD value.
- Were DAI to fail (may face collateralisation issues at March 2020 BTC/ETH prices), collateralisation ex-cGLD would further fall to 0.24 .
Three Potential Collateralisation Metrics to Monitor
Suggested numbers are illustrative
*a. BTC/ETH collateralisation.
- I would suggest there be a minimum of 1X collateralisation with BTC/ETH, assuming BTC/ETH prices at their previous 3 year low.
*b Stablecoin collateralisation.
- I would suggest 1X collateralisation with a basket of non celo stables.
- I don’t know why DAI is included over USDC (I’m guessing people felt that USDC is not decentralised enough for the mission?)
- DAI seems risky because many DAI that are minted may be underwater at BTC/ETH 3 yr historic lows. I need to learn more about whether DAI’s liquidation protocol would be fast/stable enough in a rapid price spiral.
- USDC does seem like it would diversify risk, at the expensive of decentralisation.
- Side note: Stables provide cheaper collateralisation than BTC/ETC (at least if you collateralise with BTC/ETH off of previous lows).
- Sorry to make these comments a mess, but I’m not sure whether including stables for collateralisation makes good sense. If the goal is to get the best security for end users (like Valora), I think it could make sense. If there is a purist goal to build a better and independent platform for stables, then I would think collateralising purely with BTC/ETH is a better approach (which would be a variation on DAI).
*c. cGLD collateralisation:
*I’ve left this until last because I think it is hardest to come up with a good metric here
*I think cGLD provides an interesting stabilisation approach, but I’m not sure what attributes make it good for collateralisation. I’m guessing it would behave like BTC/ETH in a market crash?
- I don’t think this is the right answer, but based on my limited thinking so far it seems to me that cGLD in reserves should be set based on stability considerations (i.e. cGLD <> cUSD) rather than collateralisation considerations.
In the very long run, which do we expect to be larger: the market cap of cGLD OR the market cap of all cStables? why? Could someone point me to any articles on this question? I think this question might have implications for cStable collateralisation because obviously if we want (or think) cStables to have a higher market cap than cGLD in the long run, it doesn’t make sense to use cGLD for collateralisation. OR is cGLD the long term goal and cStables are just for a transition period? OR we don’t know and we’re trying to move quickly while building a secure platform?
Does the Tobin tax help with collateralisation? How so? I could see it would prevent high frequency traders so maybe it helps stabilisation and also prevents arbitrage attacks. Is there somewhere I can read about how - if cGLD is plummeting in value - the Tobin tax would mitigate that quickly enough?
I’m sure much of the above has been thought over many times before and written about. I would appreciate sharing of any articles/analysis I should read beyond docs.celo.org to understand the thinking to date around collateralisation.
And as an aside I love the Valora App and the 0.001 transaction fees I’ve been paying.