Almond SRM Grant Proposal

Hello, core Almond dev here with a SRM grant proposal.

Almond is a fair launch DeFi protocol that is currently incentivizing over $300M in liquidity to Serum! We do this by emitting our native token (ALM) to many staked Serum liquidity pools, which can be viewed here: We have more DeFi features under wraps and in development to be announced soon.

We would like to incentivize 15M TVL of ALM/USDC at a target APY of 15% for 2 months (60 days). This is roughly 50k SRM, at the current price of $7.50. Here is the corresponding calculation:

15M * 0.15 * (2 mo / 12 mo) / 7.50 = 50,100 ≈ 50k SRM

This emissions model is in contrast to many other projects, which emit their native token. We think emitting a token other than our native token will promote the long term growth of Almond, which is directly correlated with Serum’s success and TVL due to our tight integration with Serum liquidity pools. If we were to emit our native token, it is very likely that the TVL on Almond would decrease greatly over time as our token price decreases due to the selling of ALM emissions, creating a negative feedback loop. So we think it’s in both protocols long-term interest to try to maintain, or even grow TVL on Almond.

As a small side effect, this proposal will also directly incentivize TVL and liquidity on Serum, since the ALM-USDC pool deposits its liquidity onto the Serum orderbook.

To note, we will NOT be removing ALM emissions for any Almond pools. In fact, we will be adding more pools as our community grows and more projects reach out to us.

While I think it is great that Almond is composing with Serum, I don’t support this proposal. I don’t think that SRM emissions should be used to incentivize a NewProtocol/USDC pool. Generally speaking, the actor mostly concerned with promoting NewProtocol/USDC liquidity is NewProtocol, especially in the early days when liquidity is scarce. I think the benefit back to Serum is pretty tangential.

Emissions create sell pressure. They should be considered when they would directly achieve an important goal for Serum, the achievement of which would add more value to the Serum (in the long term) than they would cost. When done correctly, emissions are a +EV investment.

What’s presented here doesn’t convince me that we need SRM emissions for the benefit of the ALM tokenholders. You’re worried about ALM emissions creating sell pressure on ALM… but then you’re incentivizing all of your other pools with ALM token?

My impression is that Almond wraps Atrix (lmk if that’s wrong!), and therefore the emissions proposed in Atrix SRM Grant Proposal would flow to Almond LPs in those pools. That seems like an appropriate place to start since those pools are high-value and have the potential to drive a lot of Serum activity.


Second this. Atrix’s AMM equation and actually liquidity provided has been called into question, making Altrix looks like a superficial TVL provider like “Sunny” for Saber. What does this make Almond then? A Sunny’s Sunny? TBH yield aggregators have little ground to stand on here…

1 Like

Hi guys. Your feedback is very valid. I saw in other threads that Serum is valuing TVL less as a metric, and that makes Almond’s proposal less valuable.

We are adding fees on top of Almond farms soon which will generate revenue for the project. That makes the need for SRM emissions less and gives more value to the project. We are also going to release some more DeFi products, but that would be less relevant here since they are not public yet.

Still hope the community considers this proposal, with maybe less SRM amount : )