Implement SushiSwap pools (and perhaps other AMMs)

With SushiSwap now being established as viable AMM in the dex space and holding $50-$70 million TVL in each of it’s stablecoin pools, it might be wise to consider adding their pools to further help the Pickle protocol achieve it’s aims of keeping stablecoin pegs.

On a purely market choice basis, the Sushi pools are currently paying more in rewards than Uniswap, so would benefit Pickle participants more to have these options.

For example, USDC/WETH pool is currently paying 43% APY vs Uniswap’s 36% for the same pair (19.5% more).
SushiSwap DAI/WETH pool paying 48% APY vs Uniswap’s 40% (20% more)

edit: for clarification of the calc… 40 to 48 is 20% more… (48-40)/40 = 0.2

This could be expanded to other AMM pools like Mooniswap down the line if their liquidity is significant enough.


A recommendation by @jjdub on the Discord is that the protocol could implement a jar strategy that moves between like for like pools on different protocols to take the opportunity for more rewards instead.

Its a great idea but I think there’s a risk of the protocol then having to be too active and making sure that it’s not transferring to another AMM because of a temporary spike in rewards token price for example.

So to expand on that I think this could be a jar alongside the Uniswap pools. Instead of having ‘per protocol’ jars, there is this one which moves between them. It is user choice then.

1 Like

This proposal has me on the fence severely. I tried to go look at the liquidity available on sushiswap for stable pools and couldn’t find it so maybe we can include some of this here.

I think we need a good balance of liquidity / yield here to be able to choose a direction definitively (should we care about stabilizing pegs still). I think my main worry past that though is the split between the community for sushi vs. uni farming. Ultimately all the revenue will be driven by the system but the opportunity cost to compound positions will be higher (marginally) with a split pool.

That in mind, I think the idea of allowing the pool to move around as needed would be a good route to allow for a single revenue stream to compound underlying assets maximally regardless of yield origination.

Thanks for bringing this to the forums, toast!

I think it’s an important time to put a spotlight on my lack of knowledge when it comes to the actualities of strategy writing / implementing. This is one of those ideas that sounds great as a user, but may cause major nightmares for a developer.

With that said, whenever the devs dig themselves out of this hole, I’d love to hear their thoughts about this (and all the other posts that have suggested similar ideas).

Dynamic strategies? Dynamic farms? Dynamic AMMs?

What say you?

I’m still somewhat suspicious of SushiSwap but I would agree that should add more pjars when there are legitimate and proven AMMs which the community would vote in via governance!

Sorry I don’t have much more to add, but I agree we need to move with the market, and assume that it would need to be voted in by the community :slight_smile: