Proposal: Add 5 New Vaults With Ready Code


Add the following as assets to be used as collateral in yVaults.
Strategy smart contracts to farm CREAM are already written and ready to go (pending approval).

  • BAL
  • COMP
  • CRV
  • LEND
  • LINK


Increase opportunity for revenue generation via governance fees. Ready to go soon as voting complete. Contracts to farm are written, very little effort required to go live now.


Strategy smart contracts to farm cream with the above assets are already written and ready to go (pending approval). In addition, simply add a new Vault in the yVault panel to accept deposits and execute the strategies.


  • FOR: YES! Add 5 New Vaults With Ready Code
  • Against
0 voters

Ready to go soon as voting complete.

Let’s use the new voting system if possible. Also is Andre able to manage strategies on all these vaults?

Too much too soon? The deployer will suddenly have 5 more babies to care about…


I’m against. CREAM farming is not profitable enough to warrant adding them. BAL APY is much higher by being an LP for BAL, but LP strategies have IL, so they don’t qualify for yearn.

COMP is a valid candidate, however COMP holders won’t provide it as LP for yearn, its a different demographic.

CRV in a lender has too much risk, the CRV pool in cream is almost always at max utilization, this means vault users won’t be able to get their funds back when they need, so this strategy does not qualify for yearn.

LEND we need to wait till after their AAVE migration, and even then they are a better candidate for delegated vault.

LINK already has a delegated vault.

Please don’t rush vaults or strategies, there is timing, security, and utility to consider.


You’ve got to slow down man. I am all for your enthusiasm. But wanting to switch the website, now this 5 additions. You’re just moving to fast imo. We have no need to rush our products. We have already got 1st mover advantage and earn + vaults are already amazing and set us at 1B TVL. I am all for adding on new assets but it needs to be done in a methodical way with goals and metrics to judge the decision off of.


I’m getting bad vibes out of this… Voted NO


Lmao he added Link which already has a vault. :joy:

BTW don’t rush such things as there’s money involved and rushing might lead to people losing money. I’m against.


Please vote No! this is rushed in every way


hi Andre, when will yswap single side liquidity exposure remove IL for LP yield, so it can qualify for yvault strategy? Should we be focusing on this first, or wait for AMMs to integrate it on their own?


voted no, lets put security and stability in the front seat here…


“Testing in prod” is nice until you have 1B in AUM. This feels rushed. Voted no.


Yes against. Impermanent loss pools don’t make sense. Lets get the ETH and SNX pools right, get things stabilised for a bit and come back to whether any new pools in a month.

1 Like

While I am perfectly fine with the choice of @andre.cronje and the community here, I firmly reject this position to paint this as an attempt to cash in on anything.

To clarify, these are actually some of the first smart contracts I’ve ever touched, and I am taking the opportunity to learn by doing. Simple.

In fact, I’ve learned a lot already, especially with respect to these points which @andre.cronje mentioned should be more considered when proposing vaults and strategies, in case it helps anyone else here:

  • Yield
  • Integration path
  • Timing
  • Security
  • Utility

I wouldn’t have learned to consider the above without doing the work, so for that, I’m quite satisfied with the outcome.