YIP-56: Buyback and Build

Here’s an amended proposal:

  1. Time-cap this proposal, to say 6 months, forcing a revote for its continued renewal. This would create a natural check and balance on responsible spending from the operations fund.

  2. Preserve 25% of the bought-back YFI as income for stakers, or alternatively to be burned by the protocol (though I’m less of a fan of burns, but it’s better than nothing). The continues at least some value accrual for YFI holders.

Some may erroneously say that startup growth-oriented companies do not pay a divided or do buybacks. That may be true, but Yearn is not a company, and YFI tokens are not equities giving holders legal claim to business assets, etc. Break the value accrual loop now and it will be very hard to reestablish in the future if entrenched interests take hold.

If you want to preserve the long-term value of the token beyond speculative bullish mania (something which would be good for Yearn long-term), I strongly suggest considering these provisions.


Grants should be paid in yUSD or similar. Think of vested YFI as a stock option on top of the grant.

1 Like

This a great proposal. Yearn started paying dividends maybe too soon. The focus should be to build something yamazing.

DeFi moves at light speed. We need to move as fast or more. This will give more people skin in the game and help in building a bigger community of collaborators (not only devs, also comms, artists, explainers, translators, and more!).

I vote FOR.


I agree with DC Investor that it should be time-capped or value capped. For example in 6 months we revisit this proposal or after XX amount of YFI was accumulated, we return to rewards going to stakers.

I understand that YFI need better incentives for Developpers and long-term contributors etc. However, I think we need to find a good balance here.

Also, so far, transparency have not been the greatest, who will really have a say on the use of the YFI bought back?

1 Like

I support the concept, but @DCinvestor’s amendment presents an interesting thought. While the current staking rewards are anemic, preserving the payout creates value and differentiation. I have another suggestion linked to preserving 25% of the YFI income.

  1. Assuming the upcoming changes in Yearn v2 will increase fees with a number of the strategies being developed.

  2. With the 25% DCinvestor is proposing, I’d suggest an annual or quarterly payout, similar to a dividend payout (in YFI or DAI). Yearn’s anniversary/ born date would be a thought. Benefits would allow holders to benefit in a more meaningful way while maintaining some payout.

Appreciate the contributions and proposals by all.


I’m down with adding a time-cap if there is more desire. I don’t really love the idea of more votes unless we actually need them, but I’m open.

On the second point, as we were chatting on twitter, when there are better options on the guest-list I don’t see a reason for this. But let’s see what the universe thinks.


what would happen to the YFI Gov Vault after retire? Or what people currently staking there should do?
I think some people are still locked bq of the redemption fee of in the vault.

1 Like

Really? Have you seen our recent quarterly report or the multiple newsletters (daily, weekly, vaults, ecosystem) outlining basically everything that happens? Or our updates telegram channel and twitter coverage?


Apologies, had not seen this report. This is great indeed.


To recap some of the thoughts I shared with @tracheopteryx on Twitter:

  1. Time-capping this forces a vote of confidence / no confidence on this every 6 months. This is less adversarial than someone having to propose to remove this provision. IMO, this would be a helpful check to keep everyone “on their toes” to ensure that money is being spent wisely, gainfully, and responsibly.

  2. I strongly suggest maintaining some level of value accrual to the YFI token itself. Once this is turned off completely, it may be very hard to turn back on. I totally agree that burning is sub-optimal as a value accrual mechanism except for money-like assets. Staking income must compete with guest-list and other opportunities which use YFI as collateral.

I don’t know what the right answer is and I’d love to hear thoughts, but every fiber in my being says that completely turning off income for YFI now would be a catastrophic mistake and could kill the value of the token long-term, leading to a death spiral once this cycle’s speculative mania dies down. It is a comparative differentiator for YFI versus pure governance tokens, and a positive one. When you have no value accrual and you are just hoarding YFI which will eventually be sold to fund ops, you’ve basically recreated the ICO-hoarding-ETH model (narrator: It got dumped, hard).


There’s no withdrawal fee for yGov. You are able to withdraw and/or claim rewards using ygov.rocks. The vault that has withdrawal fee is yYFI.

1 Like

Have you looked at the contracts on this?

This is an excellent question, thank you. The answer is “No”. Just clarified this in the proposal.

1 Like

This is fantastic. Am for.
Few questions:

  • yYFI vault to replace yGov. Will this vaults withdrawal fees therefore be rescinded?
  • For clarity…
    Previous discussions called for Yearn fees to split 50% to YFI holders and 50% to treasury and academy. Are we now saying only the yield earned by yYFI vault will come back to YFI holders? And all yield earned elsewhere goes to buybacks?
  • I’m for YFI holders voting while YFI is working elsewhere, so long as the working YFI isn’t being loaned out. I don’t want to kick start this discussion again but this differentiation must be stated.


Completely disagree. We can always add back the dividend in the future once we have enough value in our contracts to be satisfied with our growth.

In fact, I will vote to do so then. For now, we are still in the growth stage. Let’s grow!


I disagree that 100% of all fee income is needed to drive growth though. You don’t think 75% to 90% would be enough?

IMO, there is great value in retaining some sort of value accrual mechanism to the token. Do yo have any idea how hard it might be to vote to turn back on “divided” funding or some other value accrual mechanism in the future?

No one thinks entrenched interests can happen to them, until they do.


How our devs spend the tokens/coins is transparent. If you don’t like how they spend it, you can voice your concerns here and schedule a vote. Our devs have only been extremely transparent and generous since this project launched. We should give them the benefit of the doubt.

Time-capping just continues to mutter the trust between YFI holders and YFI builders.


How much of a dividend has Tesla given its shareholders since it launched?

Find me any successful startup that has given a dividend this early in its launch please


Sorry, I don’t believe in designing mechanisms on what has been great behavior in the past.

I believe in designing mechanisms which will create conditions for mutual success and positive outcomes, irrespective of the actors who are involved (who could change over time).

Time-capping this is a simple and effective way to create a check and balance on expenditures.


Yearn isn’t a public company- with any of the legal rights or protections which accrue to equity holders. Your comparison not relevant.

However, we agree that a substantial portion of earnings should be reinvested into the protocol to promote growth.

1 Like