AMPL problem on Aave v2 Ethereum

Any parameter change through Aave Governance is factually the truth on-chain. This is why we utilize this liquidity rate.

Once again, utilization is not 100%, given the deviation between variable debt AMPL supply and the incorrect aAMPL supply (effectively 3.3% utilization). This is simply done in the best interest of aAMPL holders.

The market had been frozen for 1.5 years, and borrowers were unable to borrow and react according to the assets underlying economics, which historically led to large losses for suppliers as the protocol worked according to its correct and intended logic. Calculating returns from the freeze as opposed to inception completely omits this activity

and gives aAMPL holders 4x more in USD. Additionally, taking into account the 87.5K% APY and assuming this logic, users would have received half the amount they are currently slated to receive.

1 Like

That’s why we ask the AMPL team to provide investors with some kind of bonus on top of your calculated as “fair” 100%, because we have already realized that you yourself made an unfair proposal about 99% RF on an asset with a critical error, and lowered the APY for it twice. Although judging by the first proposal dated last year November 24, you were going to increase it for all assets but it was for AMPL that you lowered % by mistake and made it equal to all other assets without rebase, this most likely happened due to inattention, - you did not pay attention to its mechanics.
But apparently AAVE are kind of stubborn, and even though they made a mistake, they will insist - the DAO voted for this, so we will proceed from this.
Therefore, we are now turning to AMPL and asking for compensation on top of what AAVE offered us. We ask you to put yourself in our position, most of the investors are not rich people, and if for AAVE and AMPL this is rather insignificant money, then for others it is many months and even many years of hard-earned salaries that they invested in projects and platforms that they trusted

1 Like

Dear @Naguib ,

Do you understand us a little?

1 Like

@bgdlabs Thank you so much for your anser.
My understanding is that 300,000 USDC is distributed to the 590 address owners recorded in the csv file in proportion to the ampl holders. I belong to this distribution list. I calculated the total amount of all this list to be 300,000 USDC.
I don’t know the reason why it was ended without i receiving it.
Did it end early because 300,000 USDC was not fully allocated? Could you help me solve my confusion? I would be very grateful.

Hello @axc .

If your address is on the list included in the interim 300’000 USDC distribution HERE, it should be claimable on

We recommend you to:

  • Double check the connected wallet on Merkl is the correct one with the claim.
  • If the problem persist, create a ticket on the Merkl Discord, under the #create-ticket channel.
  • Mind that if you were an LP on Mooniswap the total amount (including interim and second distributions) will be claimable only after the final distribution proposal gets approved and executed.

Looks like final distribution is fully passed and executed 4 hours ago.

Anyone able to claim the distribution?

1 Like

It’s night according to European time, people are probably sleeping. During the day, they will most likely make a transaction and activate the ability to withdraw funds from the Merkl platform.
@Naguib can you please tell the moderators to add a link to the Merkl website in the Ampl discord, with a guide on how and who can withdraw assets from there. I asked the moderators several times to do this, but the messages were ignored, and some were even deleted

hey guys - I have a question

Do I need to convert AaveETHUSDC into regular USDC before sending USDC on Ethereum network to exchanges?

It would be nice to know where we can convert aEthUSDC to regular USDC. Why they didn’t do it the way they did the first time with pure USDC is unclear. They could convert the entire amount in one transaction, but now we will have to make several transactions… But again, how we can do that…?

As an update to the community, the final distribution is available to claim on the Merkl platform, together with the interim.

Both distributions can be accessed on

Regarding questions of the asset distributed, in the case of stablecoins the final choice is dependant always on recommendations from the finance service providers. In this case it was Aave v3 USDC Ethereum (aEthUSDC), which is USDC supplied into Aave, with exactly the same value as USDC.

After claiming on Merkle the Aave v3 Ethereum, users that want plain USDC can go to the Aave Avara UI (Dashboard on the top menu) and click “Withdraw”.


So, at this point are aAMPL tokens basically useless/worthless? Can we transfer them out (ie burn them), or are they transfer-locked?

I was able to claim.

1 Like

@OneGoodDude Could you share how you successfully claimed it? I have been unable to link my wallet to the claim address:

I have tried many ways but nothing works. I have also opened a ticket on the Merkl but still no progress. If you can share your experience it would be much appreciated,Thanks.

@bgdlabs We all appreciate getting those distributions across the finish line.

@Paulus @psmith05 @QuantumEvolver

I understand your concern on how the distributions are calculated but your estimation on how undercalculated they are compared to rebase instead of simulated interest is off.

Based on assuming no interest is accrued since 1/1/2023 (The date when the pool was frozen) and instead tokens get full rebase as if they are not in AAVE. would result in a total of 49,412 WAMPL (That’s based on the same as the previously posted 51,856 WAMPL but after removing the AAVE reserve portion)

The two distributions done through the AAVE DAO (40% of them funded by the Ampleforth treasury) when converted to WAMPL based on the respective AMPL price at the time of the two distributions are equivalent to 46,102 WAMPL that’s 93.3% of the calculation based on rebase.

As we want to reduce the impact of the situation on the affected users. A proposal will be made through the Ampleforth DAO for a distribution in WAMPL that covers that gap and more. Will share the link here once it’s posted on the Ampleforth governance forum.

1 Like

I went to the site, connected my wallet, and clicked claim all.
Hope you get it figured out.

Thanks @Naguib!

I was making a different point. I was saying the day I deposited my AMPL tokens on Aave, the total AMPL supply (source: Ampleforth Dashboard) was around 100M, and today the AMPL supply is 201M. So if I hadn’t deposited my tokens on AAVE, I would have roughly doubled my AMPL tokens. But, because of Aave’s technical issue, that did not happen. Now, as a corrective action, Aave returned 80% of what I supplied, so I am at a loss of roughly 120%.

This is not looking at any fancy on-chain data. Just 3 variables: number of tokens supplied, date of supply on Aave, and total AMPL supply then and today.

So what Aave did is appreciated, they could have just said “we wouldn’t do anything and go deal with it”, but, as a user and investor of AMPL, I am still at a loss caused by technical error.

Appreciate your effort to do a bit more to impacted users and will see what that comes out to be but a lot of AMPL users got hurt in this process. I really believed in the project from the heart.


This is the point that there were no full rebases, not with a negative rebases (we received a much larger negative rebase than we should have), nor with a positive one (we did not receive as much rebase as if we had held tokens outside of Aave). So the mechanics have long been broken, which is why we have questions about how the calculation simulation went. But Aave had already said that they would no longer support any new payment proposals, that this was final on their part.

This whole idea about placing AMPL on AAVE was an interesting experiment, but even if this mistake had not happened, it would not have ended well for those who provided liquidity. Perhaps it would be fair to make the % increase linear from the start, rather than so that only when 80%+ is borrowed does the significant increase begin. It is not clear who came up with such calculation mechanics from the very beginning. The interests of borrowers, but not liquidity providers, were primarily taken into account.

I have spent a lot of energy and effort on this issue since last year. I had hope that in the end liquidity providers would be in a better position, but it is what it is. If AMPL thinks everything is fair, ok. For my part, I have done enough to draw attention to this problem and help protect the rights of all investors.


You did a good job my quantum man and even inspired me to start writing messages too, I usually don’t do that lol. I remember your messages on the AMPL discord before you contacted AAVE support, and how they ignored this problem without even replying to you. Only after AAVE began an investigation AMPL did begin to give us some answers and replies. Also I don’t understand why AMPL dont offer to create some kind of geyser for us so that we can transfer our aAMPL tokens there and thus compensate for losses, that would be fair…


Thanks buddy ^^

As for the geyser on aAmp tokens, for some reason they blocked the transfer of tokens, although they could have simply turned off the withdraw button on Aave.

This can be corrected if desired, but so far there have been no initiatives from Ampl to launch a geyser or anything else to further compensate investors for their losses.

1 Like

@Naguib I completely agree with @psmith05 and @QuantumEvolver

The Ampl team has shown its worst side. They shroud themselves in silence and leave investors frustrated. And then we haven’t even talked about the financial aspect. It would be to their credit if they were to take on a third distribution themselves. A compensation that goes more towards the investment than the current two