[Temp Check] BUIDL/USTB/USYC/TBILL/USDY GSM

[Temp Check] BUIDL/USTB/USYC/TBILL/USDY GSM

Author: Hashnote

Date: 09-30-2024


Summary

The Temp Check proposes a strategic expansion of the GHO Stability Module (GSM) by integrating a basket of money market tokens in a market-cap-weighted “optimal portfolio.” Instead of choosing whatever is being proposed, Aave can follow a Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) style portfolio structure. The largest money market tokens by market cap according to rwa.xyz are:

  • Blackrock’s $BUIDL
  • Franklin Templeton’s $FOBXX
  • ONDO’s $USDY
  • Hashnote’s $USYC
  • ONDO’s $OUSG
  • Superstate’s $USTB
  • Open Eden’s $TBILL

For the purposes of this allocation, however, it may be prudent to exclude Franklin Templeton’s $FOBXX and Ondo’s $OUSG. Franklin Templeton’s product can not be held in a smart contract wallet owned by the GSM. Ondo’s OUSG invests primarily in the BUIDL token, so exposure would be redundant. If anyone in the community knows otherwise on this topic, please feel free to correct us in the comments.

Motivation

The original temp check proposed to integrate $BUIDL into the GSM architecture, Superstate in turn, proposed to not only integrate $BUIDL, but also integrate Superstate’s $USTB and support 50%/50% asset allocation. We at Hashnote propose to integrate a market-cap weighted basket of $BUIDL, $USTB, $USYC, $TBILL, $USDY because this would be the most defensible from a rigorous portfolio construction perspective. To be fair, the MPT optimal portfolio framework does not perfectly fit here, it is a much closer proxy to a safe diversified portfolio than an over-concentrated allocation.

Normally MPT uses the normal distribution of market volatility to construct an optimal portfolio. We can assume, however, that the market cap distribution of the money market tokens still roughly approximates the market implied riskiness of the structures. The main contentions to this statement may be captured aum due to back-door deals, self-attributed aum from vested interests, and sticky money from first mover advantages.

Each project has chosen different characteristics for various reasons. While we believe all participants are structured in a “bankruptcy remote” fashion, the actual characteristics of a legal unwind will differ in all cases. Dollars may be safe, but in some of these structures, it is unclear how long it will take for distributions. Some projects have more duration risk than others, and some have a bit of credit risk to commercial paper. Finally, the liquidity characteristics from a redemption perspective are certainly different.

We should assume the market has allocated capital taking the complexities above into account and their associated risks. Furthermore, a market cap allocation is dynamic, so the GSM should rebalance on a regular (monthly?) basis to update for market changes. MPT’s market cap weighted portfolio gives the GSM a rule of thumb to rebalance to.

A Note on Modifications to MPT

The DAO should consider whether some slight modifications should be made to the MPT optimal portfolio allocation. For the GSM, liquidity may be the most important feature. Similarly, perhaps smart-contract enabled direct redemption is most important. It may make sense to modify the allocations slightly to account for features that are unique to the GSM’s utility function. A similar feature perhaps worth considering- time to redemption. Fiat style redemptions may take T+1 to T+3, so it may make sense to reduce allocations based on how many days a redemption takes in an adverse scenario.

For example, if instant liquidity is important, it may make sense to add 10% allocation to the tokens that are instantly redeemable and pro-rata deduct that amount from other allocations.

Specification

The proposed GSM instance that will run in parallel with already existing GSMs, will enable 1:1 fixed-ratio swaps between stablecoin and GHO. Surplus, in turn, will be used to mint the backing portfolio.

$USYC and $BUILD provide access to 24/7 liquidity facility for redemptions. While $BUILD can be redeemed into $USDC, $USYC can be redeemed into $PYUSD and $USDC. (see footnote 1). The remaining tokens need a fiat leg that may delay withdrawals.

We also offer a slightly altered approach presented by Superstate, and provide immediate redemptions via in $BUIDL and $USYC into pro-rata USDC and PYUSD (PYUSD could theoretically be swapped to USDC via Curve if full redemption in USDC is preferred). Other GSM constituents could be rebalanced once a day back into the optimal allocation. To allow full redemptions (and to avoid a zeno’s paradox like cycle of rebalancing) the GSM can allow a user to choose between instantaneous redemption up to the amount of USYC and BUIDL available or T+1 redemption queued for when the remaining constituents can be liquidated via fiat rails.

2_mint_gho
2_redeem_gho

Footnote 1: USYC has the ability to create “private tellers” that allow for 100% instant redemption capability to select clients. Hashnote is willing to deploy a private teller for the GSM so that 100% of the USYC held by the GSM would be instantly redeemable via smart contract call.

Next Steps

  1. Gather feedback from the community.
  2. If consensus is reached on this [TEMP CHECK], escalate this proposal to the Snapshot stage.
  3. If Snapshot outcome is YAE, escalate this proposal to the ARFC stage.

Copyright

Copyright and related rights of this Temp Check waived via [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/).
3 Likes

At this current governance stage, we aim to clarify the evaluation criteria that will guide our assessment of tokenized securities and similar Real World Asset (RWA) products. During our standardized asset review methodology, we’ll put additional efforts into identifying risks specific to RWA offerings.

When conducting an asset review, we will direct additional attention toward the following key areas:

  • Assets Under Management (AUM): An assessment of the value of assets under management.
  • Product Longevity: An evaluation of the product’s maturity, which indicates the stability and reliability of the offering over time.
  • Legal and Regulatory Standing: An assessment of the product’s legal and regulatory framework, focusing on the jurisdiction of incorporation, compliance with relevant regulations, and the extent to which the product offers bankruptcy protection. These aspects will help gauge the security and viability of the centralized components.
  • Credible Decentralization: We will also seek reasonable assurances for decentralized products. This includes the robustness of the governance mechanisms, such as timelocks on protocol upgrades and the DAO oversight.
  • Instant Liquidity: An evaluation of whether the liquidity available in secondary markets or through issuer-backed buffers exceeds the value of the proposed allocation. Products with insufficient liquidity to meet this benchmark will be considered higher risk.
  • Redemption Time: We will demand clear assurances regarding the redemption processing times for custodial products, ensuring that investors can reasonably expect timely access to their assets upon redemption requests.

Beyond the metrics above, we strongly advocate for a detailed explanation in each proposal, particularly concerning the requirements for investor onboarding. This will facilitate our analysis of whether Aave DAO can meet these requirements or if a special-purpose legal structure must be established to facilitate such compliance.

1 Like