Which Curve Pool Should RAI Connect To?

This post is meant as a quick temperature check to see which Curve 3Pool RAI should connect to.

The default pool is the traditional DAI/USDC/USDT one used by all stable assets today. Soon, there will be a second option with the FRAX/FEI/ALUSD 3Pool where we can collaborate with newer projects to take market share away from the main pool.

Once we finalize the audit for the RAI Curve pool, we’d like to choose a strategy to build up liquidity on Curve. We can start with the traditional pool, go only with the new 3Pool or split incentives between the two.

Which strategy should we go with?

  • DAI/USDC/USDT Metapool
  • FRAX/FEI/ALUSD Metapool
  • Both Pools (Split Incentives 50/50)
  • Both Pools (Custom Split)

0 voters


I don’t think that FRAX or FEI decreases the risk(due to their collateral) compared to the classic USDC/USDT/DAI, it is better to use the more liquid one in this case.


+1 to @nolan, liquidity is the most important thing for now


50/50 makes sense. That way Rai can capture future innovative liquidity.


My reason for voting for the DAI/USDC/USDT pool is that this pool is already on lots of other chains (avax/matic/arbitum, etc) and is also integrated into the TriCrypo pools. So it seems like this integration would be easier to port over to other chains, and I’d like to have my RAI on some L2s

1 Like

For me 3crv would be better for now, or a split 80/20. All about risk management.


I think the best strategy is the first option

1 Like

What do you all think about making a Saddle RAI pool and connect that to the LUSD/FRAX/FEI/ALUSD pool instead?

Someone please tell me wtf a saddle pool is.

Voted for DAI/USDC/USDT first because that will see the most organic volume. Those are the big stablecoins on uniswap and liquidity with them is key because aggregators will use it routing larger trades.

All for building liquidity with the other stablecoins but I think those projects should add some of the incentives as well.

1 Like

Saddle is a fork of Curve with the same exact logic.

I didn’t mention FRAX/FEI/ALUSD could help RAI get a gauge for the metapool assuming we connect to them. I don’t want the community to pick them only because of incentives but rather think about risks and organic volume.

What would be the benefit of using Saddle vs Curve? I do like Saddle, but currently most of the liquidity and volume currently is on Curve. Maybe we could split (Curve for 3CRV 80% - Saddle 4D 20%).

But then again, if we think that FRAX/FEI/ALUSD could help RAI get a gauge for the metapool, well, then I’d don’t think Saddle would be the option in this case.

I am now leaning more towards a split, something around 80/20 or even 70/30. As you say, thinking about risks and organic volume, I think that would make the most sense.

Saddle would have been there so we get to collab with these other projects while we focus on the default 3Pool on Curve.

And yes I don’t think potential incentives from the other projects should be the main factor.

1 Like

+1 @cryptomooniac

The lowest risk pool that would maximize RAI’s liquidity would be without doubt DAI/USDC/USDT

FRAX/FEI/ALUSD is more degen with 3 quite different systemic risks stacked but more aligned with our space.
Maybe split 80/20?

I don’t see advantages with Saddle.

1 Like