[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] WardenSwap

tbh can it be like 25% for traders and 5% for referral program ? I think your product does not need to do thing like that much because it’s good in itself. Moreover, I think you can use your Twitter to do a full mode marketing because the point is that you are for traders.

1 Like

Voted for you guys. Hopefully a few more people see the potential!

1 Like

Warden exchage good the best

1 Like

I support this. :sparkling_heart: :sparkling_heart: :sparkling_heart:

1 Like

great, I agree with this idea.


Voted : Yes

Reason: Number of token requested is reasonable, token distribution plan is good (80% to platform and ecosystem growth) and distribution will last for 1 year which give me felling that they are not rushing to distribute the fund but rather focusing on slow and steady growth.

Now, the feedback ball is in your corner. Give your feedback here and help us all.

1 Like

This proposal fits into Gov Fund Phase 1 but the the value-add to Optimism is questionable: Voting No

Value-add: Small
Amount: Ok
Op distribution: Okayish - a bit broad (Influencers :upside_down_face:)
Co-incentives: None

This funding round’s goal is primarily in increasing liquidity and users on Optimism. Top, efficient DEXs and DEX aggregators are moving to Optimism and Wardenswap adds comparably little value. Some of your incentives are a bit broad and we have doubts that this will meaningfully increase Optimism growth. Nonetheless, we look forward to your steps into Optimism & potentially a new application in one of the next funding Phases.

1 Like

Do you just put NO on everything without any clear research? Warden Swap is big on BSC

1 Like

Absolutely not. It took us significant time to go through all proposals and we voted Yes for Paraswap, dForce, Balancer-BeethovenX, Pickle Finance and Mean Finance in this round.

Most other proposals fit into one or more of the following categories

  • Too much money ask for too little value add,

  • Mostly funding internal development (better to apply for VC funds if you’re building a venture),

  • Broad proposal, little detail, bad distribution of received funds

Key guiding principles are real value-add & long-termism. That said, we are interested in quality projects joining the Optimism ecosystem as well as smaller projects and we are keen on supporting new projects and tools - if they come up with a reaonable proposal in the future. In all funding decisions, we will be risk-taking but frugal and will not vote on not spending funds that we wouldn’t spend internally.

(Here, you can read more about our core values)

1 Like

The thing is dForce is a smaller project to WardenSwap and can provide much more value. Two similar project, one you know so its biased and the other you might not.

Same with IW your comment shows 0 research of the platform.

This will be our last response to you as you seem not interested in constructive discourse but rather wasting time. In our small feedback to each project proposal, we clearly list things we look for:

  • Value-add: High-Ok-Small
  • Amount: High - Reaonable
  • Op distribution: Good - Bad
  • Co-incentives: Good, Small, None

We assessed each proposal, and the projects behind with significant diligence. We do not claim to be flawless. Hence, feel free to share good arguments and metrics with us in which way WardenSwap, IW or other proposals will add significant value to Optimism and we may adjust our opinions in the future.

PS: If you look for additional information on blockchain, crypto & solution providers, you can also start at one of our websites called blockchain-comparison.com.


wardenswap i have not used it much but i have heard of it

such a great Dex and actually it’s on most of L2

In deciding whether to say yes or no, I respect how your decision matrix was formed.

However, if you can elaborate on “small value added” from DEX aggregator, that would be great.

I’m curious how you quantify the impact…

Was it just gut feeling or was there a numerical tool at work?

Ultimately, it is a subjective assessment based on some quantitative data, qualitative insights from parties we know & our own previous experiences. We haven’t fully quantified this assessment.

On one side, we look at key KPIs for different categories in DeFi (DEX/Aggregators: Volume routed, Total Volume, Revenues, Users - partially filtered) and we do ofc look at Dashboards (Dune, Tokenterminal, etc.) like this DEX aggregator comparison. Soon, we’ll also share more and more of the key KPIs per category on DeFi-Reporting.com and other websites.

On the other side, we have done research for years, engaged in ecosystem building and I’d call us crypto powerusers, who are active in DeFi communities and continue to follow developments. Hence, we are confident in assessing which projects add value to the stack or to ecosystems & and which are not.

As it all started on Ethereum and we’ve been most active there, there is a slight bias towards projects that have been live there and had significant amounts of users/community (verifiable by us; facilitated by tools that support Ethereum first). If we have a blind eye, please let us know. (For example, we’ve seen Wardenswap with small market share on dashboards but haven’t used it ourselves. Hope to provide first feedback ahead of voting in the upcoming Phases which would also give you time to pitch in.)


  • Cutting-edge protocols are still in 95% cases launched on Ethereum as you get composability with other cutting-edge projects and benefit from the biggest DeFi liquidity, swap volume etc… (If you got a DEX aggregator that is competitive on l1 Ethereum, it is likely also competitive on Eth l2 or chain x.)

  • DEX Aggregators will grow their market share vs DEXs in low-transaction-cost environments over the next years, and with further adoption and abstraction of the DeFi space

  • In this great Dashboard you can see the DEX and DEX Aggregator landscape on Optimism. This gives a good overview which DEXs and aggregators are most efficient (or have short-term very well-designed incentives): Uniswap & 1inch dominate without incentives.

Feel free to send a message if you want to continue the discussion - as we don’t want to spam this thread.


Thanks for sharing your proposal. I’m abstaining from this vote since my husband is the co-founder of 0x which is also working on DEX aggregation and could create a potential conflict of interest.


WardenSwap is a good project and if you abstain here it means you need to abstain on nearly every similar project like ParaSwap and etc.

I hadn’t gotten around to commenting on that proposal yet but I just abstained on it too (also abstained on the earlier 0x proposal).

My point which I might of missed was that if you abstain on projects you are going to be missing most of the good projects (Paraswap, Wardenswap and etc…) that can bring growth to OP. Would it not be best to set potential conflict of interest aside and focus on how it would benefit OP?

I respect your honesty, I just think a lot of projects are generally similar to 0x in terms of trading or aggregation.

To my knowledge so far out of the 17 proposals this cycle, only 2 are DEX aggregators and present that conflict. Not sure I understand how this misses most projects that bring significant growth to the Optimism ecosystem?

I don’t think it’s that easy to set aside. If I vote no on a project that is a direct competitor because I don’t think that’s the best use of funds then I can understand people would be upset about potential bias. If I only vote yes on ones I support, then there’s the potential concern that I’m selectively abstaining from some and not others (e.g. what you just said earlier).

1 Like