Strategic Context
In S7, the Collective allocated tokens to a range of initiatives aimed at maximizing impact toward a shared objective. At the start of the season, the Token House, Citizen House, OP Chains, OP Labs, the Foundation, and many other community members aligned around a common goal: to grow Superchain TVL ahead of the interop launch.
Since then, these contributors have executed on that vision, catalyzing ecosystem-wide momentum and liquidity growth. After the season ended, Open Source Observer and the Foundation partnered to examine the impact of each program in light of this concerted effort to grow Superchain TVL.
As a result, we published a series of detailed evaluations quantifying program-level contributions. The full list of S7 impact analyses can be found here. Going forward, these historical ROI benchmarks will serve as reference points for the evaluation of future initiatives.
While these results provide valuable directional insights based on observational data, it is important to note that correlation does not imply causation. Ideally, these analyses can pave the way for more rigorous quasi-experimental designs to probe a potential causal link.
Program-Level Breakdown
**
Future Improvements**
Shaped by an analytical joint effort across multiple teams, the impact evaluations reflect the Collective’s push for more transparency and rigor in assessing the downstream impact of our token spend. As intended, this forcing function has led to a more comprehensive understanding of how well different programs have performed relative to the S7 Intent. At the same time, it has unearthed several deep-rooted gaps the Collective should aim to address in S8.
First, while we were able to measure ROI based on normalized net TVL inflows for the most part, the inherent complexity of programs such as Retro Funding made it difficult to distill impact down to a single metric. Although this by no means implies that it has not been impactful, all programs should ideally demonstrate measurable progress toward the same success metrics in S8.
Similarly, accurate impact attribution has emerged as a thorny issue across various programs, complicating efforts to tease apart and quantify each program’s contribution to overall TVL growth. In response to this challenge, the Foundation has proposed a methodology to address attribution in a practical way in S8.
Lastly, another measurement blind spot exposed over the course of this analysis was the fact that none of the evaluations factored in OPEX and other costs associated with running these programs. To get a more granular view, future impact evaluations should include these cost components.
Practical Implications
Based on the outcomes of the ROI summary, several concrete measures are being taken in Season 8. These actions reflect how early findings are translating into adjustments in program design, grant allocations, and data transparency across the Collective.
-
SuperStacks V2. The Foundation may run SuperStacks V2 closer to the launch of interoperability on the Superchain.
-
Retro Funding. Given Retro Funding’s unclear ROI, the S8 budgets for both the developer tooling and the onchain builder rounds have been drastically cut to 3.65M OP and 1.35M OP, respectively.
-
ROI Reporting. To provide a holistic view of ROI, the Foundation plans to publish comparable impact analyses for internal token spend, such as chain grants, in S8.
Note: The Foundation’s intention is not to provide recommendations but rather to provide data that equips governance participants with the tools needed to draw their own conclusions when allocating grants in future seasons.