Based on the discussions above, below we’re sharing the list of ARKs we are planning to start getting the data necessary for the proposition of initial parameters for the “higher risk” ETH fleet on Mainnet and “lower risk” ETH fleet on Base, after which we’d expect community to share feedback and any potential changes to the list of ARKs for those two upcoming fleets so we can finalize the choices.
ETH Fleet - Mainnet (“Higher Risk”)
| Chain | Fleet | ARK |
|---|---|---|
| ethereum | ETH | euler_swaap_lend_weth |
| ethereum | ETH | euler_prime_weth |
| ethereum | ETH | morpho_gauntlet_weth_core |
| ethereum | ETH | morpho_mev_capital_weth |
| ethereum | ETH | morpho_re7_weth |
| ethereum | ETH | fluid_weth |
ETH Fleet - Base (“Lower Risk”)
| Chain | Fleet | ARK |
|---|---|---|
| base | ETH | euler_base_eth |
| base | ETH | morpho_moonwell_flagship_eth |
| base | ETH | aave_v3_weth |
| base | ETH | compound_v3_weth |
| base | ETH | fluid_eth |
| base | ETH | morpho_steakhouse_weth |
| base | ETH | morpho_gauntlet_weth_core |
If the community is to agree with the proposed ARKs, we’d proceed with necessary parameters proposals.
Here we also want to raise the awareness once again about the appropriate labeling/naming of the fleets on the summerfi UI from the risk perspective (as we’ve done already in this discussion’s thread above here and here).
Thanks to the discussions with the SummerFi team and hearing their thinking behind the different risk tiers, we’ve identified 3 potential risk tiers among fleets, those being:
- Low Risk - Fleets consisting of ARKs with collateral assets implying low risk evaluated by BA Labs, and appropriate parameters to address the risk level of those.
- Medium Risk - Fleets consisting of ARKs implying significantly higher risk based on their collateral listings, parameter configuration etc, as well as the more aggressive parameters on the SummerFi Lazy protocol level (computed by BA Labs).
- High Risk - Fleets consisting of ARKs that include strategies using leverage/margin (e.g. looping strategies, delta-neutral strategies, etc.), implying swap and management risk.
Based on the brief description of the potential risk tiers above, we’d advise categorizing the aforementioned fleets as
- ETH Fleet (Mainnet) → “Medium Risk” on the official UI
- ETH Fleet (Base) → “Low Risk” on the official UI.
Note: We also note that labeling the fleets should be just the first (and necessary) step to bringing full transparency to end users, where we do want to emphasize the importance of making the actual parameters/exposure info easily accessible on the UI as well, so users can make fully informed decisions.
USDC Fleet - Mainnet (also to be labeled as “Medium Risk” based on the above categorization)
As far as USDC Fleet on Mainnet is concerned, we want to share that we’re generally OK with the idea of including blue-chip ARKs like Aave v3, Compound v3, Sky, Fluid etc alongside the non-blue-chip ARKs proposed as an effort to address the APY sustainability/scalability, however we do believe this is more of a product type of a decision than risk, and thus would encourage the community to further discuss the options brought by @samehueasyou above (like the capped high-yield vaults).
Potential list of ARKs for the Medium Risk USDC Fleet on Mainnet, in case of the decision to launch the proposed “composite” fleets, would be (also subject to revision by community):
| Chain | Fleet | ARK |
|---|---|---|
| ethereum | USDC | euler_yield_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | euler_resolv_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | euler_prime_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | euler_stablecoin_maxi_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | morpho_gauntlet_usdc_frontier |
| ethereum | USDC | morpho_relend_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | morpho_resolv_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | morpho_mev_capital_usual_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | morpho_smokehouse_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | compound_v3_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | aave_v3_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | sky_sUSDS |
| ethereum | USDC | fluid_usdc |
| ethereum | USDC | morpho_gauntlet_usdc_core |