Enable $IDLE farming for the RAI Pool

The new RAI pool was introduced by IDLE a few weeks ago.

The current RAI pool implements Rari Fuse and Cream protocol, providing optimized yields across those providers. Currently, the RAI pool does not have any incentive.

For users, it actually offers 14% APY.

Anyway, it was experimentally integrated on yearn and available at https://ape.tax/rai

It’s going to be evaluated to be promoted in production and enabling $IDLE farming would facilitate the process, improving the opportunity also for other integrators (e.g. Harvest).

Therefore I would like to introduce the idea to also enable $IDLE farming for the RAI pool.

In order to do that we need to have consensus in the community to add RAI to the list of pools rewarded by the Liquidity Mining program.

Looking forward to listening to the feedback from the community! :handshake: :pray:


Thanks for sharing Emiliano, nice to see the experiment live!

IdleRAI is currently live in beta, but it’s still not actively rebalanced yet, I think that if it’s able to get more funds (something like 50k) we can start to actively rebalance it. After that if the pool is getting used more and working as expected we can port the pool in production and from there the community can decide whether to incentivize it with a portion of the LM program or not


We’d be happy to get things going with some incentives offered by Reflexer!

If Idle has a smart contract that drips rewards it would be easier, if not we can make some off-chain scripts that monitor activity.


IdleRAI now has about 488k RAI deposited ($1.4m) is it being regularly re balanced ? With such low gas prices, it should not be a big burned :sweat_smile:

Any thoughts on the timeline for sending the pool to prod ?


The RAI pool in beta is showing impressive traction! Excited to see this volume :raised_hands:

The rebalancer sets the allocations as reported in the image below; not many rebalances yet but funds have been already split across Cream and Fuse.

The Governance recently approved the Integration Standard Requirements, which can be used to measure the metrics related to the safety criteria.
In this case, there are 3 involved players: new protocols (Fuse and Cream), and a new asset (RAI).

On the asset side, the RAI protocol has been live since mid-February, with a $100m TVL (worth of cryptos backing the token) and $30m market cap. Values seem to be aligned with expected requirements.

Regarding underlying pools’ longevity, the RAI pool is pretty new (listed on March 24th), but the Cream protocol already passed the initial due diligence.
The idleRAI pool implemented also Fuse, a Compound fork, officially launched on March 18th. Fuse is below the $50m TVL requirement, with $37m supplied.
With the latter active for less than 3 months, today the idleRAI pool does not meet all the requirements to migrate to production stage.

Parameters are not set in stone and the Governance can overcome the criteria if willing to proceed with this integration, but the expected Due Diligence process would wait for achieving the longevity requirement while collecting more info about Fuse’s robustness.
Just my 2 gwei, looking forward to hearing more from the community!


Thank you David for looking into it!

I get your concern regarding Fuse. Note that it was at some point in the past above $50m TVL. And for anyone wondering, the recent Rari hack was on a different product, not Fuse.

Is the Idle community open to pursue the discussion ? If yes, where should we continue the discussion ?

Any thoughts from @emilianobonassi ? RAI pool has now decent volume and is being rebalanced.


Any updates here?

Big fan of both idle and rai would love to see them finally working together. Could we trigger a snapshot poll to move to prod and start idle rewards?


Hey @tom, that’s a good timing to come back on this proposal, as Fuse will pass the 3-month activity in 3 days, one of the requirements to move a strategy in production. That’s a good sign, a longer track record corresponds to a higher risk score of the network. Regarding the TVL metric, the protocol still has $30m TVL and is far from the required $50m. This missing point generates a security alert and blocks the Governance to move to the next step.

Furthermore, a bad debt event occurred on Cream protocol, demonstrating the need for further security measures in the Integrations Standard Requirements.
That accident created $1.3m losses, but the final damage is worth $7.5m. This event happens when collateralized assets do not have enough liquidity to cover high price falls and the protocol can not liquidate the loans, resulting in lenders that own worthless tokens.
The more illiquid assets are listed, the higher is the probability to suffer from accidents like this.

While Cream already anticipated that bad debt will be covered by reserves (that amount to $7m according to this report), if the same event would happen in low-TVL protocols like Fuse there are fewer guarantees to cover those losses.
That’s why the journey is not so straightforward and having some good metrics is not enough to cover potential bad events.

In this case, the Governance will move the strategy in production once RAI, Cream, and Fuse reach all the required parameters listed in the Integration Standard Requirements. This conservative approach ensures that the protocol respects the safety criteria. Until that time, it lives in the beta stage, where users can experiment on strategies in testing phase (with extreme caution), and accessible through third-party integrations like Yearn.