APIP 1: Additional swap fee activation for Apwine treasury

Key words:
Protocol fees, DAO earnings, Grow the treasury.

Enable a 0.05% swap fee collected by the DAO on APWine AMM.

APWine V1 was launched less than a month ago,with boosted rewards to bootstrap the protocol, and the swap fee is set to 0.25% of each swap collected by the liquidity providers.

The APWine treasury is currently composed of 44M$ worth of $APW, and 2.45M$ worth of $TOKE. The goal of this proposal is to increase the fee to 0.3% on APwine AMM, allowing the DAO to collect 0.05% of each trade on the AMM router.

APwine DAO doesn’t currently earn any revenues from the protocole, but we could consider the Sushiswap model to implement a 0.05% swap fee collected by the DAO. Since it would be taken on each trade, Apwine treasury would accrue a yield paid in the various assets listed on the platform.

I propose to increase the swap fee to 0.3% on each trade: split as follow:

  • 0.25% for liquidity providers
  • 0.05% for the DAO

All or part of this 0.05% fee could be used to grow and diversify the treasury, reward $veAPW holders, pay for DAO expenses (maybe several or all of the possibilities). We’ll need to decide how to use this fee on another proposal, if this one is voted on.

No budget required for this proposal.

Technical implementation:
Upgrade the AMM in order to restrict swaps to the router only.

Should we add a swap fee for the DAO (currently 0.25% for LPs) ?
  • Yes, increase to 0.3%
  • Yes, increase to more than 0.3% (propose in the comments)
  • No, leave the swap fee to 0.25% for LPs only
  • Abstain

0 voters


I am for the fee sharing to veAPW holders, because at the present moment there is no value added to veAPW other than speculative and governance.


Thank you for this proposal dydymoon.

I think that the DAO needs to have income related to the activity of APW.Setting up a swap fee is a great start to creating cash flow for the DAO.

We will have to find interesting ideas and use these income wisely. Fee sharing to veAPW holders is a very good start.


And as you said on twitter @Dydymoon:
I think buy back $APW with the fees collected in order to reward $veAPW holder sounds good!

But I have a suggestion, what if we add 0,1% rather than 0.05% (so 0.35% fees in total):

  • use 0.05% to produce a yield in $APW to $veAPW holders
  • use 0.05% to accumulate governance power (TOKE, CRV, etc…) (reward $veAPW holders too)
    (or maybe divided the second one in: 0.025% keep the fees without swapping it, and 0.025% swap it to gov tokens (maybe too much diferent tokens collected))

I don’t really know if 0.35 is too much (I don’t have enough hindsight) but divided the fees collected in this way sounds good imo.

.35% is greater than most swap based platforms as quickswap is only .3% and uniswap is also only .3%. So I believe .35% would be too much for most users. Ergo we should keep the fee increase at only .05%.


I agree with CoolGuy

1 Like

Yes I know but 0.05% more is not so much.
But yes I agree psychologicaly (or not of course) it can repel some :+1:

So if we have only 0.05% more fees, I don’t know if spliting the 0.05% fees into $APW and Gov tokens is so usefull. So yes maybe only buy back $APW with the 0.05% fees to rewards $veAPW holders is the best option :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hey everyone,

We are reaching out from Delphi Digital to voice our support for this proposal. DAOs need to build a diversified treasury to ensure their long term survival. Further, we agree with Hasu and Monestupply, and think that unreleased tokens are better considered as something more akin to equity and therefore discounted from the treasury. The addition of the 0.3% DAO swap fee provides a great opportunity to accumulate treasury assets while simultaneously maintaining a competitive balance for riskier assets within the protocol.

As the treasury is only comprised of the protocols native token, APW, we prefer that all revenue captured by the proposed fee be directed towards to treasury. This would provide the DAO runway in the advent of a prolonged market downtown and position it for long term success.

We would welcome the idea of a revenue share after the DAO has built up a suitable amount of capital to satisfy the above. We were also wondering if the team could present some very rough revenue projections for the DAO with the addition of this swap fee.


1 Like

Thanks for your feedback !

This proposal only concern the fees activation for the treasury, and i’ll post another proposal later today to discuss about how to use this fee.