DeFi Renaissance Incentive Program (DRIP)

[kamilgorski]

@Entropy

The goal is to only support activity where Arbitrum already has PMF or where that fit can realistically be catalyzed with BD work and amplified through incentives. In practice, if Arbitrum is organically the best place to execute an activity, it should be sticky. If other ecosystems incentivize that activity, it’s fine, as when they turn off incentives it should flow back to where it’s organically the best, i.e., Arbitrum.

OK - would you mind sharing some information about these Arbitrum products that already have PMF? It would be great to see examples & supporting data to better understand your line of thinking and why this activity isn’t already happening

It would also make it much clearer for the DAO what products this program is going to support.

@Entropy

The focus is on driving sustainable usage where Arbitrum is the best place to execute, not just competing on temporary yield.

@Entropy

We will work closely with the evaluation partner to monitor concentration in real time, and adjust if rewards are flowing too heavily to a small number of actors. Additionally, we are already exploring setting program rules that directly discourage extractive behavior.

I totally agree with the first statement - it’s just that user incentives are just an increase of temporary yield for these users. We don’t recognize any past or current user rewards campaign that would have a ‘fairer’ distribution amongst wallets so it would be valuable to know these new rules beforehand.

source: OBL ZKsync Ignite End Of Program Report - April 4, 2025 - Google Docs

zkSync Ignite had 41% of rewards sold after claiming with native TVL dropping to almost baseline - all for 45m $ZK in rewards and 9m $ZK for service providers (16,7% of the budget).

Maybe even such a slight boost is something Entropy considers valuable enough for the ecosystem and that is totally fine but it would be great to understand why

Best,
Kamil