I have been an avid trader on Gains Network (mainly forex and commodities) in the past and due to the current STIP grants I noted that trading these same pairs on MUX would supposedly lead to a full rebate of my fees.
See below the claim made by MUX that all trading on their platform that would get wired through their integrated protocol, Gains, would get reduced to 0.
First of all, when I started to trade with my original wallet, I was getting no fee rebates at all.
Turned out I was not eligible for rebates because as an old Gains Network trader, I had used a referral link to trade there and my account was now forever linked to that referral, which is not MUX. And apparently MUX only rebates users that use their Gains referral link. This was not stipulated in their STIP grant application!
So I had to make a new wallet and transfer my funds there to start trading with MUX and as such start getting logged in the system with MUX as my referral.
Turns out that this way, the first trade that wires through Gains Network you make is not logged in MUX’s history thus you don’t get a rebate for the first trade either.
And now to add insult to injury, I am also not getting the full rebate for any further trades made.
Because for some reason, the rebate does not cover the referral fee! Which goes to the MUX team!
So even on my new account I have paid over 522 DAI in fees, (of which the 1st trade didnt register, thus only 515 DAI got registered) and MUX is only rebating me 451 DAI in fees.
And this only because I was lucky enough to quickly notice I wasn’t getting any rebates at all with my old account.
In my opinion this could be considered as false advertising. The MUX team is simply not rebating what they promised.
Not rebating users with different referral links.
Not rebating the first trade of users with no referral link.
Not rebating the portion of the fee that is the referral fee.
Hi ser, the MUX proposal was drafted with the goal of rebating as many trading fees as possible for all the pairs from each integrated protocol on MUX.
The issue you indicated is a technical difficulty since the integration with Gains is through frontend and can’t be done through contract given the Gains contract limitation. We definitely want and need to cover as many pairs, users and cases as possible, but given the frontend integration, the only technically doable way to identify if the position is opened through MUX is through the referral code, since trader addresses are interacting with Gains contracts directly.
The standpoint is we definitely tried to make the rebates easy and accessible for everyone, and we designed and developed the rebate setup for each integrated protocol individually. The dev time did cause us to delay the launch time as well. And totally understand the frustration from the traders in this case, cuz not being able to receive rebates for certain trades due to referral code is not ideal. We thought about crossing the referral code barrier during development so it will be easier for everyone, but the solution couldn’t be done through fe will require new contract development, and it won’t fit the STIP timeline. So we had to release the solution we currently have on hand.
Given this context, except for the edge case that you encountered, all trades through the MUX Aggregator are eligible for the rebates, and traders have claimed the first round of rebates. Plus we have updated explanations on the claiming dialog to indicate this case as a possibility.
After we discovered the issue after the Gains team reached out, we explained the reasons to 4+ different Gains team members separately. And Gains team members recognized the reasons we mentioned behind this edge case and I hope it would have helped create a better clarity in the Gains community. It’s a bit surprising to see this being brought up in the forum, but I’ll attach a screenshot as a reference and proof.
And regarding “I am also not getting the full rebate for any further trades made.
Because for some reason, the rebate does not cover the referral fee! Which goes to the MUX team!”
that’s not the case and should have been a misunderstanding.
The rebate program covers open & close fees but won’t cover other fees from Grains like borrowing fee, funding fee, rollover fee, spread cost, etc. The fee differences might came from there, please check. For all the fees covered by the scope, it is 100% rebated atm.
The delta between the fee rebate and the actual fees rebated is exactly the value of the referral fee.
See in the original image the rebate being $451.79 whilst the fees paid (at least of the trades logged by MUX, so not the first one) was $515.22.
Thus a $63.43 difference.
The referral fees are only upon opening a positions so I paid $61.88 in referral for the second trade
So the referral fees come in at $63.43 exactly the same as the delta.
As you said rebating people with different referral links are a technical issue, but that doesnt change the outcome.
Same for thus the first transaction, probably a technical issue related to the referral link, but it doesnt change the outcome.
And then the third one I still stand by it that you are not rebating the referral fee. Perhaps you can do something about that last one.
But as of right now there remain 3 ways in which you are not rebating full fees.
Then it comes to whether ReferralFee should be also considered as part of the open & close fee. Since Gains fee model is slightly more complicated compared to other integrated protocols on MUX, we previously didn’t realize how ReferralFee is handled. After reaching out to the Gains team, we now understand the referral fees will be taken from DevGov and SssFee, meaning they should be part of them instead of being treated as a standalone fee. With this context, we can look into adding ReferralFee to the rebate scope as well. As a reference, for GMX positions, since open & close fees are just two fees and the referral rebate will be handled after the full open & close fees are charged, it didn’t cause as much confusion when it comes to the $ARB rebates.
We certainly don’t have any ill intentions as the MUX rebate program is applied to all integrated protocols unconditionally, and all the income earned will directly go to the integrated protocols. In the case you countered, all the fees you paid went to Gains first, and MUX used the Aggregator grant to rebate the fees covered by the scope. The ReferallFee not being covered in the scope is caused by our understanding of how the Gains fee structure works. Regarding the technical difficulties, unfortunately, we can’t really cross it and there isn’t much we can do about it.
In addition, based on the reduced total grant size, the market volatility, and the potentially extended STIP timeline, the rebate rate and scope can be adjusted along the way to accommodate the program and expectations. The original proposal has also indicated possible adjustments, so I hope these factors can be taken into consideration as well.