IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2401.04521.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Proof of Efficient Liquidity: A Staking Mechanism for Capital Efficient Liquidity

Author

Listed:
  • Arman Abgaryan
  • Utkarsh Sharma
  • Joshua Tobkin

Abstract

The Proof of Efficient Liquidity (PoEL) protocol, designed for specialised Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus-based blockchains that incorporate intrinsic DeFi applications, aims to support sustainable liquidity bootstrapping and network security. This concept seeks to efficiently utilise budgeted staking rewards to attract and sustain liquidity through a risk-structuring engine and incentive allocation strategy, both of which are designed to maximise capital efficiency. The proposed protocol serves the dual objective of: (i) capital creation by attracting risk capital efficiently and maximising its operational utility for intrinsic DeFi applications, thereby asserting sustainability; and (ii) enhancing the adopting blockchain network's economic security by augmenting their staking (PoS) mechanism with a harmonious layer seeking to attract a diversity of digital assets. Finally, the protocol's conceptual framework, as detailed in the appendix, is extended to encompass service fee credits. This extension capitalises on the network's auxiliary services to disperse incentives and attract liquidity, ensuring the network achieves and maintains the critical usage threshold essential for its sustained operational viability and progressive growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Arman Abgaryan & Utkarsh Sharma & Joshua Tobkin, 2024. "Proof of Efficient Liquidity: A Staking Mechanism for Capital Efficient Liquidity," Papers 2401.04521, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2401.04521
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2401.04521
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Acerbi, Carlo & Tasche, Dirk, 2002. "On the coherence of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1487-1503, July.
    2. Arthur A. B. Pessa & Matjaz Perc & Haroldo V. Ribeiro, 2023. "Age and market capitalization drive large price variations of cryptocurrencies," Papers 2302.12319, arXiv.org.
    3. Menkveld, Albert J. & Wang, Ting, 2013. "How do designated market makers create value for small-caps?," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 571-603.
    4. Clapham, Benjamin & Gomber, Peter & Lausen, Jens & Panz, Sven, 2021. "Liquidity provider incentives in fragmented securities markets," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 16-38.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petar-Pierre Matek & Maša Galiæ, 2024. "The impact of designated market-makers on liquidity in frontier markets: Evidence from Zagreb and Ljubljana Stock Exchanges," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 42(1), pages 95-121.
    2. Winter, Peter, 2007. "Managerial Risk Accounting and Control – A German perspective," MPRA Paper 8185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Juan Carlos Escanciano & Zaichao Du, 2015. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall: Accounting for Tail Risk," CAEPR Working Papers 2015-001, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    4. Carlo Acerbi & Dirk Tasche, 2002. "Expected Shortfall: A Natural Coherent Alternative to Value at Risk," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 31(2), pages 379-388, July.
    5. Dimitrios G. Konstantinides & Georgios C. Zachos, 2019. "Exhibiting Abnormal Returns Under a Risk Averse Strategy," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 551-566, June.
    6. Panayi, Efstathios & Peters, Gareth W. & Danielsson, Jon & Zigrand, Jean-Pierre, 2018. "Designating market maker behaviour in limit order book markets," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 20-44.
    7. Qifa Xu & Lu Chen & Cuixia Jiang & Yezheng Liu, 2022. "Forecasting expected shortfall and value at risk with a joint elicitable mixed data sampling model," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 407-421, April.
    8. Furman, Edward & Landsman, Zinoviy, 2010. "Multivariate Tweedie distributions and some related capital-at-risk analyses," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 351-361, April.
    9. Björn Häckel, 2010. "Risikoadjustierte Wertbeiträge zur ex ante Entscheidungsunterstützung: Ein axiomatischer Ansatz," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 81-108, June.
    10. Marco Rocco, 2011. "Extreme value theory for finance: a survey," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 99, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    11. Bernardi, Mauro, 2013. "Risk measures for skew normal mixtures," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(8), pages 1819-1824.
    12. Y. Malevergne & D. Sornette, 2003. "VaR-Efficient Portfolios for a Class of Super- and Sub-Exponentially Decaying Assets Return Distributions," Papers physics/0301009, arXiv.org.
    13. Maria Logvaneva & Mikhail Tselishchev, 2022. "On a Stochastic Model of Diversification," Papers 2204.01284, arXiv.org.
    14. Ebnother, Silvan & Vanini, Paolo, 2007. "Credit portfolios: What defines risk horizons and risk measurement?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 3663-3679, December.
    15. Alexander, Gordon J. & Baptista, Alexandre M. & Yan, Shu, 2012. "When more is less: Using multiple constraints to reduce tail risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 2693-2716.
    16. Kull, Andreas, 2009. "Sharing Risk – An Economic Perspective," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 591-613, November.
    17. Csóka Péter & Pintér Miklós, 2016. "On the Impossibility of Fair Risk Allocation," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 143-158, January.
    18. Gauvin, Charles & Delage, Erick & Gendreau, Michel, 2017. "Decision rule approximations for the risk averse reservoir management problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(1), pages 317-336.
    19. Brian Tomlin & Yimin Wang, 2005. "On the Value of Mix Flexibility and Dual Sourcing in Unreliable Newsvendor Networks," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 37-57, June.
    20. Haitham M. Yousof & Yusra Tashkandy & Walid Emam & M. Masoom Ali & Mohamed Ibrahim, 2023. "A New Reciprocal Weibull Extension for Modeling Extreme Values with Risk Analysis under Insurance Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, February.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2401.04521. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.