Any Interest in $ESPO -Esports ang Gaming Etf

THe etf has been performing extremely well since inception in 2018 (past performance doesn’t equate to future results yah yah) Would like to hear communities input before I submit for a vote. I mean it seems like were approving any shit that hits the wall hint hint: Softbank

Anyway here are some of the details:

https://www.etf.com/ESPO#overview

1 Like

Thanks for the post, but I’m worried it might be too illiquid at $5M worth of daily avg trading volume.

Not a bad idea

Volume may be low, but this should not have much impact on the mAsset on-chain trading apart from maybe a greater volatility (but we can address that with a higher C-ratio maybe)

NB: it’s a dividend paying stock if I understand correctly, and we’d need to see how the management and perf fees of the ETF are impacting its price over time

https://www.vaneck.com/us/en/investments/video-gaming-esports-etf-espo/?country=us&audience=retail

Competing ETFs

NERD
HERO
GAMR

mAssets can’t have more liquidity than the real world asset. Very bad things can happen.

This is probably too illiquid considering the avg liquidity of mAssets.

Can you give further details as to what would happen ?

Someone could manipulate the real-world market to mint unlimited amounts of the mAsset on Mirror. It’s basically an oracle attack.

So in summary

  1. Sell real stock on exchange > crash price
  2. Oracle price on Mirror adjusts down
  3. Mint stock on Mirror at crashed price

What’s the rest of the playbook ?

  1. Real Price recovers
  2. Sell MAsset at massive profit

This should be something we’re mindful of but it’s more about sufficient liquidity in the underlying than “which liquidity is greater”. If you had $1bn of underlying liquidity and $2bn of Mirror liquidity, you’re still safe creating having that mAsset

Ok, so I don’t see the issue ?

  • #3 will require so much collateral to avoid liquidation risk when/if #4 happens that it’s not a capital efficient operation
  • #3 and #5 are not dependent on Mirror existing for happening, these could occur on real exchanges (Mirror does not create any opportunity that does not exist on the exchange already)
  • #4 is a hypothetical step , and if you believe the “manipulator” is the one fueling the recovery, then #4 + #5 is a zero sum game

Still don’t see the risk , but I’m dumb so please be patient with me

We have short mints now.

You can also just bid up the real-world price, mint masset, dump into the LP, then cover when the real-world price goes back down (Note: you can even sell the real-world price down yourself, but this is unnecessary for an ETF).

As long as there’s more liquidity in Mirror this will be infinitely profitable.

If you were worried before about global SEC organizations coming after Mirror, well see what happens after you allow this to happen.

I’ve written before about why you shouldn’t whitelist an mAsset.

Either way, with so little interest in real-world trading, not understanding why there would be relatively more trading interest on Mirror.

Just to clarify, the part you are missing is that #4 and #5 are not zero-sum games if there is a difference in the amount of liquidity between the real market and the synthetic market on Mirror.

By difference in liquidity what I mean is that there is a difference in the amount of notion dollar value of trades needed for the same price movement in each market.

This oracle attack is very similar to the one described by Jump Trading in their post about changing Luna’s Liquidity Parameters. The synthetic market must always have less liquidity than the market providing the price for the peg whether we’re talking about mAssets or UST.

1 Like

Thanks good points - it is clear now

Thanks for sharing your knowledge, i learning something new, thanks a lot, I don’t know the gaming etf trend in the future, but i could tell you , Chinese market has in past in game industry. Game value is not clearly in my opinion