Next steps to new mAsset whitelisting proposals (MIP 1 - 40)

The following mAsset whitelisting proposals are expected to pass, which means that 28 new assets (both equities and coins) are about to be whitelisted on the Mirror Protocol to constitute new mAssets. These are:

  1. Walmart Inc
  2. Johnson & Johnson
  3. JPMorgan Chase & Co
  4. Mastercard
  5. NVIDIA corporation
  6. Paypal Holdings
  7. Walt Disney
  8. Coca-Cola Co
  9. Nike Inc.
  10. Airbnb Inc
  11. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd
  12. Palantir Technologies
  13. AMD
  14. Square
  15. Galaxy Digital Holdings Ltd (GLXY)
  16. Tencent Holdings Limited
  17. Starbucks Corporation
  18. Peloton Interactive, Inc.
  19. Microstrategy (MSTR)
  20. AMD (repeat) - about to fail
  21. McDonald’s Corpooration
  22. Spotify Technology S.A.
  23. Facebook Inc.
  24. Adobe Inc.
  25. Intel Corporation
  26. Bitcoin
  27. Ethereum
  28. Goldman Sachs
  29. Shopify
  30. Visa
  31. Baidu
  32. IBM
  33. Etsy
  34. FedEx
  35. CRISPR - low support
  36. Polkadot
  37. Ford
  38. Sony


Unfortunately, for some of these assets it’s logistically challenging for oracle vendors to set up infrastructure in a shorr timeframe (for example, Samsung, as it does not trade in US equity markets). Therefore, while the MIP Text Proposal may pass this time around, the unavailability of the oracle feeder within a short timeframe may restrict the ability of the protocol to support the asset (at least for now).

What this means for LP rewards

For LP rewards, the total pool is set to be a fixed supply, with each new mAsset being added being given a weight of 1 (MIR itself has a weight of 3).

Therefore, new mAssets added to the whitelist and pools created on Terraswap dilutes the amount of MIR rewards a unit LP token will earn on existing pools.

For the $ value of the rewards, there are a few possibilities:

  1. mAssets LP dilution may reduce sell pressure on MIR (LPs are earning fewer tokens) and raise buy pressure (more CDP closures as there are more assets available), therefore keeping $ denominated APY constant or higher than previous levels.
  2. LP rewards going down may result in lower liquidity for mAssets, leading to higher slippage and lower usability for the platform.

I suggest we just add the mAssets for now and see what happens. If scenario #2 plays out, we may have to apportion new rewards from the community pool to normalize rewards.

Next Steps

Getting the above proposals passed is the first of 3 required steps to have the mAsset whitelisted on Mirror, details documented here: Whitelist Procedure - mirror

  • Once the above poll is nearing completion and seems like it will pass, a user should request oracle support for said asset from either Band Protocol ( contact information to be announced shortly ) or Chainlink ( ). The user should refer to the specific proposal that has passed and include a link.

  • Once the oracle has tested for stability and is fully operational, any user may submit a Register Whitelist Parameters with the provided oracle address in the Oracle Feeder field.

  • If the poll again passes, the new Mirrored Asset is immediately added to the active set of assets with prices being fed. However, there is an approximate one week delay before the new asset can be added to ensure that the feed is running smoothly on the Mirror Protocol.

Recall that while the oracle feeder address can be set to any address, we strongly caution the community to restrict support for oracle feeders that are run and endorsed by well-established oracle protocols such as Chainlink and Band Protocol.


This is going to be interesting :slight_smile:

What do you think about raising the minimum MIR deposit to issue a whitelist proposal ?
I think it’s a bit dangerous to have people generate so many proposals without sufficient skin in the game.
Raising the min MIR deposit would force any user to think more carefully about the consequences of their proposal


If the poll again passes, the new Mirrored Asset is immediately added to the active set of assets with prices being fed. However, there is an approximate one week delay before the new asset can be added to ensure that the feed is running smoothly on the Mirror Protocol.

So just to be clear, once voting passes, there will need to be another vote to add the oracles before the asset goes live?

So the new assets will be added approx 7 days from when the mAsset whitelist approval vote passes?

I think the problem is that voting participation is rather thin, so quorum is very easy to clear. (we could technically raise the voting deposit to 10k, but a whale could clear this pretty easily - also it’s pretty hard to justify the capital costs to participate in making gov proposals + disenfranchises community members with less capital)

  • Right now there’s aboutd 2.7M tokens staked to governance, which is ~ 10% of the liquid supply
  • 10% of the staked tokens is the quorum for governance votes
  • So, only ~1% of the liquid supply needs to vote to clear quorum
  • The most sustainable solution is to make gov staking more attractive such that a higher proportion of the liquid supply votes

This is quite challenging to do while LP incentives are as attractive as they are today


Let’s pick 3-5 assets to add and see how this effects liquidity. 30 is madness. Few bricks at a time here builds a strong house.


30 in one shot is quite a lot… but can push MIR evaluation and TVL.
Probably in governance should be discussed a minumum number of massets to be added in future in one shot.
For sure I start to stake mir in governance now (and this because of the new massets).

could it happen that a masset is added with an oracle different from the 2 mentioned? How to prevent this?

Last observation: I expect the TVL to go up a lot but the project is not mentioned on defipulse. Should the mirror community contact defipulse? Mirror should already make the top 20 in their (incomplete) list.

Defi pulse is all ethereum (unless you count the nod given to the lightning fail network) – so i don’t think they have any interest in listing non-eth projects . likely owned by joe jewbin entity.

I agree with this - even selling $5000 of any of these assets lowers the price by 1-2%. Adding 30 would mean that you’d be hard pressed to buy or sell over $1000. I suppose I could mint, but then I’d be vulnerable to someone running up the price of an asset I minted in order to liquidate me (which is easier with lower liquidity)


The price for liquidation is the oracle one, not the pool one as far as i understand (am i wrong?). This means that you are not vulnerable to the running up price case. Important is to make sure that the oracle is Band or chainlink.

Ok - so lots of super interesting discussion - think this is the best way forward:

  1. I am in agreement that adding 30 new assets all at once is going to be detrimental to liquidity. Further, current volumes for existing mAssets (which mirror much more popular equities than the new ones proposed) do not justify rushing into listing lots more single stocks.

  2. We should pick 3-5 of the proposed assets, and ask oracle providers to start supporting them. Out of them, in the interest of experimentation, I suggest we include crypto assets. We do: {Bitcoin, Ethereum, McDonald’s, Visa, and Goldman Sachs}. After oracle providers have worked these assets into their feeders, we as a community back the ParamChangeProposal for these assets and these assets only. This means we ignore the remaining proposals that may pass the first tranche of votes for now.

  3. For the remaining assets, we slowly work them into the set over the course of the next few months.

I am going to leave this post up for a few days, and ask someone to submit a text proposal with the current thread link to put the above action items to a community vote.

1 Like

I agree with all of this but when you say we should add crypto assets why McDonald’s over something like glxy and mstr? I want to provide lp and earn incentives but right now there is nothing in the stock equivalent.

yeah instead of mcdonalds lets do glxy it will be also better PR imo i can submit proposal but i think its better to wait 5 more days till 7 days proposal passes so we can shorten the wait passing text proposal by 3 days


How about 3-5 of the biggest bank stocks? This will assure lots of minting and cdp’ fees to mir holders. Everyone in crypto wants to short the banksters right? -or does that make me a boomer?

Seriously though any 5 of these will do tho seems like lunatics prefer novo over happy meal.

Agree that Visa, McD, GS are a strange set of assets to put on… We should do the BTC and ETH synthetic, but it’s likely better for marketing and for volume/seeding purposes to pick YOLO stocks instead of the Fortune 500.


I agree, would should start with listing mBTC and mETH as they are passed. I feel we don’t need the same amount of rewards for these pairs, but this also depends on how big the pools would get.

the synth cryptos would be interesting to the current defi crowd, and an easy value capture, driving up volume and fees and making Mirror more robust. I feel with many of the currently passed stocks there is a hype to get them listed but no way to gage the actual demand for liquidity providers to make them tradable. before we list many more stocks I feel like we should take a good look at the reward mechanism and the sustainablity of it. Also we should look for ways to reduce slippage in less liquid pools.

TLDR; in favor for adding mBTC and mETH, but feel like reward structure for stocks needs a rework, close look

Out of curiosity, what are the advantages of buying mBTC and mETH vs the real asset?

@dokwon, just a gentle reminder that we need to submit a text proposal for this and link to the current thread. Is this just a text poll? Can anyone from the community do create the poll for this?

@davidkohcw & others:

As of this time, out of the new asset whitelist proposals, the following 5 assets have the most widespread support (highest proportion of gov staked voting power in support):

  • BTC
  • ETH
  • Facebook
  • GS
  • Airbnb

Without going through another round of voting proposals, I suggest we simply move to requesting the following assets be supported to oracle providers, and issue a ParamChangeProposal to whitelist them once the oracle feeds are operational.

Our team will relay the requests to oracle feed providers today.