Is Quickswap’s Gamma a no-go?

Hi, I’ll be brief. According to my calculations, Quickswap’s **Gamma is eating up my deposit by making nonsensical transactions in order to accumulate fees for other depositors**.

21 Feb – I deposit 1080 mat + 972 usdc in Gamma narrow protocol (a total of **$2.5k**; mat priced at $1.40).

14 Mar (today) – I have 657 mat + 1403 usdc (a total of **$2161**, mat priced at $1.17).

21 Feb to 14 Mar – Mat’s price decreased with -16.4% – My LP is 50/50 with a stable, so the LP’s value should have decreased -8.2% (half of -16.4).

Notably, my $2.5k (mat-usdc) LP should have lost less than $240 (-8.2%).

Yet, my LP is currently worth $2161, meaning I lost **13.6%** from the LP’s value.

In conclusion, Gamma’s hedging strategy does not work at all. In fact, it **makes no sense to hold stable + crypto LP with Gamma, as the stable fails to hedge the crypto loss and it’s almost the same as holding 100% of the crypto itself**.

View Source

3 thoughts on “Is Quickswap’s Gamma a no-go?”

  1. Which type of strategy did you use? The ‘narrow’ strategies will suffer in volatile markets / held over a long time period – perhaps this is is why?

    Still weird though that you effectively swapped 423 Mat for 431 usd which is 1.02 price (basically the lowest its been…). Doesn’t look like gamma is great no.

  2. The problem with autocompounders is that they’ll constantly be rebalacing. Thus, you’ll lose more via impermanent loss because the loss is realised, which is especially true if you pair a volatile asset to a stable one.

    Remember that impermanent loss is only realised when the position is exited and/or replaced, which is what autocompounders do.


Leave a Comment