We as a community should have the option of providing liquidity for a single asset rather than only a trading pair. This would allow not only an increase in the TVL but the inclusivity of the community as a whole. Example being MinswapDex Zap-In liquidity method.
28 Likes
This is a great idea. I second this motion. This will only add liquidity and functionality to our favorite dex. Let’s get this voted on I know many sundae holders feel the same way.
7 Likes
good suggestion 
I like it
6 Likes
I Kike it i hope this happend
3 Likes
This would be great!
5 Likes
Just making sure I understand correctly… There is single asset liquidity (which I do not believe that Minswap has). Then, there’s providing a single asset (of a pair) to a liquidity pool, in which case a “swap” is actually done that equalizes the proportion of the deposited asset with the other asset involved in the liquidity pair. Which are you proposing?
3 Likes
I would be proposing the later providing liquidity to one token in the pair via a swap exactly like Zap-In. And thank you for the clarification my wording may have been not 100% accurate. Please let me know your thoughts and opinions?
2 Likes
ya, zap is nice to have
3 Likes
Yes, I think it is a nice feature and although I know very little about the technical side, it does not seem as though it would be that difficult to accomplish logistically.
2 Likes
me uni ha dicha propuesta me parec un salto de calidad para sundaeswap, asi como atraerĂa a mas inversores que proporcionarĂan mas activos al poder aportar solo uno y no necesitar de Ada por ejemplo, ya que dividirĂa tu activo entre dos para proporcionarlo en el Lp.
2 Likes
How does providing liquidity for a single asset helps SundaeSwap? Having higher TVL is not the benefit… it is just a stat but it does not mean the protocol is healthy, effective etc… it is just a reference which can mean many things depending on what you use it for
1 Like
Higher liquidity means lower slippage and risk/damage of someone pulling lots of liquidity at once. TVL tells investors about trust and value of protocol. Of course it is a metric of protocol health.
1 Like
hi, you probably did not read the question carefully - it was about SINGLE asset liquidity, what is good about SINGLE asset liquidity for the DEX?
1 Like
Yes, I know, and providing liquidity of single asset does not expand the pool? From what I know single asset has to be paired by another provider of second asset, or half of provided asset is being traded to pair it. Or did I get sth wrong? Either way it increases size of the pool, total TVL and decreases price slippage. The difference is quite obvious, entities that want to provide only one side of pair can do it, so protocol is more flexible and can attract more investors.
1 Like
No, single asset pool is not paired with anything… that is the essence of decentralised AMM - it cannot just take two assets and combine them in the pool - it can only be done by people themselves (i.e. they lock two assets) otherwise it is not DEX but CEX or bank (i.e. there is someone who decides what to do with the assets)… so single asset pool cannot be used for swaps, thus single asset pools and slippage are not related in any way, thus TVL made of single asset pools says that there is this amount of single asset deposited and it does not mean it is good or bad. So locking single assets and rewarding for it makes no sense for DEX until there is application for that asset which users should be aware of and accept the associated risks.
1 Like
Man, I think You’re getting it wrong. Question is about providing one asset to a standard pool of pair of assets. You have normal pool with two assets, but you can provide one of assets from pair if you want to. Why would anyone create single asset pool.
1 Like
- let’s ask the author of the question what he/she meant because it is not clear 2) even if the author meant what you are saying - then the only way to implement this for the protocol is to swap automatically 50% (usually) of the deposit into the another token of the pair and add two tokens to the pool. You cannot just add singe token to one side of the pair pool because 1) it is not possible to calculate LP tokens - i.e. what is the share of this deposit in the pool which consists of 2 tokens? 2) it will change the market ratio (i.e. price) - i.e. you will depreciate the price of the asset you are adding (because you increase the amount of just one token in the pair)… thus it does not make sense… if the question was about convenience, so you have 100 ADA and you add them and the protocol swaps 50% to Sundae, so your actual liquidity you are providing is ADA/Sundae and when you withdraw the protocol converts LP tokens to two tokens, then swaps Sundae to ADA and returns everything in ADA (i.e. it might be 80 ADA or 110 ADA - depending on the situation on the market - if this is what was meant then ok
1 Like
Yeah, that’s basically what I said a couple posts up 
please read.
1 Like
the zap feature is a must imho, I have personally added further liquidity because I had ADA sitting there without the need to purchase another token to LP. should this not have been added as a proposal though?
1 Like
grate idea . sundaeswap need improve for be the best dex
2 Likes