# Restrict Superfluid pools to a core set of pairings **URL:** \ **Category:** Superfluid Staking\ **Tags:** passed\ **Created:** [July 1, 2024, 1:19pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884 "2024-07-01T13:19:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JohnnyWyles](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/johnnywyles/32/3114_2.png) [@JohnnyWyles](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/JohnnyWyles)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2024, 1:19pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884/1 "2024-07-01T13:19:15Z")
This proposal removes superfluid staking on the majority of pools in order to encourage the further migration of liquidity to Supercharged pools as well as align Osmosis security with a minimal selection of core assets. ## Superfluid Superfluid Staking allows a portion of the value within a pool to be staked to secure the Osmosis chain. Approximately [14.3M OSMO](https://lcd.osmosis.zone/osmosis/superfluid/v1beta1/all_superfluid_delegations) are currently staked through superfluid staking, comprising 3.8% of staking security. Governance has previously preferred that any sizeable OSMO paired pool be added to Superfluid staking to increase the security of the chain and rewards for those pools. Due to the low level of Superfluid usage, OSMO currently receives minimal security benefit from this while maintaining the old standard of 14-day bonding in liquidity pools and encouraging the use of OSMO pairings. This proposal reviews the current set of Superfluid-enabled pools and would reduce them to a core set due to observed changes in community preference and liquidity provider behavior. ## Superfluid Enabled Pools (73) | Pool ID | Quote | Base | TVL | Fees | Pool Type | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | OSMO | ATOM | 7,837,608 | 0.20% | Classic | | 833 | OSMO | stOSMO | 7,294,090 | 0.30% | Classic | | 1135 | OSMO | ATOM | 4,269,943 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1093 | OSMO | AKT | 2,420,588 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1134 | OSMO | ETH | 2,086,815 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 712 | OSMO | WBTC.axl | 1,432,587 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1090 | OSMO | WBTC.axl | 1,371,530 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 704 | OSMO | ETH | 1,315,333 | 0.20% | Classic | | 812 | OSMO | AXL | 1,161,446 | 0.20% | Classic | | 678 | OSMO | USDC.axl | 855,832 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1133 | OSMO | USDC.axl | 789,423 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1248 | OSMO | TIA | 730,726 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 681 | OSMO | FET | 703,386 | 0.30% | Classic | | 1094 | OSMO | AXL | 628,258 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 3 | OSMO | AKT | 475,727 | 0.20% | Classic | | 9 | OSMO | CRO | 418,664 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1095 | OSMO | SCRT | 403,389 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 725 | OSMO | INJ | 402,633 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1263 | OSMO | USDC | 378,981 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 806 | OSMO | STRD | 375,094 | 0.20% | Classic | | 840 | OSMO | BNB | 351,195 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1096 | OSMO | STARS | 304,059 | 0.30% | Supercharged | | 584 | OSMO | SCRT | 262,285 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1098 | OSMO | STRD | 256,750 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 722 | OSMO | EVMOS | 255,365 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1265 | OSMO | ATOM | 253,634 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1097 | OSMO | JUNO | 240,339 | 0.30% | Supercharged | | 1464 | OSMO | USDC | 234,961 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1092 | OSMO | CRO | 228,478 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 604 | OSMO | STARS | 164,200 | 0.30% | Classic | | 497 | OSMO | JUNO | 156,536 | 0.30% | Classic | | 1400 | OSMO | ATOM | 142,634 | 0% | Supercharged | | 1104 | OSMO | BLD | 101,721 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1281 | OSMO | ETH | 93,897 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 789 | OSMO | MATIC | 93,163 | 0.20% | Classic | | 674 | OSMO | DAI | 91,024 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1066 | OSMO | DAI | 87,562 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1399 | OSMO | ATOM | 73,762 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1077 | OSMO | USDT | 72,747 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 899 | OSMO | AVAX | 72,554 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1103 | OSMO | SOMM | 72,232 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 605 | OSMO | HUAHUA | 71,519 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1099 | OSMO | MARS | 70,761 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 907 | OSMO | MARS | 67,175 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1111 | OSMO | HUAHUA | 65,977 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1221 | OSMO | USDC | 54,540 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 42 | OSMO | REGEN | 49,799 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1101 | OSMO | XPRT | 44,192 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1088 | OSMO | IST | 43,531 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 15 | OSMO | XPRT | 40,100 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1105 | OSMO | KAVA | 39,323 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1434 | OSMO | WBTC | 35,364 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 900 | OSMO | FTM | 32,736 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1477 | OSMO | ETH | 32,254 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 627 | OSMO | SOMM | 29,340 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1249 | OSMO | TIA | 28,047 | 0.20% | Classic | | 773 | OSMO | moonbeam.DOT.axl | 26,793 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1091 | OSMO | moonbeam.DOT.axl | 26,465 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1100 | OSMO | ION | 25,361 | 0.50% | Supercharged | | 837 | OSMO | IST | 13,069 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1011 | OSMO | ARB | 12,276 | 0.20% | Classic | | 463 | OSMO | NGM | 11,697 | 0.30% | Classic | | 831 | OSMO | USDT.axl | 11,373 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1013 | OSMO | ION | 9,683 | 0.50% | Classic | | 795 | OSMO | BLD | 9,676 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1347 | OSMO | TIA | 7,853 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 730 | OSMO | KAVA | 6,477 | 0.20% | Classic | | 1433 | OSMO | WBTC | 4,917 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1430 | OSMO | WBTC.axl | 795 | N/A | Supercharged | | 1432 | OSMO | WBTC | 49 | N/A | Supercharged | | 1076 | OSMO | USDT | 31 | N/A | Supercharged | | 1369 | OSMO | USDC | 22 | N/A | Classic | | 1465 | OSMO | USDT | 15 | N/A | Supercharged | ## Proposed Changes ### Remove Non-Supercharged pools from Superfluid This suggestion follows [Proposal 774](https://daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/proposals/774) where Osmosis incentives were removed from Classic pools. With Supercharged pools being live for a year, active liquidity in Classic pools should have fully migrated and is likely to continue to exist without receiving the additional rewards from Superfluid staking. This also includes the stOSMO/OSMO pool as a stableswap, which has been far outperformed by the [stOSMO/OSMO Concentrated liquidity pool](https://app.osmosis.zone/pool/1252) backed by protocol-owned liquidity. Superfluid positions in both of these pools underperform compared to staking but have the full bonding period. Removing this set of pools will remove 35 pools from being Superfluid enabled, which will encourage active liquidity providers in Classic pools to migrate to equivalent or more concentrated positions within Supercharged pools. ### Remove Non-Quote assets This suggestion follows [Proposal 638](https://daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/proposals/638), which restricted incentives to a minimal list of assets, mostly quote assets at the time. This concentrates the Superfluid provided security to current quote assets of: - USDC via Noble - DAI via Axelar - WBTC issued on Osmosis - WBTC via Axelar - ETH via Axelar - ATOM - TIA This removes 20 pools from being Superfluid enabled. The main benefit is that minimizing emissions to these pools encourages liquidity to form alternative pairings, such as with USDC or BTC, which helps to diversify and strengthen the Osmosis ecosystem while having minimal impact on Osmosis security. This approach also helps to de-couple the performance of ecosystem tokens from OSMO itself, addressing a commonly raised concern by ecosystem participants and leaving the maintenance of these pairings entirely to liquidity provider preference of volatility expectations. ### Proposed Superfluid Pools to Retain (18) | Pool ID | Quote | Base | TVL | Fees | Pool Type | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1135 | OSMO | ATOM | 4,269,943 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1134 | OSMO | ETH | 2,086,815 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1090 | OSMO | WBTC.axl | 1,371,530 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1248 | OSMO | TIA | 730,726 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1263 | OSMO | USDC | 378,981 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1265 | OSMO | ATOM | 253,634 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1464 | OSMO | USDC | 234,961 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1400 | OSMO | ATOM | 142,634 | 0% | Supercharged | | 1281 | OSMO | ETH | 93,897 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1066 | OSMO | DAI | 87,562 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1399 | OSMO | ATOM | 73,762 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1221 | OSMO | USDC | 54,540 | 0.20% | Supercharged | | 1434 | OSMO | WBTC | 35,364 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1477 | OSMO | ETH | 32,254 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1347 | OSMO | TIA | 7,853 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1433 | OSMO | WBTC | 4,917 | 0.05% | Supercharged | | 1430 | OSMO | WBTC.axl | 795 | 0.01% | Supercharged | | 1432 | OSMO | WBTC | 49 | 0.20% | Supercharged | **Target Onchain Date** : 8th July 2024 ---
**Author:** ![Shotanate](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/shotanate/32/2174_2.png) [@Shotanate](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/Shotanate)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2024, 9:00am UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884/2 "2024-07-03T09:00:53Z")
Hi! Could you elaborate on what criteriums were used to determine the list of 18 retained superfluid pools? Has the active liquidity in classic pools fully migrated? ---
**Author:** ![JohnnyWyles](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/johnnywyles/32/3114_2.png) [@JohnnyWyles](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/JohnnyWyles)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2024, 10:07am UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884/3 "2024-07-03T10:07:00Z")
They’re the assets that are currently “Quote” assets on Osmosis which are those that supercharged pools can be created with. While we could probably keep things like AVAX/OSMO since AVAX is independent of OSMO price action it seems best to keep this to a very small set and focus on improving the security that we get from the most prominent tokens such as BTC and ETH. There are also a couple of borderline removals here - USDT.kava was just replaced by allUSDT as a quote asset, so there is a removal, but no allUSDT/OSMO superfluid onboarded yet. And USDC.axl is removed despite being a quote asset until recently - but this is part of encouraging migration to Noble native USDC. Since Supercharged launched a year ago, there has been a prompt to migrate. The Classic pools no longer receive additional incentives. If a user is active, there is no reason for them to not have migrated their position to a Supercharged pool by now. However, this hasn’t been confirmed within the data. ---
**Author:** ![LeonoorsCryptoman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/leonoorscryptoman/32/208_2.png) [@LeonoorsCryptoman](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/LeonoorsCryptoman)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2024, 7:33pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884/4 "2024-07-03T19:33:54Z")
I agree on just having the clear list of assets which are added for Superfluid. Is there an estimate of the amount of staked OSMO which will disappear? Or is that not visible? Will this also have a beneficial effect on the epoch because the calculations are done for lesser pools? ---
**Author:** ![JohnnyWyles](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/johnnywyles/32/3114_2.png) [@JohnnyWyles](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/JohnnyWyles)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2024, 9:39am UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884/5 "2024-07-04T09:39:19Z")
Hmm, it may have an impact on epoch, however I wouldn’t think it would be huge. I don’t have the data extracted, but I would think most of that 14M would be unstaked since if inactive users were 14-day bonded for incentives in the old classic pools, there was no reason not to also be superfluid-staked. ---
**Author:** ![LeonoorsCryptoman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/leonoorscryptoman/32/208_2.png) [@LeonoorsCryptoman](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/LeonoorsCryptoman)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2024, 6:07pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/restrict-superfluid-pools-to-a-core-set-of-pairings/2884/6 "2024-07-05T18:07:43Z")
> [@JohnnyWyles](#): > > there was no reason not to also be superfluid-staked Unless it is real set-and-forget liquidity which has been put in once and never looked at it again 😛 But, we are thus talking about 3-4% which is potentially unstaked maximally. Sounds like a risk we can take (as long as the stake is not removed from my validator hahaahaha)