# TEMP CHECK:SLURP-50 | Add 1.5% DeFi-PoL rake for Uniswap V3 SDL/LINK incentives in $LINK **URL:** \ **Category:** SLURPs\ **Created:** [July 25, 2025, 12:56pm UTC](https://talk.stake.link/t/temp-check-slurp-50-add-1-5-defi-pol-rake-for-uniswap-v3-sdl-link-incentives-in-link/318 "2025-07-25T12:56:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 5
**Author:** ![hboss](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e480ec/32.png) [@hboss](https://talk.stake.link/u/hboss)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2025, 5:49am UTC](https://talk.stake.link/t/temp-check-slurp-50-add-1-5-defi-pol-rake-for-uniswap-v3-sdl-link-incentives-in-link/318/5 "2025-07-27T05:49:43Z")
Hello Tokenized, and thank you for surfacing this slurp in the best interest of the DAO. Here are my thoughts: > [@Tokenized2027](#): > > focusing on the Uniswap V3 SDL/LINK full range Most of my perspectives shared in [SLURP-13 - MODIFICATION OF 10b](https://talk.stake.link/t/slurp-13-modification-of-slurp-10b/88) regarding the use of Uniswap v3 over v2 for volume and efficiency still stand strong. The devs have already implemented support for “IN RANGE” rather than “full range” LPs—let’s capitalize on that instead of backtracking. Uniswap v3’s ability to set price ranges gives LPs the essential tool of mitigating impairment loss (IL), and we shouldn’t strip that away. If an LP falls out of range, it’s fair they either reposition or stop earning. That’s the inherent design—efficient and performance-based. I’ve heard Uniswap v4 could be even more optimal, though I haven’t personally researched its implications yet. Perhaps the nails or our community reps could help run an in-depth analysis on this? > [@Tokenized2027](#): > > Instead of distributing stLINK directly to LPs, the protocol will receive stLINK, convert it to LINK via the Priority Pool (thereby enabling further LINK to be “swapped-staked” for the Priority Pool LINK depositors), and then deposit the LINK tokens as incentives directly to the Uniswap V3 SDL/LINK LPs on a recurring basis (e.g monthly). I absolutely love this idea. Could we make the distribution process more dynamic—for example, triggered after every X amount of LINK is accrued (e.g., 15 LINK)? If the limitation is gas fees, can we explore a gasless automation that allows for near-continuous micro-distributions (e.g., every 1 LINK)? That would be groundbreaking and would drastically improve LP retention. Monthly distributions may not be optimal, considering LPs face impairment losses _daily_. Taking inspiration from Curve’s recent successful ng pool launch, I truly believe that layering SDL rewards _on top_ of LINK fees will drive massive participation. As the second-largest LP after LinkPool, I would personally _double_ my position if such incentives are introduced. IL is the biggest drawback for LPs. But if we’re able to distribute rewards in _both_ tokens in the LP pair, we effectively _neutralize_ IL—a massive win. The potential visibility and traction from the DeFi space could be game-changing. > [@Tokenized2027](#): > > The APY in LINK is expected to increase the SDL liquidity on-chain assuming the reward rate is attractive enough for LPers. To illustrate the potential impact of this 1.5% rake on Uniswap SDL/LINK LP incentives, the following table outlines the projected APY at various TVL depths: > > | TVL (Uniswap SDL/LINK Pool) | Annual Incentive (from 1.5% rake) | Annual Incentive (stLINK, converted to LINK) | Projected APY in LINK | > | --- | --- | --- | --- | > | $320,000 (Current) | $83,660 | 4,700 LINK | 26.14% | > | $700,000 | $83,660 | 4,700 LINK | 11.95% | > | $1,500,000 | $83,660 | 4,700 LINK | 5.58% | > | $2,000,000 | $83,660 | 4,700 LINK | 4.18% | With such a compelling APY structure, I’m confident LPs will pour in rapidly and we’ll hit those higher TVL targets in no time. Incentivizing LPs with SDL would serve as a temporary but powerful catalyst to ignite momentum—just as we saw with Curve. Let’s make it happen. 🚀 Cheers! --- _[View the full topic](https://talk.stake.link/t/temp-check-slurp-50-add-1-5-defi-pol-rake-for-uniswap-v3-sdl-link-incentives-in-link/318)._