[BIP 004] Investing 10% of Treasury into MVI

Status: Proposed

Author(s): BuzzedMo

Discussions-to: Sentiment Check: Investing 10% of funds into $MVI

Created: August 30, 2021

Buzzed Summary

We invest 10% of our initial honeypot ETH (24.5) into $MVI, the Metaverse Index, from the Index Coop.


This is a proposal suggesting that we put 10% of our initial capital (24.5 ETH) to work by investing it in $MVI, a market cap weighted index capturing the tokens of top metaverse projects.

Details about the index can be found here and here

Motivation ‌

The Metaverse Index would give us broad exposure to the metaverse, and let us catch the upside of great work happening in NFTs, Gaming, and other metaverse categories with the benefit of being passive.

Specification ‌ Overview ‌

We purchase $MVI tokens from Index Coop via minting directly on TokenSets

Rationale ‌

We should generate returns for bear holders, otherwise why do we have such a treasury? We can passively invest in $MVI and capture upside from projects like Axie Infinity, Rarible, and Decentraland.

Copyright ‌

Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.


That’s a big yes for me


I support this proposal and would vote for it. Investing in an index provides simplicity and inherent risk management. This allows us exposure to the metaverse without getting mired in details.


I support this proposal, thanks for the hard work @BuzzedMo! I have a logistics question:

It looks like https://www.indexcoop.com/mvi will execute a buy order through Uniswap V2. https://www.tokensets.com/portfolio/mvi also indicates it will use Uniswap but doesn’t specify which version it uses.

[Minor] Should we use a DEX aggregator like Matcha or 1inch to make the purchase in case Uniswap V3 liquidity offers a lower price impact than Uniswap V2? I expect Uniswap V2 may still be optimal by the time we execute this proposal but a DEX aggregator will find the optimal route for us.

1 Like


Why? Is it somehow more efficient than minting new MVI tokens?

1 Like

All the MVI liquidity is still largely on V2 (for now).

Actually we’re kind of at a sweet spot with the amount we’d want that it should be the same through both, but if we’re going to be whales I would rather just mint, personally


I agree that this would be a worthwhile investment and would vote in favor of this proposal. The metaverse is 100% the future and token sets are fantastic ways to expand exposure. Thanks for the work on this @BuzzedMo


while this is interesting, i think we can stand to do better with our feet on the ground. MANY times investmetn vehicles like this have fees and red tape that make it “less” than worthwhile. considering we are at the fore front. i think an internal commitee would suit better

In this context, does “minting” MVI refer to issuing MVI by converting all the composite tokens into MVI via https://www.tokensets.com/set/0x72e364F2ABdC788b7E918bc238B21f109Cd634D7/issue? If so, I expect the minting method to be more gas intensive than converting Eth to MVI via a DEX. Can someone elaborate on why minting is more beneficial than swapping?

1 Like

It would require combining constituent tokens, but that task would be done by tokensets. If you attempt to make that trade on your own you’ll see that the slippage/price impact is roughly similar to that of minting.


I support this. Clean and simple way of getting the MetaVerse exposure we’re all interested in.


I support investing 10% of treasury into MVI!

A solid performer and a great way to expose us to the potential upside of this space over the next few months…

Let’s do it!

PS. I’d vote this comes out of the ‘Metaverse’ allocation from the honeypot strategy proposals x

1 Like

I checked the chart and what index holds. I am on board from my earlier misgivings. i did not check fees. Thsi should 100% come out of metaverse allocation.

remainder to be put towards actual land either for development or capital appreciation.


I changed this proposal to BIP-004, as most of you wished to have the treasury strategy in place before we made any moves.

BIP-003 is now reserved for @aBinaryMind 's treasury strategy.

BIP-004 will go to Snapshot vote immediately upon the completion of BIP-003.

1 Like

I was mistakenly thinking of basic issuance. Based on what you said, I think it’s likely we’ll mint MVI using net asset value issuance:

The NAV Issuance Module differs from the Basic Issuance Module in that the end user only needs to bring a single asset versus needing to replicate each position in the SetToken. This dramatically saves gas costs for SetTokens…

1 Like

NAVIssuanceModule is not enabled for MVI. All issuance must be done through BasicIssuanceModule. Alternatively, you can issue it through the ExchangeIssuance contract which allows you to supply ETH or and ERC20 and will automatically trade into the correct assets and issue MVI in a single transaction.

1 Like