How does the current AnyHedge compare to the 'Official BCH stablecoin'(point 5) design? How far are we from the ultimate volatility solution?
oracle security
does the oracle need to be run by the BCH stake holders (miners, coin holders) to have equivalent security guarantees as bch itself?
is oracles taking a cut of every contract a good alternative? what is the cost?
how does chainlink do it?
early exit (before maturity)
This was already proposed, would allow spending part of the stake in the contract as a stablecoin.
It is a win-win for both sides of the contract, therefore should not add any cost for the hedger.
Would a merchant accept such tokens at face value? Is this dependent on zero cost rehedging ability? More probably there would need to be a secondary market for these tokens where the value is determined. (might be slightly lower or slightly higher than the intended peg, based on current market conditions and maturity date, similar to existing stablecoins)
late exit (after depeg)
in case of a depeg the hedgers might prefer instead of taking an early payout (long liquidation) and having to rehedge to keep the depegged tokens and wait for a future repeg. (of note is that even with the current design, if the hedgers dont immediately rehedge they end up holding depegged tokens)
the longs would value such a contract higher (they cannot be liquidated before maturity) compared to current anyhedge design, thus decreasing the cost for the hedgers.
topping up collateral before pending liquidation seems impossible to do without breaking the fungibility?
fungibility
There are 4 potential issues here:
different oracle - depends on solving the above oracle incentives problem
protection percentage - can we agree on some standard, future proof value? would it need to be super high (90%) thus increasing the cost for the hedger?
contract length - the solution would seem to be to have the contracts expire at the same block height (or same datetime). (newly issued tokens would have shorter contract length to match the same block height as the first contract) This would probably need to be super far in the future (5-10 years)? Would that long period give us zero (or better than zero) cost for the hedgers?
is it technically possible to make tokens representing shares of different contracts fungible? I.e. use tokens issued by a contract to settle a different contract? Hopefully it is after the native tokens upgrade. How is a single updateable contract different from distinct fungible contracts?
liquidity
in case of a big disbalance (not enough longs due to bch bear market) the longs (market makers, liquidity providers) would need to hedge their bets by buying the peg asset (e.g. usd on forex) or some derivative thereof. What is the cost of this for fiat currencies and commodities?
is this mitigated by a super long maturity period?
stability
is a usd stablecoin enough or do we need a peg to a basket? (see e.g. the original facebook Libra stablecoin proposal)
In the case of a basket do we do just fiat currencies (SDR?), or also commodities? perhaps a bit of a global stock index?
assuming that in the long term all fiat currencies and all commodities should lose value compared to bch, does the basket need to contain also a small portion(1% ?) of bch not to lose value over time? do we want this stable coin to be disinflationary or slightly deflationary?
do we want the basket to be implemented by a single oracle or by composing the basket stable coin by individual asset stable coins?
