Please find above the GitcoinDAO treasury report for February 2022. As with previous months, the statements are split into transactions denoted in the governance token $GTC and separate transactions in stablecoins. We have included a consolidated profit/(loss) account that translates the GTC transactions into $USD to allow for comparison in a denomination that can easily be relatable to many reading the report.
This months iteration has some adjustments within as more operations wallets were identified and included into our accounting, this has made some slight adjustments to previous months however the transactions were mainly swaps of $GTC to stablecoins, mostly only effecting the balance sheet and not the income statement.
Highlights
Total $GTC outflow compared to January is down 42.9% mostly due to January being high because of a grant being funded
Gitcoin Ops is now included within the financial reporting, it has totaled $93.6k in rewards since inception
Total contributor rewards are $3.94m since genesis and is an average of $657.3k per month (stated at month-end GTC rates using Coingecko)
Total treasury holdings have decreased 41.7% since the start of 2022, which is a result of GTC token price depreciation. Llama has proposed a treasury diversification which will diversify the treasury away from being 99% $GTC. Gitcoin Treasury Diversification
Please do read, share and add a comment to let us know what you would like to see in our next iteration of this report.
Please find above the GitcoinDAO treasury report for March and April 2022. As with previous months, the statements are split into transactions denoted in the governance token $GTC and separate transactions in stablecoins. We have included a consolidated profit/(loss) account that translates the GTC transactions into $USD to allow for comparison in a denomination that can easily be relatable to many reading the report.
Please do read, share and add a comment to let us know what you would like to see in our next iteration of this report.
This is a quote from March 22 regarding the report of February
Few updates were given in that regard and we can see on the latest report that we’re still around 99% GTC.
What is the current treasury diversification plan ? It might be best if strategies were defined ahead of time and included in the financial report or on the governance forum so that we can give feedback.
We should also consider selling GTC at some defined prices so that we can accumulate more stables and blue chips during the next bull run.
Hi Huxwell, thank you for the questions here. We do have a thread with updates here in case it’s helpful.
To provide a little more detail: the working group is still actively working on the diversification, but the process has been slower than we initially expected for a few reasons. Most notably, market conditions weakened over the past few months and demand for publicly traded governance tokens from institutional partners slowed down. Kyle has written about this in more detail in the thread linked above. We’re still in talks with potential partners and are exploring alternative mechanisms that will allow Gitcoin DAO to have stables in the treasury.
I agree with your final point; during the next bull run we should proactively think about diversifying the treasury to protect against drops in GTC.
Thank you for sharing this. Can I ask why March and April reports had to be combined? And why use end-of-april GTC prices but a latest transfer date of May 18th 2022 (slide 4)?
This GTC price decision significantly changes the treasury outlook from having $40.4M to $23.7M (a >40% reduction).
Could you also share more details about why the treasury diversification into stables could not occur in April or sooner? Llama’s first post about treasury diversification (proposing swapping $15M of GTC into stables, which was at the time 24% of the treasury and is now 63%) is from January 13th. Based on the thread, perhaps it has been a slow search for institutional partners. I am confused why ‘institutional partners’ are needed at all to swap GTC into DAI or USDC (this may be my ignorance). An earlier diversification could have resulted in a much better treasury outlook than we now face.
Hi @umarkhaneth - please see my comment above regarding the timing of the treasury diversification, as well as this thread for more details. Unfortunately it’s not quite as easy as simply swapping GTC into DAI or USDC; while Gitcoin DAO might have been able to get some stables by doing so, there is not enough liquidity to do so on-chain in a timely fashion. Had we swapped GTC on the open market, we would have experienced material slippage and a negative price impact on GTC. Further, selling GTC in the open market would have resulted in the token ending up in the hands of short-term holders; the benefit of working with institutional partners is that we can select partners who are aligned and long-term oriented.
Just highlighting this chart from this much needed and nicely done report. I’ve been wanting to see this since day one. This should be on a dashboard somewhere. Every participant in every workstream should constantly know his/her/their position in this chart at all times. Since the DAO itself has no real from-the-top organization, the participants must be responsible to build an organization. Part of that is to know one’s own place, shape, and size.
@schlabach and @Elliott - I suspect PGF should be cut in half and moved to May? Perhaps they paid early which is why it is double in Mar, then no payment in March?
Very interesting! Surprised to see the growth/reduction in the various workstreams as the abstract numbers didn’t give such an informative picture.
Thanks for posting this.
As such, there may exist errors or inaccuracies that materially misstate the financial statements. We are not responsible for any financial losses or adverse outcomes that may result from making investment decision based on the data presented herein. Further, by viewing this report you agree that the statements in this report do not constitute a representation, warranty or guaranty regarding any matter, and you are not relying thereon, but will conduct your own due diligence.
How can we as a DAO do our job and fact check these reports? It seems that asking questions on the forum here is a good start, but specifically, how can we check the numbers? Is there anyone in the DAO who has the knowledge and skills to accurately fact check things (maybe DAO Ops)?
I’d also ask the following question: “How can we hone the product/market fit of the engagement with Llama? What financial forecasting needs does the DAO have + how can they been more deeply met by reporting?”
Excellent. This type of information is so desperately needed.
Every workstream proposal should have a section where they point to this type of information and discuss exactly how their workstream fits into the larger whole.
Very small suggestion. I wonder if it would be possible to show these charts relative to the budget seasons. Round 12, Round 13, Round 14, etc. You can kind of see the seasons in the colors, but it might make what’s happening easier to see. Just a thought.
