Caney Fork voted:
- Karpatkey
- Avantgarde
- Llama
- None of the above
with its and DXdao’s (46k) ENS tokens.
The three most important items we considered were 1. Fees 2. Financial reporting 3. non-custodial management.
Llama’s fees are too high without a clear understanding of what additional value the extra costs bring.
Karpatkey and Avantgarde both seem like the type of professional manager who can evaluate risk and communicate it to the DAO. We have a slight preference for Karpatkey because their work with Gnosis DAO has overlapped with DXdao a lot, and so we can attest to their work and execution ability.
We are encouraged by the discussion around non-custodial financial infrastructure. Both Avantgarde & Karpatkey have made this a key part of their proposal. ENS should be at the forefront of sovereign treasury management. Again, we have a small preference for the Zodiac module over Enzyme’s. Even though Enzyme infrastructure has been around longer, the Safe ecosystem is a better foundation for DeFi and governance integrations because of its widespread adoption.
Regardless of the selected manager, we think the deployment strategies should be more focused on yield generated through fees (like Uniswap v3) as opposed to token incentives.
Thanks to all who submitted and the stewards for shepherding through the proposals.