SIP-1 ( SILK improvement proposal ) - rETH and stIBCX collateral


Despite my very frequent warnings, SILK is becoming increasingly centralized, 18.6 the collateral centralization reached 56%.


  • Low incentives ( caused by the collapse of SHD and the entire SCRT ecosystem )
  • low Max TVL for decentralized assets compared to centralized stablecoins
  • High max SILK mint limit for centralized stablecoins


  1. even wider use of decentralized LSDs
  2. reduce SHD issuance until the situation improves
  3. more real yield
  4. reduce max borrowing for USDC and USDT
  5. more expansion of SILK outside the Secret Network
  7. more SILK utilities

This post covers point 1.

What is rETH:

rETH it is the most decentralized, pretty much adopted Ethereum LSD by RocketPool
As its adoption begins to spread across the Cosmos ecosystem, SILK should not stay behind.
rETH is currently used on Demex, for support it will be necessary to open a dialogue with SL and Axelar

In the future it would also be good to replace SILK/ETH with SILK/rETH, potentially we can ask RocketPool for RPL incentives.

What is stIBCX:

stIBCX is an LSD managed by Stride for IBCX, the Cosmos index token
This asset may be another potential adoption port for SILK, both because IBCX is simply a simple tool for the masses to be invested in the entire Cosmos ecosystem, and because of the tokens it is mined for ( in the future we may create a proposal to mint for SILK )

ION ( DAO emitting IBCX ) also provides icentives, after the launch of SILK/stIBCX or any other pair we could make a request to ION to incentivize this pool

Proposed parameters ( Max TVL and initial SILK supply ):

rETH - 70% 500K
stIBCX - 70% 500K

1 Like

I would strongly oppose stIBCX as liquidity, it really is just an ETF of shitcoins mostly. Not good colleteral and hard for people to use as it doensnt have an easily trackable price/volatility. It also adds OSMO, SCRT and ATOM exposure which is harder to see similar to how the usage of DAI adds exposure to USDC and USDT without a direct way of noting/controlling that.

IBCX ( stIBCX ) is definitely not made up of shitcoins, it’s just a Cosmos index, it certainly seems logical to me to offer it as collateral, we’ll see for ourselves what the demand for it will be.

What seems to me the main thing is not to offer a high amount, at least temporarily, if there are objections to 500,000 SILK, it seems to me good to make an offer 100,000 and wait for demand.

If stIBCX is a good asset we can’t decide for ourselves, central planning is stupid, if there is demand for it then it will obviously be a quality asset

We need to focus on bridging with Ethereum and Layer 2 assets to bring more users