Hydrax vs Aerodrome: Building Sustainable Liquidity & CEX Strategy

Notes

1. Market Overview & Initial Agenda

The meeting opened with a brief market and liquidity update across chains. The REGN token price stood at $0.0087. Liquidity remained fragmented and relatively thin:

• Osmosis: ~$4,000
• Polygon: ~$8
• Celo: ~$800
• Base: ~$500

Volume across ecosystems was low, reinforcing the group’s interest in finding mechanisms to improve liquidity depth, efficiency, and yield for LPs.

Brandon then introduced the main agenda: comparing Hydrax to Aerodrome as a liquidity and yield platform for Regen, with specific emphasis on governance, emissions, and the potential for a positive flywheel.

2. Hydrax vs. Aerodrome: Key Differences

2.1 Governance Models

• Aerodrome uses a classic ve-model: 4-year token locking with decaying voting power over time.
• Hydrax introduces permanent earning power:
• Non-decaying governance weight
• Permanent lock → emissions do not dilute long-term governance holders
• Governance rights yield protocol revenue

This model appealed strongly to the group, as it aligns incentives with long-term alignment rather than time-decay mechanics.

2.2 Revenue Streams & Account Structure

Hydrax functions as a meta-DEX + liquidity layer, interacting with other DEX infrastructure (including Uniswap). It operates using three accounts — liquid, flex, and protocol accounts — enabling:

• Single-sided liquidity
• Permanent governance power
• Revenue sharing to HYDX holders

Unlike Aerodrome, Hydrax distributes broader protocol revenue instead of limiting rewards to LP fees + emissions.

2.3 Lower Market Cap = Higher Influence

Hydrax’s sub-$20M market cap suggests that Regen governance participants could realistically gain meaningful influence within the Hydrax ecosystem. This increases the strategic attractiveness of building early liquidity there.

3. Full-Range vs. Single-Sided Staking

A major segment of the meeting centered around the implications of enabling single-sided staking for Regen on Hydrax.

3.1 Christian’s Concern

If the community enables single-sided staking, many holders may deposit REGEN only, leading to:

• Large REGEN-heavy pools (e.g., $50k REGEN vs. $5k USDC)
• Price suppression on upward movements

(due to deep REGEN reserves absorbing buys)

• No protection against downward price moves

(because sales quickly drain the small USDC side)

This drag on positive price action seemed strategically counterproductive, even if it reduces slippage for buyers.

3.2 Clarification from Brandon

• Single-sided staking is optional, and the Regen team controls whether it is activated.
• It is not obligatory to turn it on at launch.
• Full-range liquidity provision can happen independently.

3.3 Group Consensus

• Do NOT turn on single-sided staking initially.
• Focus on full-range LP only.
• This approach:
• Ensures USDC and REGEN enter the pool in balanced proportions
• Maintains healthier price responsiveness
• Allows emissions and bribes to create a yield flywheel without distorting liquidity composition

The group agreed that single-sided staking could be revisited later once liquidity conditions evolve.

4. Hydrax + Uniswap Integration

Lance raised an important question:

Why not concentrate all liquidity on Uniswap rather than experimenting with smaller DEX startups?

Hydrax’s team had explained earlier that:

• Hydrax interacts with existing Uniswap pools, as part of its meta-DEX aggregation layer.
• Liquidity provided on Uniswap can still qualify for Hydrax emissions and rewards.
• For single-sided staking, one must use Hydrax directly, but full-range LPs can be on Uniswap and still benefit.

This creates a “best of both worlds” scenario:

• Regen maintains liquidity on the most respected DeFi venue (Uniswap)
• Hydrax yields and governance benefits still apply
• Hydrax’s account system leverages other DEX infrastructure to route trades optimally

This answered Lance’s primary concern about platform risk and liquidity fragmentation.

5. CoinStore “Incident”: Unexpected Sell-Off & Damage Control

Mark delivered a detailed and, frankly, frustrating update regarding the CoinStore Alpha listing, which caused major price harm.

5.1 What Happened

• CoinStore had been given REGEN tokens as part of the listing onboarding.
• They did not disclose intent to sell the tokens.
• They unexpectedly sold 100% of their allocation (not half as they later claimed).
• They executed the sell poorly, causing massive slippage and tanking the price.
• Net proceeds: only $3,700 — far less than expected.

The group characterized this as incompetence at best, negligence at worst.

5.2 CoinStore’s Response

CoinStore framed it as a “misunderstanding,” though Mark emphasized that no such communication had ever been made. Their treasury “didn’t care” about slippage and acted mechanically.

5.3 Mitigation They Offered

• They will proceed with the Alpha listing on Base, essentially consuming their own listing fee through the sale they already made.
• SBV (Regen-related vehicle) will compensate by:
• Sending $4,000 USDC to Christian
• Conducting a $4,000 REGEN buyback to restore some price stability
• For the future main CoinStore listing, they will provide:
• A discounted marketing package
• Marketing support equivalent to a $25k package, but for the original $15k listing fee

5.4 Team’s Reaction

Although annoyed, the group saw no way to reverse the harm other than proceeding strategically:

• Accept the Alpha listing benefits
• Use the $4k repurchase more intelligently (preferably coordinated with market makers)
• Leverage CoinStore’s marketing package later when liquidity conditions are optimized

6. Centralized Exchange (CEX) Listing Strategy

Mark broadened the discussion to long-term CEX strategy:

6.1 Current Status

• CoinStore main exchange:
• Application submitted
• $10k deposit paid
• Ready to list anytime pending market conditions
• MEXC:
• Application already in progress
• Listing fees manageable
• Binance Alpha:
• Possible pathway identified
• Requires understanding cost, deposits, and strategic timing

6.2 Constraints & Capital Management

The SBV has limited capital and must deploy it efficiently. The strategy must maximize leverage, generate liquidity, and avoid premature listings that drain liquidity or create dead markets.

6.3 Mark’s Key Question

“What conditions need to be true before we feel comfortable listing on a major centralized exchange?”

Possible metrics the group mentioned:

• TVL
• Trading volume (on-chain and cross-chain)
• Price stability
• liquidity depth in Hydrax / Uniswap
• social metrics and narrative momentum
• emissions-driven LP yield flywheel functioning
• readiness of market maker partners

The group agreed that these thresholds should be explicit—potentially tracked via the dashboard Mark’s developer created.

7. Dashboard Demonstration

Mark showed the newly developed analytics dashboard, which includes:

• Market data (price, liquidity, volume)
• Top token holders
• Validator information
• Recent transactions (MintScan integrated)
• Liquidity pool stats
• Social metrics and trends
• Custom analytical modules in progress

The dashboard is being improved continuously and can help guide decision-making for timing CEX listings or measuring Hydrax liquidity health.

A Slack channel exists for collaborative development. Open-source contribution (e.g., via GitHub) is possible, though more coordination is needed.

8. Closing Notes

Brandon reiterated that robust on-chain liquidity must come first. A Hydrax-based liquidity flywheel can support future CEX listings, but only after the ecosystem reaches internal stability. The meeting ended with alignment on:

• Launching on Hydrax with full-range liquidity only
• NOT enabling single-sided staking initially
• Coordinating a smart REGEN buyback to repair CoinStore damage
• Using the dashboard to define readiness metrics for CEX listings
• Maintaining Uniswap liquidity to ensure broad access and compatibility with Hydrax’s meta-DEX functionality
• Developing a cohesive long-term listing strategy (CoinStore, MEXC, potentially Binance Alpha)

If you want, I can also prepare:

• A 1-page executive summary
• Slides (PDF/PPTX) summarizing the call
• A strategy document translating this into actionable next steps
• A memo for internal or public community use