A Retrospective Quantitative Review of Crypto Grants Programs | Fracton Research Portal
This article provides a history of grant programs in the cryptocurrency field and a quantitative comparative analysis of four programs, Uniswap, dYdX, Optimism, and Gitcoin. Here are the main points
- grants are often provided for two purposes: to sustainably provide and maintain public goods (i.e. goods or services such as parks or highways) and to grow a particular ecosystem.
- grant programs will develop significantly in 2019 and beyond. Ecosystem Support Program, Gitcoin Grants, Moloch DAO, etc.
- in 2020-2021, grant programs centered on the DeFi protocols will be active. Retroactive Public Goods Funding, etc.
- 2022-2024 will see the emergence of grant program impact evaluations, community-driven grant programs, etc.
- a comparison of four grant programs - Uniswap, dYdX, Optimism, and Gitcoin - revealed significant differences in grant amounts and number of recipients.
- suggested that there is a correlation between how grant program managers are selected (top-down, bottom-up, or QF) and the amount of grant funding.
- top-down grants tend to fund projects that benefit their own protocols, while bottom-up or QF grants tend to distribute funds more evenly among projects of public interest.
- top-down grant bias may serve to fund projects not covered by the QF and create contingencies in the public goods market.
This page is auto-translated from [/nishio/A Retrospective Quantitative Review of Crypto Grants Programs](https://scrapbox.io/nishio/A Retrospective Quantitative Review of Crypto Grants Programs) using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.