Proposal to integrate Yearn and have the DAO earn revenue via its partner program

As outlined in the decentralization blog post, I would love to see a proposal to integrate Yearn vault support directly into the ShapeShift interface. This could be taken on by current ShapeShift developers in their off hours even ahead off full open-sourcing of the code.

I would propose an initial bounty of 100k FOX to make this happen in reasonable time frame.

This would have huge benefits by allowing users to earn passive income via Yearn vaults directly in the ShapeShift interface and the DAO could even fund FOX rewards for using that making it even better than using Yearn directly. On top of that ShapeShift DAO could receive revenue directly to the DAO via the Yearn partner program without costing the user anything additional.

Look forward to ideas and discussion on this topic.

I fully support this and can’t think of a better partner than Yearn. We’ve got beautiful mockups for earning yield both in mobile and web ready to go too 1f525

Yes, great point , we already have UX/UI ready to go on this we just need someone to pick up the development torch and make it happen!

I fully support this proposal and will instantly vote on this. I believe this addresses a significant pain point for many people around the world.

How many people are stuck in the rat race? Where they work hard trying to make a living, feed their families, and secure their futures in a world where inflationary spend-first monetary policies invisibly take away their purchasing power?

You work hard, keep your nose clean, keep your money in a bank as you’ve been told - and each year you can buy less and less.

This proposal will give access to true savings growth to everyone. Just a short month ago the Yearn DAI pool was making 8%! We can introduce the world to the idea that you can and SHOULD DEMAND that your hard work and savings be rewarded.

This must happen. Thank you for proposing it.

This is an instant yes vote for me

Anyone want to move this proposal forward to board room ideation (or interested in working on or both)? Seems like there is general support for this, would be a worthwhile bounty that adds great functionality for users and establishes a revenue stream via the yearn partner program.

Curious on other community feedback and next steps to make it happen!

Is this a solicitation for devs to work on it? (After it gets voted on, of course)

This is effectively a discussion thread to go over the idea, create an incentive for the work to happen (the FOX bounty) and then lets the community coordinate putting a team together to get the work done.

The proposal could go forward and just create the bounty and then let a team step up to do the work later, or preferably a leader will emerge who wants to manage/lead on this project and put together a team who will then push the proposal forward themselves, with the intention of taking up the work, so as soon as the bounty is created a team can get going on the development (this is what I would prefer to see, which is what happening right now with the osmosis/shapeshift integration bounty that is being voted on).

I would like to raise my hand to take on the project lead for this! I am on the current product team at centralized ShapeShift, so I think I would be a good project lead since I have worked with engineers on our current web app and mobile app and have a good idea of what it will take to complete this. Also, I really want to see the open source version of ShapeShift be an even better version of what ShapeShift is currently, which is included in this proposal. Below is the proposal, and I would love to hear any feedback.


This proposal would accomplish the following: Add Yearn vault support for native wallet and KeepKey on both mobile and web. Once Yearn vaults have been added to the current product, it would then be added to the open sourced version of ShapeShift.


As a ShapeShift user, I want to be able to use Yearn vaults so that I can earn passive income on various assets. It would be great for the DAO to contribute FOX rewards to ShapeShift users depositing into Yearn vaults to make it the best way to use Yearn. (This would require further governance vote on whether the community supports this idea and how much FOX and for how long the incentives would last). In addition, the ShapeShift DAO will be able to receive revenue by earning up to 50% of the profits from ShapeShifts contributed TVL from Yearn through the Yearn partnership program.

There would need to be a project team formed of a 1 project manager (myself, Lilah), 1-2 UI/UX designers, 4-5 engineers to achieve this goal. After the project spec document is complete we can reassess the resource requirements.


  1. To achieve this proposal we will have three milestones to meet:

    A delivery of the UX/UI designs to the community for a period of feedback for the Yearn vaults integration into ShapeShift Mobile and Web (current and new). This should include functionality and UX for Yearn deposits, earnings, removals, and errors. This milestone will be complete when the product stream signs off on the UX/UI.

  2. Delivery of Yearn in the current mobile app. This should include engineering delivery of Yearn vault deposits, earnings, and removals in production with Native wallet and tested by Project Manager. This milestone will be complete when the engineering signs off on code and product stream signs off on the functionality.
  3. Delivery of Yearn in the current Platform. This should include engineering delivery of Yearn vault deposits, earnings, and removals in production with Native and KeepKey wallets and tested by Project Manager. This milestone will be complete when the engineering signs off on code and product stream signs off on the functionality.
  4. Delivery of Yearn in the open sourced version of the web app. This should include engineering delivery of Yearn vault deposits, earnings, and removals in production with supported wallets and tested by Project Manager. This milestone will be complete when the engineering signs off on code and product stream signs off on the functionality.

Each of these 4 milestones, once accomplished, would receive 1/4 of the total bounty: $120,000 in FOX. The project manager will be allocated 10%, UI/ UX allocated 20% and engineering allocated 70% of the bounty.


Adding Yearn as an option for users to earn yield gives them more opportunity to earn additional income on assets that are already in their wallet. Yearn gives users the option to earn yield on different assets than FOX/ETH, so it diversifies our users’ options. Additionally, through Yearn’s partner program, the ShapeShift DAO would earn up to 50% of the profits from ShapeShifts contributed TVL.

If there were to be an additional proposal passed through governance where users could earn FOX when depositing into Yearn vaults, users could be rewarded with FOX making ShapeShift the best option for users to use Yearn.


In order to generate revenue for the DAO treasury as quickly as possible, we would need to implement this in the current platform and mobile app. Once the open source version is available, we would need to add it to that version as well. While this does seem like several different places to add Yearn vaults, I think it is necessary so that the treasury can start earning revenue as soon as possible.

I love this proposal and know you will do a great job leading and making sure it is delivered if the proposal passes.

Great to see you pickup this thread from this idea and I fully support the proposal as currently written moving forward through the next stages of governance.

Yearn, baby yearn! 1f53c

heck yeah! best person for this :fist_left:

This has my support, thank you Lilah for stepping up and leading!

FYI to new folks, “support for native wallet” ← when we say native wallet that refers to the ShapeShift mobile app wallet.

Hi there! As a yearn contributor working on the partnership program, I just wanted to swing by here and say that we’d very much welcome having the ShapeShift DAO integrate yearn vaults. :slightly_smiling_face: DAO 2 DAO collaboration ftw 1f64c

Thank you for swinging by and for the support! Agreed DAO 2 DAO collaboration is where it’s at! 1f64c

Stoked for this integration, thank you for stepping up to lead this and putting this proposal together

  1. !

    Overall I think this proposal looks great, and only have 2 suggestions:

    Consider changing the order of milestone #2 and #3 because there is more AIO to be unlocked on web than in mobile.

  2. Consider removing the UI/UX and project management budget from this particular proposal and instead including it in the roadmap/budget proposal for the product workstream next week.

I’m flexible on both of these and open to whatever you and the community think is the best path; this could be a good discussion topic for the governance call in a few hours.

Im not sure the order of the milestones really matter IMO, other than the UI/UX delivery which is clearly a pre-req for the other milestones, it doesn’t really matter which milestone is delivered when IMO (e.g. there is no reason the DAO should block paying out completion of 3 if 2 isn’t done yet as long as the milestone is completed). So I think the order in the proposal matters less than what order the team working on this chooses to deliver the functionality (and ultimately that should be up to them based on various dependencies and factors once they get in to the work).

Regarding Willy’s 2nd point, I could argue this either way and would support the proposal either way as long as it doesn’t change the timeline the work gets done (e.g. I would not be for it if it meant the work takes longer as we wait for those workstreams to be fully up and running, but if makes no difference timing wise then I think its a wash).


Just thinking that IF the same team ends up assigned to milestones 2 and 3 and needs to decide whether to allocate resources to mobile or web, I would advocate to prioritize web first. If that’s not the case and mobile gets completed before web, let’s ship this functionality to our users as soon as its available.

Also agree we shouldn’t slow this down. Planning to get the proposal for funding the product workstream up next week and don’t think we need to hold back any work on this waiting for that. My logic here is that if the workstream proposal includes funding to pay the product individuals that would likely be working on this (ui/ux and project management), we don’t also need to request funding to pay those individuals in this proposal.

One way to handle this after the fact would be for the project manager to simply redirect the bounty that would have gone to the PM and UI/UX to the product workstream later if that makes sense at the time the bounty would be paid out?

Then you could move forward with the bounty as currently contemplated without changing the proposal, but the PM has the discretion to work with the workstream on best place to actually place the funding later? Just an idea!

I’m of the opinion that funds should generally be managed by the relevant workstreams, even in the case of one-off bounties that aren’t part of the roadmap that the product/engineering workstream propose and that the DAO approves and funds. The project manager can still create motions to pay contributors, and the workstream can object to payment requests if necessary. Alternatively, the workstream leaders can be responsible for payments and determining whether or not a bounty meets the acceptance criteria, regardless of who proposes or who is managing the project. Everything stays organized in Colony, contributors get reputation credit in the relevant workstream, and workstreams/leaders have final say on whether the deliverables indeed qualify (or if there is ever a disagreement here, the workstream’s decision can be appealed).

In this case, I think this feature could be part of the initial roadmap that the product workstream proposes next week, which if passed would allocate funding to the product workstream to cover full-time positions for the product individuals that would most likely be working on this. Or, if the product workstream determines that those individuals’ time would be better allocated to other priorities, they could source the work however they think is best (just an example, I doubt this would be the case for the Yearn integration).