Single-token vs Two-token Blockchain Tokenomics (2403.15429v2)
Abstract: We consider long-term equilibria that arise in the tokenomics design of proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchain systems that comprise of users and validators, both striving to maximize their own utilities. Validators are system maintainers who get rewarded with tokens for performing the work necessary for the system to function properly, while users compete and pay with such tokens for getting a desired portion of the system service. We study how the system service provision and suitable rewards schemes together can lead to equilibria with desirable characteristics (1) viability: the system keeps parties engaged, (2) decentralization: multiple validators are participating, (3) stability: the price path of the underlying token used to transact with the system does not change widely over time, and (4) feasibility: the mechanism is easy to implement as a smart contract, i.e., it does not require fiat reserves on-chain for buy back of tokens or to perform bookkeeping of exponentially growing token holdings. Our analysis enables to put forward a novel generic mechanism for blockchain ``monetary policy'' that we call {\em quantitative rewarding} (QR). We investigate how to implement QR in single-token and two-token proof of stake (PoS) blockchain systems. The latter are systems that utilize one token for the users to pay the transaction fees and a different token for the validators to participate in the PoS protocol and get rewarded. Our approach demonstrates a concrete advantage of the two-token setting in terms of the ability of the QR mechanism to be realized effectively and provide good equilibria. Our analysis also reveals an inherent limitation of the single token setting in terms of implementing an effective blockchain monetary policy - a distinction that is, to the best of our knowledge, highlighted for the first time.
- Axie infinity whitepaper, 2021. URL https://whitepaper.axieinfinity.com/axs. NEO & GAS.
- The role of cryptographic tokens and ICOs in fostering platform adoption. CESifo Working Paper, 2019. URL https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_7752.html.
- Overcoming the coordination problem in new marketplaces via cryptographic tokens. Information Systems Research, 33(4):1368–1385, 2022.
- Tarun Chitra. Competitive Equilibria Between Staking and On-chain Lending. Cryptoeconomic Systems, 0(1), 2021. https://cryptoeconomicsystems.pubpub.org/pub/chitra-staking-lending-equilibria.
- Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation. The Review of Financial Studies, 34(3):1105–1155, 2021.
- Token-based platform finance. Journal of Financial Economics, 144(3):972–991, 2022.
- Nicola Dimitri. The economic value of dual-token blockchains. Mathematics, 11(17):3757, 2023. URL https://doi.org/10.3390/math11173757.
- Better than bitcoin? can cryptocurrencies beat inflation? Available at SSNR, 2021. URL https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3970810.
- Samuel Häfner. Optimal decentralization and service provision on a blockchain platform with market frictions, September 2023. URL https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3954773.
- Would Friedman Burn your Tokens? arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17025, 2023.
- Digital tokens and platform building. 2018. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3088726.
- neo.org. URL https://neo.org/neogas#tokens. NEO & GAS.
- Emiliano S Pagnotta. Decentralizing money: Bitcoin prices and blockchain security. The Review of Financial Studies, 35(2):866–907, 2022.
- Fundamental Pricing of Utility Tokens. Working Papers hal-03096267, HAL, 2021. URL https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-03096267.html.
- Some simple bitcoin economics. Journal of Monetary Economics, 106:16–26, 2019.
- A model of cryptocurrencies. Management Science, 69(11), 2023.
- The DFINITY Team. The internet computer for geeks. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2022/087, 2022. URL https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/087.