[Request for Comment] Compound Governance Analytics Dashboard

Proposals
1

Hi everyone,

I’m reaching out regarding the governance challenges Compound is currently facing, as observed in Signal Corps report, DeepDAO’s report, GSWG’s research and discussion in the Compound Developer Community Call. These challenges include quorum failures, low voting activity on certain proposals or during specific times, low participation, issues with Working Group and Grants renewals, and potential malicious proposals.

To help address these concerns, we’re working on a draft proposal for a governance analytics dashboard. This dashboard will provide a clearer picture of the situation in one place for the community and to support the work from GSWG (@Doo_StableLab @AranaDigital @PGov) to improve governance efficiency.

These are some of the examples of a simple tool to track governance token delegation patterns around a specific period, as shown in the attached image. This might help us notice any unusual activity, like those around the Golden Boys Proposals.

771×385 93.9 KB

Example of “Top 1000 Voting Power Delegate" chart from Optimism Governance Dashboard

We’re open to any suggestions or discussions that could make it better tailored for Compound. If there are metrics you think are missing but would offer a better view of community dynamics and decision-making—such as forum activity, participant return rates, Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, Gini Coefficient, new and returning voter, quarterly proposal overview, or final vote quorum—please let me know. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

Summary

Our mission is to advance governance data accessibility for everyone. We wanted to develop a Compound Governance Analytics Dashboard, a user-friendly tool designed to simplify the understanding of complex governance dynamics at a glance. This dashboard would foster inclusive and data-driven decision-making by providing near real-time monitoring of DAOs, delegate performance tracking, and enabling informed decisions to the community and their representative. Strengthening overall community governance effectiveness with transparent, collaborative, and accountable decision processes.

We aim to tailor our dashboard to meet the specific needs of Compound Governance, offering a level of detail that goes beyond a general data platform. We’re open to feature requests from the community and plan to refine our dashboard based on your feedback, ensuring it remains a valuable and relevant tool for all stakeholders.

Dashboard metrics

1. Holder Metrics

  • Total number of holder wallets.
  • Total token supply.
  • Total Circulating Supply
  • Votable supply (tokens in circulation that are eligible to vote).
  • Share of circulating supply that is votable
  • Number of tokens with a holding period. (eg. more than 6 months, 1 year without selling)

2. Concentration of Voting Power Metrics

  • Small Holder vs Large Holder Representation:
    • Voting power delegated by small holders.
    • Number of delegated tokens held by small holders.
    • Percentage of small holder wallets that have delegated.
  • Large Holders Metrics:
    • Voting power delegated by large holders.
    • Number of delegated tokens held by large holders.
    • Percentage of large holder wallets that have delegated.
  • Voter Quorum Gauge & Nakamoto Coefficient:
    • Delegate Nakamoto Coefficient: The number of top delegates required to achieve 50% of the votable supply
    • Delegate Quorum: The number of top delegates needed to reach the proposal quorum of 10M of Voting power.
  • Voting Power Distribution: Share of total voting power held within the top1, top 5, top 10, top 25, top 50, top 100, and top 200 voters.
  • Delegates Categorized by source of voting power:
    • Single-Holder Delegate (via Self-Delegation): Any delegate that received > =50% of its voting power via self-delegation
    • Single-Holder Delegate (via OtherAddress): Any delegate that received > =50% of its voting power via one other address’s delegation
    • Community Delegate: Any delegate with voting power where each delegation it has received (including self-delegation) accounts for ‹ 50% of its voting power
  • Share of total Small VS Large Voting Power Ratio

3. Proposal Metrics

  • Distribution of proposals by category: A breakdown of governance proposals based on their topic area.
  • Voting Results of the Proposal: Provides an overview of voting outcomes for governance proposals. This offers a snapshot of the degree of consensus or division among token holders. Classification of results as contentious, generally accepted, or normal.
  • Unique Proposers: Indicates the range of individuals or entities participating in governance proposals. This help highlight varying levels of engagement among proposers.
  • Proposal Outcome: Number of passed vs failed proposals.
  • Table of All proposal: Proposal Name, Status, Result, and Category

4. Participation Metrics

  • Top 1000 Delegates Participation Voting Power Delegators: This section provides an overview of the participation via delegation within the governance token ecosystem. Voting Power:
    • Indicates the token voting power delegated from small & large holders to each delegate category: Active, Inactive, and Ghost. Delegators:
    • Indicates the number of both small and large delegator addresses associated with each delegate category: Active, Inactive, and Ghost.
  • Proposal Participation:This section provides an overview of the participation within each proposals.
    • Voter: Indicates the unique number of addresses that have cast a vote on each proposal.
    • Voting Power: Indicates the total number of tokens that were used to cast votes on each proposal.
    • Participation rate: Indicates the percentage of votes casted in relation to the total votable supply.

5. Delegate Metrics

  • Delegated Table: Ranking, Delegate Name, Delegated token (%Voting power), Delegating address, Voting turnout, Most Recent 5 votes
  • Voter Turnout: Tracking individual participation activeness, refers to their recent proposals participation
  • Delegate Profile
    1. Dedicated page for each delegate, displaying all proposals they have voted or not voted on.
    2. Rationale Vote: Tracking each delegate whether a delegate only votes or also provides a rationale & discussion for their vote, both on-chain and in forums.
    3. Non-Conformity Ratio: Display the ratio of times a delegate votes against the majority.
    4. Delegation Tracking: Tracking changes in the amount of delegation each delegate receives.

6. Voter Behavior

  • Trend Voting Period Density: Heat map indicates voting density during various time periods.
  • Voting Momentum: Indicate the distribution of voter activity across the entirety of the proposals’ voting phase, divided into four equal quartiles: ‘early’, ‘normal’, ‘late’, and ‘ending’
Team

Curia Lab: Our team brings extensive expertise in research, data analysis, and experiences in DAO and decentralized governance. We have actively served as delegates in multiple DAOs, deeply engaging in governance, data analysis, and operational activities.

We have built governance data-driven tools for notable projects like the Optimism Collective and SafeDAO and we are keen on developing similar tools for Compound as well.

Link
1 Like