[PIP-61] PFP Pie

I would like to propose a $PFP (profile picture) Pie.

As many have noted, most recently @Cass (here), the NFT space is large and broadening quickly. $PLAY is a great product, and has performed extremely well with its focus on metaverse gaming. The inclusion of small amounts of PFP coins $PUNK and $MASK was, I think, an early indication of interest in a now-large PFP space that is emerging as its own sector, with markedly different dynamics than gaming projects.

As we discuss rebalancing $PLAY and establishing a more formal prospectus for it, I think it as good time to consider removing $PUNK and $MASK, and adding them to a new pie focused on the PFP sector to give investors greater optionality and more diversified exposure to investment-grade PFP NFTs.

Acceptance Criteria for Asset Inclusion

  • The underlying project is a collection of Ethereum NFTs featuring generative character art designed to serve as avatars or profile pictures on social media.
  • The PFP project has at least 5,000 items in the collection.
  • The PFP project has at least 2,000 unique owners.
  • We can gain exposure to the project through an ERC20 token that represents ownership of NFTs from the project.
  • The ERC20 is backed by at least 10
  • The ERC20 is fractionable to allow purchases of various sizes and allocations.
  • The ERC20 has liquidity on DEXes of either >=$0.5M or >=10% of the token’s circulating supply.
  • The ERC20 experiences <=1% slippage when purchased with 10 ETH times its determined pie allocation (if 10% of the pie, 1 ETH).
  • The ERC20 has existed for at least 60 days.
  • The ERC20 and its underlying NFT projects have each been audited.

Potential Assets (allocations TBD)

Note these assets meet several of the above criteria but have not been fully validated yet.

In practice (though not by rule), this is a collection of NTFX indices. They were willing to engage in a partnership for the original $PLAY launch, and this $PFP proposal features their products more prominently. We should discuss more consistent cross-promotion with them, including featuring $PFP for sale on the NTFX website.

PieDAO is in no way prohibited from including non-NTFX assets in this pie if we find assets that meet the established criteria and vote to include them.

This proposal comes at a time when NFT sale volumes are skyrocketing on Opensea and diversified NFT exposure is difficult or cost-prohibitive.


Personally I like that.
PUNKS and MASKS are not even gameplay related so I don’t understand what are they even doing in $PLAY.


Big fan of this. Might I suggest not buying at the top and waiting for the first big dip before rolling out the Pie, whenever that might be :innocent:


haha it’s a good question actually: should market timing factor into our pie releases?

One one hand, no, because each investor can make their own decisions about when to buy, sell, or sit.

On the other hand, yes, because we require initial liquidity (which actually might be easier to attract at a top when people are feeling good instead of after a crash) and initial momentum (which is easier when early investors are enjoying great returns, not when they hit a crash).

Tough question IMO, and a great discussion to have.

Yes! Taking history into account, I think having a perpetual positive on the inception value has a considerable upside, which we were able to observe quite hard on the PLAY pie in the last couple of months before Axie took off.

Overall, I think people at heart are bullish, and when they see green, they’re more likely to invest in something, especially if it’s only slightly green with still a large upside to it. I feel we do have this opportunity in the PFP market right now, but we’re still not in the first bear cycle, and everything is still very much in the first initial hype observed.

I agree that we don’t want to needlessly delay a rollout of a pie for this, but perhaps give it “some” weight in the consideration of a launch date, to at least avoid the absolute top before rolling the pie out.

Having said all of this, we should also not forget to leverage the existing hype around PFPs and not be too late to the party either, so the middle-way approach seems most sensible, depending on how quickly this can roll out.

Another thing we should consider is if we’re going to go exclusively NFTX to leverage the exisiting partnership further, or also consider competitors like NFT20 or Fractional.art to include more protocols and thus widen the audience and risk-profile to go by.

Really hyped for this, and I’ll definitely buy in once released and recommend my friends to do likewise as we roll out staking as well, it could be a double-whammy for the exposure of PieDAO to the ecosystem!

Maybe we should even contemplate set aside a predetermined amount of tokens/DOUGH/cash to build maximum hype for this launch while it’s hot :sunglasses:


Great thoughts all around. Perhaps to balance launch timing with a trap of delay, we establish a small committee to manage the launch. That way we can vote to authorize a committee to launch this pie when they see fit (under certain constraints we deem appropriate), and that committee can also manage a budget to promote the launch, as you proposed.

1 Like

Also I’m very happy to include NFT20 or Fractional.art tokens if they fit our determined criteria. I’m just less familiar with them. Are you able to propose some options @Shubiwubi?

1 Like

Sharing an interaction I had on the NFTX discord on the 11th:


Random thought - I found out about NFTX via the PieDAO PLAY/Metaverse index portfolio. I have PLAY as well as some PUNK, MASK, and BAYC and I’ve been thinking that it would be super cool if there was a NFTX branded tokenized portfolio of NFTX assets, managed by the NFTX community.

gaus (NFTX core)

We tend to feel it’s better if this sort of thing gets built on top, since governance around which items to include in the portfolio could distract from core dev stuff (which we’re swamped with atm). But like Kiwi said, defs open to exploring this in a few months when we have more time if no one else has done something like it with vault tokens yet.


I’m wondering if there is a fractionalized NFT out there that is liquid enough to include. That might be fun in terms of marketing. This pie has exposure to an edition of some high profile NFT.

I think this is great BTW. This plus the proposed changes to PLAY.


I just looked at NFT20 and yes, there are definitely some potential assets here… some that overlap with NFTX and some other PFP projects not offered by NFTX. Need to check liquidity & slippage.

Fractional.art is interesting. Not all of their listings enable fractions, and among those that do do, I haven’t found one yet that has more than 8 items from a single PFP project. But interesting for sure and I’ll keep looking

Thanks for sharing!

1 Like

Turns out that I don’t think fractional.art assets will be workable.

  • a fractionalized NFT or baskets of them can be “bought out” at any time. Token holders will no longer own a fraction and will have to claim their ETH

  • supply is limited and liquidity can dry up suddenly


Thanks for looking into it Cass. My next step is to start vetting some of these NFTX and NFT20 options.

1 Like

I agree. PLAY would likely be better off without them. I like the new proposal.

1 Like

I suggest adding $COOL as they are a high liquidity, NFTX market producing high returns from staking currently at 77%.

A lot of these are low liquidity (DUCK market = 16ETH), and I wonder if it’d be worthwhile to consider mechanisms for floor sweeping to enter these vaults, or partnering with some kinda of service provider who could help source liquidity from outside of these pools in occasions where surges in demand outpace slippage of buying in directly from LPs.

1 Like

Agreed on these, CyberKongz have been taking off quite rapidly. I’ll try to squeeze in some research later this week, but pretty swamped right now.

From an initial scout, seems perhaps Cool Cats and Bonsai by Zenft could be something we haven’t included yet? (No matter NFTX or NFT20, but for Bonsai’s probably NFTX for liquidity)

@Cass That’s a great point, totally didn’t think of this, but applies 100%. Too bad, I really liked the idea and approach, but won’t work in this particular case unfortunately.

1 Like

gosh it would be cool if there were a mechanism for LP within pies, be 20% ETH (or something) and get some of those NFTX staking rewards that come from mints and redeems.

@alexintosh @Adrian.A is NFTX staking possible in the current Pievault implementation, and if not, do we have a general sense of level of effort to add that capability?

I used Dune Analytics to look at wallets that have interacted with DOUGH to see what NFTs they have interacted with.

jnova’s list of candidates looks great. SupDucks do seem to be popular among the dough crowd! . Polymorphs, Nice Drips, and GSA are less popular and only in 4, 2, 1 wallets respectively.

The things that I saw that have not already been mentioned do not have much for liquidity:

Fluf World: FLUF
Stoner Cats
Heaven Computer: HVN (I was surprised to see this one, 100% of the NFTX LP is me)
0N1 FORCE: going bananas right now, NFTX vault is 2 NFTs

1 Like

Great intel Cass. Thanks! I’m working on vetting possible assets against the proposed criteria and I’ll these to the list. Will share soon!

I’m finding that liquidity & slippage is a concern with many of them, as @BlockEnthusiast noted. I’m not familiar with the mitigation strategies he proposed, so would love to get more detail on how we can handle low liquidity.