[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism (8/7/25)
01Summary
Gauntlet proposes topping up COMP rewards contracts on Arbitrum (6,570 COMP), Base (6,750 COMP), and Optimism (2,025 COMP) to maintain three months of runway. These chains currently have insufficient reward reserves (42-84 days remaining) before running out of incentive funds.
- Type
- treasury allocation
Key changes
- Transfer 6,750 COMP to Base rewards contract via bridge(high)
- Transfer 2,025 COMP to Optimism rewards contract via bridge(high)
- Transfer 6,570 COMP to Arbitrum rewards contract via bridge(high)
- Extend rewards runway from 42-84 days to approximately 120+ days (three months)(high)
Notable concerns
- Arbitrum has only 42 days of runway remaining, making this a time-sensitive allocation
- Base has 57 days of runway remaining
- Ongoing daily distribution costs (73.0, 75.0, and 22.5 COMP per day respectively) may require future top-ups beyond this three-month extension
Generated by Kvorum
02Description
[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism (8/7/25)
Simple Summary
Gauntlet recommends adding additional COMP to the Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, and Ethereum reward contracts.
| Chain | Reward Amount |
|---|---|
| Arbitrum | 6,570 |
| Base | 6,750 |
| Optimism | 2,025 |
Analysis
Below is the projected runway in each chain’s rewards contract.
| Chain | Rewards contract COMP token holdings | Current Daily COMP token reward distributions | Remaining days of runway (not including existing claimable rewards) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arbitrum | 3110.29 | 73.0 | 42 |
| Base | 4305.25 | 75.0 | 57 |
| Optimism | 1895.24 | 22.5 | 84 |
Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism currently have a runway with less than 90 days. Gauntlet recommends topping up an additional three months’ worth of incentives to the listed networks.
Next Steps
- We welcome community feedback.
03Mismatch analysis
I matched each COMP amount and recipient chain in the description's table (Arbitrum 6,570; Base 6,750; Optimism 2,025) against the decoded on-chain actions. Each chain's amount is correctly reflected in a grantComp -> approve -> bridge (depositERC20To / outboundTransferCustomRefund) sequence targeting the corresponding L1 bridge contracts for Base, Optimism, and Arbitrum respectively, with no value or target mismatches found. The only issue is a wording inconsistency: the summary sentence mentions 'Ethereum reward contracts' as a recipient of the top-up, but this is not reflected in the table or in any decoded action — all mainnet actions are intermediate steps (minting and bridging) rather than a distinct Ethereum-based reward allocation. This appears to be a copy-paste or drafting oversight rather than a substantive discrepancy, since amounts, targets, and total COMP flows exactly match the three L2 chains described in the table. Given this is a minor textual inconsistency with no financial or control impact, I classify this as a minor_discrepancy with high confidence, since all the quantitatively significant elements (amounts and destination chains) are fully consistent between prose and calldata.
Discrepancies
- lowextra in description
The summary sentence states COMP will be added to 'Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, and Ethereum reward contracts,' but neither the accompanying table nor any decoded action allocates COMP to an Ethereum-specific rewards contract — all three actual transfers bridge COMP to Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism L2 contracts only. The mainnet actions are merely the mint/approve/bridge mechanics for those L2 transfers, not a separate Ethereum reward top-up.
“Gauntlet recommends adding additional COMP to the Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, and Ethereum reward contracts.”
Generated by Kvorum
04Actions
- Target
- 0x3d98…cd3b
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- _grantComp(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "amount": "6750000000000000000000", "recipient": "0x6d903f6003cca6255D85CcA4D3B5E5146dC33925" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0xc00e…6888
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- approve(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "amount": "6750000000000000000000", "address": "0x3154Cf16ccdb4C6d922629664174b904d80F2C35" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0x3154…2c35
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- depositERC20To(address,address,address,uint256,uint32,bytes)
- Arguments
{ "_to": "0x123964802e6ABabBE1Bc9547D72Ef1B69B00A6b1", "_amount": "6750000000000000000000", "_l1Token": "0xc00e94Cb662C3520282E6f5717214004A7f26888", "_l2Token": "0x9e1028F5F1D5eDE59748FFceE5532509976840E0", "_extraData": "0x", "_minGasLimit": "200000" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0x3d98…cd3b
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- _grantComp(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "amount": "2025000000000000000000", "recipient": "0x6d903f6003cca6255D85CcA4D3B5E5146dC33925" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0xc00e…6888
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- approve(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "amount": "2025000000000000000000", "address": "0x99C9fc46f92E8a1c0deC1b1747d010903E884bE1" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0x99c9…4be1
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- depositERC20To(address,address,address,uint256,uint32,bytes)
- Arguments
{ "_to": "0x443EA0340cb75a160F31A440722dec7b5bc3C2E9", "_amount": "2025000000000000000000", "_l1Token": "0xc00e94Cb662C3520282E6f5717214004A7f26888", "_l2Token": "0x7e7d4467112689329f7E06571eD0E8CbAd4910eE", "_extraData": "0x", "_minGasLimit": "200000" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0x3d98…cd3b
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- _grantComp(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "amount": "6570000000000000000000", "recipient": "0x6d903f6003cca6255D85CcA4D3B5E5146dC33925" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0xc00e…6888
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- approve(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "amount": "6570000000000000000000", "address": "0xa3A7B6F88361F48403514059F1F16C8E78d60EeC" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0x72ce…31ef
- Value
- 838148000000000 wei
- Function
- outboundTransferCustomRefund(address,address,address,uint256,uint256,uint256,bytes)
- Arguments
{ "_to": "0x88730d254A2f7e6AC8388c3198aFd694bA9f7fae", "_data": "0x000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000260477678e40000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000400000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000", "_token": "0xc00e94Cb662C3520282E6f5717214004A7f26888", "_amount": "6570000000000000000000", "_maxGas": "338676", "_refundTo": "0x3fB4d38ea7EC20D91917c09591490Eeda38Cf88A", "_gasPriceBid": "500000000" }- Calldata
05Tally
Summed from votes
06Voters
No votes recorded yet.
07Forum
No forum thread is confidently linked to this proposal.
08Similar proposals
- compoundexecuted[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base and Optimism (4/18/25)95%
- compoundexecuted[Gauntlet] - Rewards Top Up for Ethereum, Base and Optimism (10/3/25)94%
- compounddefeated[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for Ethereum and Base (11/26/24)94%
- compoundexecutedTopping up Ethereum and Optimism COMP rewards88%
- compoundexecuted[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for BASE, Ethereum, and Arbitrum (06/03/24)88%
- compounddefeated[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for BASE, Ethereum, and Arbitrum (05/27/24)88%
- compoundexecutedRewards Contract Top-Up for Arbitrum, Base, and Unichain85%
- compoundcanceled[Gauntlet] - Incentive Recommendations and Rewards Top Up (2024-10-885%
- compoundexecuted[Gauntlet] - Incentive Recommendations and Rewards Top Up (2024-10-24)84%
- compoundexecuted[Gauntlet] Rewards Contract Top-Up for Arbitrum and Unichain83%