Title: Strengthening Moonwell with Real Assets: BTC & ETH Treasury Accumulation

[WellMaxi]

Summary:
Moonwell generates real protocol revenue. To truly scale user confidence, WELL staking, and protocol value, I propose Moonwell allocate part of that revenue to accumulate Bitcoin and Ethereum for the Treasury, while continuing WELL buybacks. BTC and ETH are DeFi’s foundational hard assets — and Moonwell should lead this irreversible trend.

Overview:

The proposal is simple but powerful:

Moonwell earns revenue, rewards it’s stakers in BTC and ETH daily and is accumulating hard assets.

Instead of using 100% of that to buy WELL and pay it to stakers, we diversify.

Allocate 50% of that excess protocol revenue to buy BTC and ETH — real digital assets with deep market trust.

Half of that (25%) goes to the Treasury, held long-term to secure the protocol and backstop operations.

The other half (25%) goes to WELL stakers as additional yield — in BTC and ETH.

The remaining 50% continues to be used for WELL buybacks and staking rewards.

So stakers would receive:

50% of rewards in WELL

12.5% in BTC

12.5% in ETH

The protocol treasury would accumulate:

25% of total earnings in BTC and ETH

---

Motivation:

There’s a powerful narrative emerging in DeFi and crypto as a whole — Treasury Accumulation of Hard Assets.

Some recent examples:

MicroStrategy now holds over 688,000 BTC as of July 2025 — the single most aggressive and successful BTC treasury play in history.

Sharplink Gaming (SBET) is now building an ETH-denominated treasury guided by Ethereum co-founder Joseph Lubin.

Tom Lee, from Fundstrat, recently launched BiyMine, focused entirely on ETH-native rewards and ETH accumulation.

BlackRock and other TradFi giants are embracing this trend, launching spot ETFs for both BTC and ETH, signaling that institutions are backing real, foundational assets — not governance tokens.

Moonwell should be part of this irreversible trend. BTC and ETH are digital hard assets with massive liquidity, cultural mindshare, and real-world value. The public already trusts them. Let’s lean into that.

Imagine a protocol that earns real revenue, and instead of just recycling it into its own token, it buys Bitcoin and Ethereum — and shares that with the stakers.

This would:

Drive WELL demand by tying it to rewards in BTC/ETH

Attract new users who want real yield in the most respected assets in crypto

Make Moonwell the first protocol to offer real hard-asset staking incentives

Build lasting confidence in WELL, and in Moonwell itself

---

Implementation:

The Treasury purchases BTC and ETH with excess protocol revenue.

Assets are held transparently via Mamo, the best on-chain treasury tool today.

Moonwell can use this as a narrative advantage:

The protocol earns

The protocol accumulates

The protocol rewards

The protocol is backed

We can also onboard TradFi players by showing that Mamo manages the Moonwell Treasury, and it holds not just WELL, but BTC and ETH earning yield via vaults and LPs.

This is not just good optics. It’s good strategy.

---

Let’s Talk Strategy:

How should Moonwell split its earnings?

Here’s a sample model to get us started:

50% for WELL buybacks and staking rewards

25% to accumulate BTC/ETH into Treasury

25% to reward WELL stakers in BTC and ETH

Let’s use this thread to gather input and feedback before submitting a formal proposal. Would love to hear from other users and delegates. Would you stake WELL to earn BTC/ETH? Should Moonwell become the first protocol in DeFi to go all-in on digital hard assets?

Let’s discuss.

TL/DR:
Moonwell earns real revenue — it’s time to use that revenue to accumulate real assets. This proposal suggests allocating 50% of protocol profits to buy BTC and ETH: half held in the Treasury as a long-term backstop, and half distributed as rewards to stakers. The remaining 50% continues WELL buybacks. This strategy strengthens Moonwell with hard-asset reserves, offers real yield to stakers, and positions WELL as the first DeFi token backed by Bitcoin and Ethereum — building long-term trust, value, and attention.

[WellMaxi]

Lol. This forum really poppin’.

24hrs

18 views

2 likes

Zero Comments.

We should change that.and get this community excited again.

Should I become an activist delegate?

Make Moonwell great again!

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

[Sherryg]

I would like to say all this is very eye opening. This is very much above my level of education, but one thing is certain if i don’t get on this “bandwagon” lol. I know I will be to far behind in knowledge base on the these topics of WEB3, staking and trading I will be to hesitant to try to get involved. So for us very slow learners and new comers please, if you can talk in a elementary form on these topics, it would be highly appreciated. You might even get more viewers and comments if people like myself feel more comfortable and less afraid to get involved, based on our lack of education on topics that are very important for our social systems to grow wealthy and strong instead of being poor and tired of trying in poverty. When these tools will work with involvement to grow wealthy to every society world-wide. I believe ..Thank you for your time. Sherryg*( new comer/eager to learn)

[Boardroom]

Pinging Super Delegates @coolhorsegirl @PGov this discussion was held on the most recent gov call if you’d like a bit more context. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts even if treasury isn’t your expertise

[Daniel_Plainview]

I support this proposed structure. While the precise weightings are open to discussion, allocating WELL revenue to stack BTC/ETH and burn WELL is the right path forward.

The protocol has been returning 100% of excess WELL revenue to stakers for several months now, and unfortunately, it hasn’t done anything to support the price, and this is in a bull market where deposits and loan balances are going up. The market clearly isn’t putting a premium on this revenue distribution structure. It was a good attempt, but it’s time to try something else.

On the last governance call, Luke mentioned that because WELL is a governance token it isn’t allowed to technically “burn” tokens. However, he said the protocol could potential remove tokens from circulation by holding them indefinitely. I would much prefer a true token burn, but if this is the only option, then it should be done in a way where these locked-forever tokens can be tracked and no one can access them. I’m sure there are a bunch of clever solutions to effectively burn them and ensure no one can ever accesses them again.

In regards to stacking BTC/ETH - why not! These are the 2 hardest forms of money in crypto. Let’s start our own treasury and get the Moonwell name on the treasury boards.

In order, I would prioritize this capital allocation strategy: (i) burn, (ii) stack BTC/ETH, (iii) well rewards.

A few other comments:

• Would it be possible to get submissions in the forum sent as notifications in the Moonwell site? I think engagement here is so low because people don’t actively check if a new post has been sent. Moonwell has some of the most active on-chain voting, yet activity in here is nil.
• More disclosure around Lunar Lab’s commitment split between Moonwell and Mamo would be appreciated. I think a lot of Moonwell tokenholders are wondering how much time and effort is being dedicated towards Moonwell vs Mamo, and many are starting to wonder which token is the better option to hold.
• A frequent response on the last governance call was “no, we can’t do that because WELL is a governance token”. This feels like an anchor on WELL’s potential. Is there any solution here - can we convert to same token structure as MAMO? Would the Clarity Act change this?

Closing thoughts:

My WELL holdings are at an all time high. Everyone in this forum knows that the protocol is healthy and likely to keep growing, yet the WELL token doesn’t get any appreciation. I think a token burn will have the most impact on changing the narrative, but I’m also in favor of building a BTC/ETH reserve. The burn has been in discussion for over a year now. It would be great to see some action and have this implemented this quarter, if possible.

[PGov]

Our candid take is that this should certainly be explored. We are very big proponents of treasury diversification, and 100% think there should be steps taken to explore this.

The actual breakdown proposed seems logical and reasonable, but would be nice to have Anthias / Risk teams to give a suggestion. The ultimate goal of course to reach a nice equilibrium of not much sell pretty on token while maintaining a more robust treasury.

[coolhorsegirl]

I’m broadly supportive of the motivation behind this idea. The narrative of protocols accumulating BTC and ETH as foundational assets is gaining steam across the industry and there’s good reason for Moonwell to lead in that direction. Diversifying rewards and treasury holdings beyond just WELL strengthens the protocol’s resilience and long-term credibility — especially as we think about attracting more risk-conscious participants and institutional capital. A few specific points of feedback:

1. Probably a comms question: What does this mean for WELL’s value accrual? The proposal still allocates 50% of revenue to WELL buybacks and rewards — which is solid — but we should think carefully about the messaging. Will shifting 50% of rewards away from WELL dilute perceived token value (which could be as important as its actual value!)? Or maybe we could use the BTC/ETH component to strengthen well by simultaneously pushing staking for WELL?
2. Re volatility: Accumulating BTC and ETH makes sense, but we should have some guiding principles around when and how those assets are bought. Do we DCA? Do we hold in raw form or explore yield strategies via vaults (with risk clearly disclosed)?
3. Could this evolve into a modular strategy? I wonder if there’s an opportunity to make this opt-in for stakers. For example, users could choose a “pure WELL” pool vs a “diversified rewards” pool. That way we give people options and can test what really resonates.

[WellMaxi]

Hi Daniel — thanks for the thoughtful input and for supporting the core idea behind this proposal.

You made a great point about the limitations around token burns. One potential alternative I’ve been thinking about: what if instead of burning WELL, we kept the tokens in the Treasury and deployed them into permanent liquidity positions, like WELL/wETH and WELL/cbBTC?

This could accomplish a few things:

Deepen on-chain liquidity for WELL

Reduce volatility and improve price discovery

Generate yield, which feeds back into the Treasury

Still effectively remove the WELL from circulation (since it’s locked in LPs, not emitted or spent)

Would love to hear your thoughts on this variation — and whether that might be a viable middle ground that’s both legally clean and economically strong.

— David (WELLMAXI)

[Daniel_Plainview]

Hey David - if it’s permissible under the governance token structure then yeah, I would certainly be open to it over distributing 100% of the excess WELL.

I would still prefer a burn solution that permanently removes them from circulation and prevents anyone from claiming them back, but if that’s not possible then using them to LP to generate extra income would be a good alternative.

[clam986]

Hey everyone! I’m new to the forum. I am a significant holder of well and really like the roadmap and the UX. I am really blessed to be a part of this community. I really like this thread and agree with the direction of this conversation. I wanted to add a little “hot sauce” for this ideation to get the communities thoughts as well as what is and isn’t possible. My day job is building interstate bridges and infrastructure projects. We are shareholders in a captive insurance company based in the Cayman Islands. https://titaninsuranceltd.com/ We have shareholders meetings twice per year and manage our own workers comp and liability insurance up to $500,000 in coverage for each shareholder. Our premiums are over $100 million every year as a group, and as time goes on (10 plus years) the IBNRs (incurred but not realized losses) begin to tail off. These IBNRs are effectively old “ghost” claims that can but likely won’t occur in the future because they are so old. We hold them in a separate “tail fund” to isolate them and invest them to get a return. Our first tail fund has $110,000 and our total IBNRs equal around $1,200,000. I asked and it is possible for the captive to “sell” these IBNRs to a “novation reinsurance company.” What does that look like? It looks like the Titan captive insurance company selling/ giving the IBNRs to a novation company for 90% cash. Worded another way the captive insurance company will pay a novation company $90,000 of $100,000 of IBNRs in cash to hold these claims in perpetuity. You can probably see where I am going with this. What if there was a cayman “novation company” that partnered WITH the Moonwell Foundation to hold these IBNRs in perpetuity to invest in yield USDC and all the ecosystem of Moonwell building a robust cayman compliant treasury that is funded by ghost claim IBNRs from captive insurance companies located in the cayman islands? My best guess of the TAM, total addressable market, for these IBNRs in the Caymans is around $100 million dollars. Thoughts? @Luke ?

[WellMaxi]

I’ve been thinking more about Moonwell’s treasury strategy — and the more I consider it, the more this phased approach makes sense. I strongly believe this could jolt WELL out of bear-market hibernation and attract new users and new token holders looking for value and the stability of BTC/ETH, while still having exposure to DeFi. Moonwell can do what TradFi, SBET, and similar platforms cannot.

Right now, WELL stakers are only receiving WELL as rewards. Much of it ends up being sold back into the market, creating a pointless loop. We need to break this cycle.

---

A few open questions:

• Does staked WELL generate any yield for the protocol?

• Is the 7-day cooldown purely to prevent liquidity shocks (“bank run” risk), or is there something being done with staked WELL behind the scenes?

---

Here’s what I’d propose:

Phase 1: Bootstrapping the Treasury

For the first 3–4 months, split protocol revenue:

• 50% to buybacks for WELL stakers

• 50% to accumulate BTC and ETH in a Moonwell treasury

Once a base is established, begin distributing a portion of staking rewards in BTC and ETH, not just WELL.

This adds real asset backing to staking rewards and builds long-term value.

---

Phase 2: Productive Deployment

Deploy treasury BTC and ETH into high-value LPs on Aerodrome:

• Add to WELL/ETH

• Seed new pools: WELL/BTC, WELL/MAMO, possibly even ETH/BTC

This would:

• Deepen liquidity for WELL and MAMO

• Generate LP fees to reinvest into the treasury or distribute to stakers

• Cement Moonwell as a major DeFi player, co-farming with MAMO at scale

---

WELL and MAMO together could operate a large-scale industrial farming system across Aerodrome — capturing significant swap volume and generating sustainable, real yield.

Not sure if all of this is feasible from a technical or legal standpoint, but this is the direction I’d go if I were shaping treasury strategy or had the votes.

We should not drag our feet on this. Let’s push for consensus, get the plan written up, and move it to a formal vote SOON.
The time to act is now — especially with Coinbase beginning to route trades through DeFi platforms, the worldwide ETH and BTC treasury accumulation phase is just about to intensify.

This is Moonwell’s moment to get ahead of the curve — to lead DeFi forward. It’s a chance to show both retail users and TradFi institutions what Moonwell and Mamo are capable of in the new digital economy. This narrative has weight — and it will bring new users and token holders in.

Curious to hear thoughts from investors, the team and other delegates and LUUKE!

-David (WellMaxi.cb.id)

[surfingdegen]

I think Luke had some insight as to why a burn could face regulatory scrutiny on the recent Gov call. I support a treasury, but not a burn. By the way, well is up significantly today and no tokens were burned.