Proposal to add Tri-CRV to the Gauge Controller


Proposal to add Tri-CRV Pool to the Gauge Controller to enable users to assign gauge weight and mint CRV. cCRV is converted from cvxCRV.

Gauge contract modifications:
Only limited addresses can deposit LPs into the Tri-CRV curve gauge (currently, only the TriCRV LP Reward Pool Contract)

References/Useful links:

Website: - HackMD
Token Address:
Community: c(CRV)
Github: GitHub - CongruentFi/ccrv-v1-contract: Contracts used in cCRV
Audit: Omniscia Congruent Audit


What is cCRV?

cCRV is essentially converted cvxCRV, and each cCRV is backed by 1 cvxCRV

What solution does cCRV provide?

Tri-CRV Pool & cCRV staking system

  • cCRV takes in cvxCRV and converts it to cCRV. The cvxCRV is then locked in order to generate consistent yield. The cCRV emissions are then combined with the Convex yield to offer a combined yield that is higher than the regular Convex yield.
  • cCRV creates a Tri-CRV pool on Curve (CRV+cvxCRV+cCRV) and gauge emissions are used to attract liquidity and thereby assist in tightening the CRV-cvxCRV-ccRV peg.
  • Tri-CRV pool LP farming earns CRV emissions, which are then converted to cvxCRV and staked on Convex, which helps Convex to attract more CRV and, thus, hold more veCRV

Despite Convex holding a large number of veCRV, it still holds less than 50% of all veCRV and so still has room to hold even more. Each locked vlCVX currently represents 4.8 locked veCRV (as of Mar.30), which means that CVX is trading at a premium. The more value that CRV holds, the more ve-type services it can create and offer. Over 80% of possible CVX tokens have already been emitted, which means that Convex will likely require additional strategies going forward in order to ensure consistent yields.


Our aim is to create a new flywheel.

Create good liquidity for the Tri-CRV pool and to secure CRV emissions so that we can continue to convert more CRV to cvxCRV, thereby increasing the veCRV/vlCRV ratio and driving the Convex flywheel. So, what had previously required users to actively move their CRV to Convex and convert to cvxCRV, cCRV now automates this process by taking CRV emissions and automatically converting them to cvxCRV and then staking.


1. Multi-sig:

The 4/7 multisig wallet on Ethereum:

The following 7 individuals will have Multi-sig rights:


2. Audits:

cCRV has already undergone a complete audit by Omniscia
Omniscia Congruent Audit

3. Centralization Vectors:

The multi-sig address has the right to modify the protocol’s parameters, such as adjusting the yield speed, the minter whitelist, etc. The multi-sig holds the rights to withdrawal by the Convex Depositor contract. But, modifications to the deposit contract will only be used if the Convex contract undergoes upgrades.


An efficient product, should help strengthen both Curve and Convex. Tightening the peg seems to be a win for us all. I like it. So, a higher yield for all and curbs overall emissions. I would like to see some information about oracle risks though… It’s a potential risk factor. Can you provide a little more information?

1 Like

So I agree with the fact that helping Curve and Convex at this stage is important. So stakers in the tri pool earn higher yields and at the same time help the Convex flywheel and Curve emissions? Is there a cap on ccrv?

1 Like

Clarify this please?

Also what is the product, why would veCRV holders vote in your gauge and/or allocate CRV to your gauge, especially since the CRV is only distributed to what sounds like a whitelist of LPs?


Hi skellet0r!

We view Curve and Convex as spokes in the same flywheel where both benefit, and the core of this flywheel is converting more CRV to cvxCRV. Just to show how cCRV is beneficial to veCRV, allow me to show the following:

  1. The generation of new cvxCRV is slowing down : Dune Analytics

  2. The peg between cvxCRV and CRV is a bit off.

So, the first stage of cCRV will be as follows:

  1. A portion of CRV emissions will be automatically converted to cvxCRV (not simply swapped), thereby creating the flywheel.

  2. The peg between cvxCRV and CRV will be tightened via more intuitive distribution of emissions.

The core benefit to veCRV holders is for Curve to continue operating smoothly for the long term, and for CRV to be distributed into the pools of those generating more trading fees. cCRV helps to drive the Curve/Convex flywheel, and helps Curve to generate more trading volume and trading fee income. As the DAO backing cCRV, our only profit is the trading fee distributions from veCRV (the 3CRV received from staking cvxCRV).

So, we are basically in the same position as veCRV holders.

To clarify this:

Users are still allowed to add liquidity, the only difference will be that, for the time being, staking of LPs on the gauge would be restricted to only our smart contract. But, to be entirely clear, such restriction on LP staking would apply only to the gauge. You can see from the smart contract that, even though the contract stakes LPs on behalf of the user, the rewards that the user receives still come directly from the gauge, and there will be multiple pools distributing rewards.




cCRV always backing by cvxCRV with 1:1, so it may don’t have oracle risks, the price will depends on the market actions


I think this will have great success. I’m blown away how much the community is involved. I didn’t quite understand this DAO thing. Now, I’m starting to understand the true power it brings. I’m so glad I got involved with Curve and Convex. Much love…


This proposal makes no sense. So we give you a gauge and only you and a few of your whitelisted addresses can earn CRV?


Not sure I like the idea of a whitelist for the gauge contract. Think offering a staking service on top should be able to capture most of the pool anyway.



As I mentioned, we try to maximize the utilization of capital as much as possible, and so we employ this type of recycling. The key to CRV emissions is incentives for LPs. If we don’t have enough incentives for cCRV, then it will be difficult to maintain the peg. So, the only difference is just that we will be implementing the incentives.


Maybe the metaphor is inappropriate. Tri-CRV gauge will be like a fundraising gauge which is focusing on Curve/Convex flywheel, and it also can generate trading fees to Curve

You are essentially asking for a whitelist to be able to double dip emissions, your token would be wrapped staked cvxcrv while itself being a part of a tripool that farms crv and cvx.

  • Any plans for a native project token or for fundraising for cCRV will be decided by way of a proposal followed by a vote in Congruent DAO

Can you provide more information regarding your plan for a token?
Also I still don’t understand why are you restricting users from directly staking the LP in the gauge and instead having it done through your contract? seems suspicious.

Good luck with your project I like the motive but not the execution.

1 Like


The role of Curve emissions for a pegged token is to incentivize users towards the LPs and thereby help stabilize the peg. We just need to offer enough emissions to ensure a stable peg. If we were to just send the remaining emissions back into the market(if users don’t lock crv into convex), this would be kind of a waste, since the goal of cCRV is to help Convex lock more CRV. We need to make sure we are getting maximum utilization of the CRV emissions.

and this one just want to clarify we don’t have a project token(like CVX for convex) or fundrasing atm, if we gonna to have one it need to pass the DAO vote in Congruent DAO, since ccrv is supported and owned by Congruent DAO

1 Like

The multisig that can infinitely mint cCRV?
Why is this the case?

cCRV seems like a marketing layer?
I don’t understand why a whole new gauge is needed to balance the CRV-cvxCRV pool this should by the Convex team them selfs or at least be endorsed by them.

I will vote against this proposal.


We’ve noticed you’ve made custom modifications to the gauge implementation which is not acceptable. I’m closing this thread and I recommend large holders to abstain, vote no on the proposal.