NFT selection process for adding to treasury

Copying over some input from the discord:


Rather than subjetive decisions and biases creeping in, there should be an objective definition of “Blue-chip NFTs” .

For example: A project whose:

(a) Floor is > x ETH (Eg; 5 ETH) and
(b) Time in Market is > y months (Eg: 6 months) , showing sustained longevity.


Type of project. Obviously subjective and nothing will be 100% in any category, but I think we can get a pretty good sense of the goals projects are pursuing. We should try to diversify holdings of different types, as they may experience a lower correlation with one another. These are some NFT categories that come to mind:
• DAO ownership
• Game assets or gaming startup
• Corporate branding partner/real-world pop culture (music, film, TV, advertising, etc)
• Novel blockchain experiences, so would be a team more dev-focused.
• Generative artist
• Historical crypto items


As a Squiddao holder I would suggest Squiddao Nfts. Generates passive income from bonding fees and daily nft sales. Not much at this moment bc Squiddao inst attracting many buyers (trades near treasury value) / isnt really visible within the OHM forks. Nft sales (1 per day) are around 7-10 Eth per NFT at this moment.
For visibility/exposure BAYC is ofc better also with their release and airdrop of the $APE token


imho the 2 most obvious choices are punks and apes

the discussion will become interesting if we really want to move to other nfts that aren’t pfp


Fidenza comes to mind, A Noun?
Mutant Ape, World of Women is becoming serious,


agree with pratik re: (a) minimum floor threshhold for early picks

quantitative metrics in order of importance:

  • volume over time (most important of all metrics imo, w greater weight for sustained liq over time)
  • volume volatility (eg check fidenza vol over last year vs BAYC vol over last year)
  • price volatility (stable > wild fluctuations for LP)
  • size of collector base (tens of thousands > thousands > hundreds)
  • collection total size (generally bigger better assuming above metrics are strong)


  • large supply of relatively undifferentiated floor nfts (too many price divergences w/r/t/ attributes may disincentive those seeking AMM liquidity, assuming liq will be mispriced)
  • anything that might speed up turnover (NFTs used for farming, airdrops etc)

prob a bunch other in the qualitative but quant first, qual later.

1 Like

Bong Bears, Apeliens and Crypties. Great Olympus-aligned communities. Holders are not fly-by-night and are crypto-native. Utility to the projects are incoming in 2022 :eyes:

1 Like

how should we deal with wash trading volume? some collections with 0 royalties or fees (eg. Meebits) are getting majorly cleaned on LooksRare

i like these a lot

  • size of collector base, and maybe some way to normalize this relative to collection size
  • large supply of relatively undifferentiated floor nfts
  • anything that might speed up turnover

i can see us making some tradeoffs between “blue chip”-ness and “high yield” collections

could just exclude LOOKS-based contract swaps from data? prob don’t need 100% of data to make accurate generalizations on this.

yeah blue chip is probably a misleading category, esp as some (like autoglyphs) prob won’t bring much yield and others (fidenzas) have a decent probability of no longer being blue chip in a few years time.

think some metaverse/game-y stuff like niftyisland legendary pistols is a perfect example of something that falls outside of the blue chip framework but is a good candidate for liquidity because: 1) large collection of same-ish floor nfts (tiny handful of rares), 2) will have utility which revolves around experiential gameplay (ie likely to be used a handful of times by multiple diff owners) 3) has a huge potential user base relative to 99% of nft collections. that said not an expert in that ecosystem, so whether its worth pursuing is another question.

1 Like

There should be competition from the NFT communities themselves to want to be added to the treasury tbh

1 Like

agreed. i also think, and this is something we can’t really model, that whatever FloorDAO decides to add, this could DRIVE more trading volume (and hence yield) just by the 1) publicity, and 2) guarantee of liquidity

for example, the BAYC vault is tiny rn, but if we do add xBAYC and xBAYCWETH as bonds, maybe seed an sweep + LP, this could drive some major trading volume

yea i love this idea.

imagine we implement ve(:broom:, :broom:)
lock your sFLOOR and vote on NFT gauges/whitelisting/bond parameters
projects would want to buy FLOOR, stake, lock, and vote to incentivize liquidity for their collections

FLOOR Wars :eyes:


Yes, I think this with some tweaks is what makes sense and probably would be the best-case scenario. How feasible do you think it is to have these projects onboard. NFTX mainly has and had this problem basically forever which has caused the illiquidity issue. Maybe Alex G can shine some light here

Add the top 10 projects in terms of volume for the last 3 months to start with .

There could be multiple criteria based on which the new projects could be decided

I like this guys analysis on Twitter based on which he has analysed doodles project

Some of The parameters seem interesting to decide the real blue chips


Agreed it will be great to have competition between teams wanting to be integrated into a potential bond system. Having a trusted list of collections/artists to bootstrap this is key though. I follow a lot of the stuff from Pak, Rafagrassetti and FVCKRENDER for example. They deliver on a constant basis to their communities and are always building on top of their collections. Pak is/are really out fo this world. TL;DR: choice based on team and artist w3 cv. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Lots of good thoughts in this thread so far. I think Floor could pursue NFT selection in stages:

Stage #1 is launching the DAO and having Punks as the starting asset.

Stage #2 could be a single proposal with ~5-7 NFT sets that fit criteria that’s been mentioned so far e.g. sufficiently liquid, floor NFTs are mostly fungible, different communities represented etc.

My picks here off the top of my head would optimize for stuff that is mid tier price wise but high credibility like Squiggles, MAYC, Sandbox land, and so on. TLDR is: valuable, people want to trade it, decent collection sizes. You want to create liquid markets with these early picks so they prove the concept works well. Could look to partner with people like SquiggleDAO or Sandbox itself to make sure liquidity gets bootstapped well in theory.

Stage #3 could then be a framework for community competition and Floor Wars, so its an open process. There are lessons to draw from the way Mirror did it’s write race and SuperRare now does it’s space race. i.e. only allow a certain amount of projects to be added per week. Tricky to balance wanting to add new stuff vs. wanting it to be seen as something rare so communities fight for entry.


I agree that Genies quickly became known as “culture’s go-to digital identity”.
Most celebrities we know own at least one NFT and Fortune 500 corporations are hopping in left and right.

The Team behind Genies sees things very widely and from many angles and perspectives like

  • Avatars
  • Metaverse Real Estate
  • Music/Sound NFTs
  • Digital occupation
  • Digital identity
  • IRL Connection or bridging the metaverse to the real world with physical goods
  • Profile Pictures
  • Avatar Ecosystems
  • Team generated content and User generated content

They have long-term vision and focus on building with a 10 year plan, of course as most of us I suppose…

The shared words above are keywords from their blog publications and perspective becaase I prefer to be as objective as possible when I pass someone elses’ work.

If you want, take a look at the project. A good idea may come up.

I would like to add that it occurred to me to share what has already been stated, following what I read in our forum here:

• Corporate branding partner / real-world pop culture (music, film, TV, advertising, etc)
• Generative artist

and reading it Genies just popped in my mind. Actually I wanted to invest in it because I really liked it but unfortunate the interest was too high and I had no luck to get in the early as I prefer to… Now I follow, watch and read what they got to say.

I don’t know if the example is suitable but despite it I decided to share my thoughts with ya.


A friend of my showed me FloorDAO three weeks ago and I’m really really thankful about that because your idea is well thought out, it comes just in time, it’s necessary and I am sure that you’ll be able to change the attitude of the whole community to the NFT sector, the trade in it and I believe that there will be large volumes of liquidity to fulfill the image :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hello and Happy Friday! I would like to propose HD Punks as a collection for consideration.

Since the stated mission is to provide deep liquidity, I believe HD Punk provides a unique opportunity because of the tokenomics foobar and Keram developed for the project.

Half of all royalty payments on secondary marketplaces goes towards the buy and burn of the project’s vault token–HDPUNK.

There are 453 Punks in the HDPUNK vault currently. However, with the first 2 buyback and burns, 95 HDPUNK have been burned–allowing only 358/453 NFTs to leave the vault currently. This burning mechanism creates deflationary pressure without destroying any of the underlying NFTs and I believe creates access to greater liquidity as there are less HDPUNK tokens to split amongst ETH in the lp.

Thank you in advance for your consideration, please let me know if there is any additional information I can provide about the project. Have a wonderful weekend!


LPs earn the most fees when a collection has high volume.

If floorDAO is in the business of LPing then sustained high volume collections should be the top priority over all other considerations (such as prestige, history or artistic taste).

Volume cut off should be high to begin with. >1000E daily seems like reasonable current market targets.

Apes are the no-brainer besides punks, their volume is insane (lowest day in all of jan was 657 E, max 7508E).

CloneX with strong recent volumes (>3500 E daily for past 6 days) is another good candidate. CloneX as a high volume but lower priced NFT also gives the DAO the opportunity to benefit from potential price appreciation at multiples.

I have seen fidenzas suggested but do not think their volume makes them as appealing.

Relevant dashboards:

1 Like

UPDATE: The third buy and burn for HD Punks occurred. foobar bought and burned 40 HDPUNK tokens!

Those 40 burned tokens + 95 from the previous buy and burns = 135 HDPUNK burned to date. Of the 453 HD Punks in the vault currently, only 318 able to leave the vault.

The purchase:
The burn:

The deflationary cycle continues :fire: :fire: :fire:

1 Like

I think MAYC is the obvious next choice. Project consistently has top tier volume, long track record by NFT standards, the direct tie to BAYC, larger supply than most NFT projects, general popularity, and a large supply of basic floor level NFTs. Checks all boxes.

1 Like