GMX Listing

Symbol: GMX

Token Address: 0xfc5a1a6eb076a2c7ad06ed22c90d7e710e35ad0a (Arbitrum)

Listing Chain: Arbitrum
GMX on GMX Listing

Summary: GMX (GMX), is the governance token of the GMX DAO which oversees the GMX Perpetual Exchange’s smart contract and other activities of the DAO.

MCAP: $303 million

Daily Volume: $53 million

Coingecko Link:

as on May 15, 2024


  • Chainlink has a Data Streams oracle live for GMX
  • Chaos Labs has provided preliminary parameters for starting the market (updates to be done by security committee)
  • Front end provisioning done but not deployed
  • Native version of GMX token is available on Arbitrum
  • Bridged version of GMX token is available on Avalanche (synapse)
  • Move to Snapshot vote after forum discussion

Initial Recommended Paramaters

Chaos Labs has provided recommendations for both a GMX-USD and a single asset GMX-GMX market.


  • GMX single market without a GMX-USD market will mean that it won’t be possible to trade in this market directly on the platform unless you already hold GMX, as no swap route would exist
  • GMX-USD markets will likely lead to a trading of the GMX token in part moving to the GMX platform, potentially taking some volume away from the POL, but also potentially freeing up POL as well
  • Deployment of a GMX market on Avalanche is only supportable after the integration of Chainlink Datastreams along with the GMX v2.1 deployment
  • creation of GMX markets will allow the GMX token to potentially be more widely used to back select GMs.

Its happening… lets go!


In favour of this deployment.

Hesitant in deploying 2 separate markets over fragmenting liquidity, but the notes regarding swap routes make sense. The single sided gmGMX pool would offer a great alternative to native staking while retaining full exposure to GMX.

The point about GMX backing select GMs is interesting, could you elaborate a little more on it? @coinflipcanda


This to me hypothetically would be a good thing considering the volume trading occuring. Are there any negatives I am not thinking about?

In the past, there were some concerns that listing the protocol’s own token could introduce cascading risk somehow. There are so many healthy external GMX markets now, and the protocol is significantly battle tested, so I don’t believe this is warranted anymore.

I’m in favour.


I can wrap my head around a separate gmx-usd GM style pool just fine. Leveraging, swapping, distribution, all makes sense.

Regarding single-sided GMX…Couldn’t this become an added attribute for the already staked GMX? Rather than set up a separate gmGMX, that is. Would be wonderful to just leverage trade using the gmx I’ve had staked for 2 years.

1 Like

finally i am fully pro. Lets do it

Instant yes from me. No reason to delay at this point, other than to wait for the inevitable impact of the governance / mp change - implementation. Regarding protocol owned liquidity my thinking is that part of it could or should be used to boost new markets (gmx and other new listings) and to incentivize LPs / traders.

I’m for this, think it’d be interesting to add incentives for traders that trade this contract.

1 Like

Yup, potentially very useful for ARB++ :blueberries:

At the moment we have traded GMX, but without yield opportunities on top as vaults are monthly.


I suppose sort of like if you were to use wstETH as collateral? Im not sure if its technically possible with the esGMX associations to given accounts and that you need full account transfers which can’t be combined, but an interesting idea that could be worth exploring.

A lot of the concerns in the past we think have been mitigated or are much less in magnitude. Considering the ample liquidity for third party GMX markets now, this isolated pools and markets should be appropriate and is something we are in favor.

Thanks for everyone for setting this up and excited to see how it goes.

1 Like

We, at Vaultka, express our strong support for this deployment.

The introduction of GMX trading pairs, including GMX-USD, significantly enhances the utility of the GMX token for its holders. This initiative not only introduces innovative features such as protection against GMX price exposure through trading fees and traders’ PnL but also extends beyond revenue sharing to add strategic value to GMX token utilization.

While we acknowledge the concerns regarding potential volume shifts from the POL, we believe the potential benefits of reallocating POL resources—for instance, establishing initial liquidity for the GMX-USD GM pool—outweigh the risks associated with POL fragmentation. However, it is crucial to consider the potential impacts on price dynamics due to thinner liquidity, which may increase arbitrage and trading opportunities across markets.

This deployment represents a forward-thinking approach to enhancing the GMX ecosystem, and we are optimistic about the innovative utilities it will introduce for token holders. We support advancing this proposal to the Snapshot vote to gather broader community input on this strategic initiative.

1 Like

As a community we could look at a few different options.

Give the risk committee authority to list a GMX-USD market
Give the risk committee authority to list a GMX-GMX market
Give the risk committee authority to list both markets indicate a preferred first market.

In terms of the GMX token backing additional markets, conceptually any token can be used for settlement and backing of markets and in that context the GMX token is an option. Say for some very exotic new markets, there maybe more interest by GMX holders instead of other LPs to back these markets.


targeted trading incentives could make sense.


We will say yes to this proposal. Giving more use cases for GMX token is good for its price. What should be noticed is that now the yield of staking GMX averages 13%, while the yield of BTC and ETH single pools is below 5%. If the yield from the single GMX market or GMX-USD market is lower than the yield of simply staking GMX, people will not be motivated to provide liquidity to these new pools. We can consider using staked GMX as underlying assets in the future.

1 Like

love this step. been waiting impatiently for this :stuck_out_tongue:
it would be an interesting competition on yields between staking GMX tokens at gmx, or providing liquidity in GMX pools.
it is in line with the proposal to dismantle MPs, as now that MPs are not a major factor, GMX holders can move between these pools for higher yields.

GMX tokens holders shld rejoice having more choices for yields.

1 Like

Finally :slightly_smiling_face:

We’re in favour.

1 Like

I support the idea itself, but I am a bit skeptical about liquidity and enough interest from LP providers. Especially with a single-sided GMX market. I am afraid the markets will not attract more than 500k tokens if the LP APR will be below 20%.

This proposal was sent to snapshot.