Explore

veTokenomics & Bribe Markets: Gauge Voting, Incentives, and Curve Wars Mechanics

veTokenomics & Bribe Markets: Gauge Voting, Incentives, and Curve Wars Mechanics

Understanding how protocols align user incentives with long-term governance has become critical in decentralized finance (DeFi). The vote-escrow (ve) tokenomics model pioneered by Curve Finance transformed token distribution, liquidity incentives, and governance into a strategic game, spawning “bribe markets” and the so-called “Curve Wars.”

The Origins of veTokenomics

Decentralized protocols initially distributed tokens via airdrops or liquidity mining to bootstrap usage. While these approaches flooded markets with tokens, they often failed to foster lasting engagement or aligned governance. Curve Finance introduced a new paradigm in September 2020: vote-escrowed tokens, or veTokens, unlocking governance power only for users who lock their tokens for a defined period.

Under veTokenomics, a protocol’s native token (e.g., CRV on Curve) is locked for anywhere from one week to four years. In return, participants receive veTokens (veCRV), which cannot be traded or transferred. The longer the lockup, the more veCRV minted. This design tackles two core challenges:

  • Sticky liquidity: Users commit capital over long horizons, reducing mercenary capital swings.
  • Aligned governance: Token holders who vote have a vested interest in the protocol’s success.

By making veTokens non-transferable, Curve aligned governance rights with genuine long-term holders and opened the door to strategic competition for voting power.

Core Mechanics of Vote-Escrowed Tokens

Lock-up and Decay Function

When a user locks 1,000 CRV for four years, they receive 1,000 veCRV immediately. As time elapses, the voting strength decays linearly to zero at unlock, incentivizing re-locking to maintain influence. This decay function differentiates veTokenomics from fixed-period staking and encourages ongoing commitment

Voting Power and Governance

veTokens grant proportional voting power in governance decisions: gauging emission weights, approving protocol upgrades, or allocating treasury funds. For example, Curve veCRV holders vote to determine how weekly CRV emissions are distributed across dozens of liquidity pools. Major votes occur every seven days, reflecting the dynamic nature of the DeFi ecosystem.

Revenue Sharing and Rewards

Beyond voting, veToken holders often earn a share of protocol fees and boosted yield. On Curve, 50% of swap fees go to veCRV holders as revenue, aligning economic rewards with governance participation. Projects like Frax (veFXS) and Pendle have since adopted similar ve frameworks, demonstrating veTokenomics’ broad appeal.

Gauges and Voting in DeFi

Gauge voting is the process by which veToken holders allocate emission budgets across liquidity pools. Each pool on an automated market maker (AMM) like Curve has an associated gauge contract that tracks liquidity contributions. veToken holders assign their voting power to specific gauges, directly influencing which pools receive more token emissions.

Key attributes of gauge voting:

  • Decentralized allocation: Communities decide where to direct emissions, not a central team.
  • Iterative process: Votes reset weekly, enabling rapid shifts in incentive distribution.
  • Weight limits: Each protocol caps total veTokens per address to prevent single actors from dominating.

Gauge mechanisms aren’t limited to Curve. Balancer introduced veBAL in March 2022, and Euler extended gauges to lending markets, showcasing the model’s flexibility in driving on-chain incentives.

Incentives and Boosted Yields

veTokenomics often incorporates yield-boosting features to make lockups financially attractive:

  • Yield multipliers: On Curve Finance, locking CRV into veCRV can boost pool rewards up to 2.5× for liquidity providers who also stake veCRV alongside LP tokens.
  • Protocol fee share: veToken holders receive a portion of trading fees (e.g., 50% on Curve, distributed pro rata to veCRV addresses).
  • Revenue from bribes: As described below, veToken holders can earn third-party token rewards for directing gauge votes.

These incentives turn governance participation into a yield-generating activity, encouraging deeper engagement beyond passive staking.

The Rise of Bribe Markets

As veToken voting became valuable, third-party protocols devised “bribe markets” to pay veToken holders directly for voting to favor their pools. Platforms like Votium aggregate bribes and distribute them to users who cast gauge votes as specified by bribe contracts.

Anatomy of a Bribe

  1. A protocol (Briber A) wants more CRV emissions on its A-USDC pool.
  2. Briber A deposits native tokens (e.g., its own $A) into Votium’s bribe contract for the corresponding Curve gauge.
  3. veCRV holders vote for increased gauge weight on A-USDC.
  4. After the snapshot, voters claim bribe tokens proportionally to their voting stake.

The entire process is transparent, on-chain, and market-driven. Rather than earn only CRV, veToken holders can cherry-pick bribe offerings, maximizing returns.

Evolution of Bribe Platforms

  • Votium initially focused on Curve bribes, connecting protocols with veCRV holders.
  • Blocverse highlights how redacted cartels and hidden hands expanded bribing to multiple protocols like Balancer and Frax.
  • Liquidity coordination marketplaces such as Turtle Club and Royco have emerged, professionalizing bribe auctions and order books for incentive routing.

The Curve Wars Unfold

The “Curve Wars” refer to the macro competition among DeFi protocols to acquire veCRV (governance votes) and direct CRV emissions and thus liquidity toward their pools.

Early Battles

  • Whales vs. Sardines: Large CRV holders (“whales”) locking CRV for veCRV initially dominated gauge votes to favor big stablecoin pools.
  • Protocols Enter: Stablecoin issuers like Frax, Abracadabra (MIM), and others began lock-and-vote strategies to secure liquidity for their tokens on Curve.

Convex Finance’s Rise

Convex Finance abstracted veCRV locking, allowing users to stake CRV in Convex’s smart contracts, receiving cvxCRV and CVX rewards without four-year lockups. Convex then aggregated these deposits, amassing over 50% of veCRV voting power and becoming the “Curve Kingmaker”.

The Bribes Escalate

As Convex dominated raw vote weight, protocols shifted to bribing CVX/vlCVX holders on platforms like Votium. Abracadabra’s MIM stablecoin famously outspent competitors, offering millions in MIM to veCRV voters to channel emissions to its MIM-3CRV pool.

Ongoing Conflict

The Curve Wars continue as new entrants (e.g., Radiant, Pendle, Tokemak) vie for gauge influence. Budgets for bribes have reached significant amounts during peak cycles, sometimes swelling into eight-figure sums per week. Governance coalitions form across DAOs like Terra, Badger, and Frax.

Case Studies

Abracadabra (MIM) vs. Convex Vote Bribery

During the 2021 bull market, Abracadabra (MIM) prioritized liquidity for MIM-3CRV. By pledging over $10 million in native MIM tokens per vote cycle, they outbid other protocols and solidified deep stablecoin pools, crucial for maintaining MIM’s peg and trading volume.

Redacted Cartel and Hidden Hand

Redacted Cartel pioneered bribe aggregation for Convex gauges, offering tiered bribes in $PEOPLE (its token) plus other assets. Hidden Hand extended incentivization beyond Curve, integrating Balancer’s veBAL gauges and Frax’s veFXS system, turning bribes into a cross-protocol strategy.

Turtle Club and Royco

Emerging platforms like Turtle Club and Royco host full­-fledged liquidity coordination marketplaces. They introduce order books for bribes, gamified participation, and real-time capital efficiency metrics, marking the next evolution of incentive routing beyond simple weekly gauge votes.

Beyond Curve: Meta-Incentives and Future Outlook

The success of veTokenomics and bribe markets on Curve has inspired protocols to adopt similar models:

  • Balancer’s veBAL and associated bribes.
  • Frax’s veFXS gauge system.
  • Tokemak’s reactor incentives.
  • OlympusDAO’s OHM bonding and sOHM staking mechanisms.

Looking ahead, meta-incentives could coordinate liquidity across Layer 2 rollups, cross-chain bridges, and even traditional finance tokenization. Automated bribe optimizers, dynamic bribe auctions, and on-chain governance DAOs will shape how capital flows in DeFi’s next chapter. While these developments are speculative, they represent a logical progression based on current trends.

Conclusion

veTokenomics reshaped DeFi by binding governance power to long-term economic commitment, while gauge voting democratized incentive allocation. Bribe markets arose as protocols competed for liquidity by paying veToken holders to direct emissions. The Curve Wars exemplify DeFi’s dynamic, game-theoretic layer, where vote weight, on-chain auctions, and strategic alliances determine where billions of dollars flow daily. As new protocols embrace ve models and meta-incentives emerge, liquid capital will remain the ultimate prize in DeFi’s evolving battlefield.

References

  1. What are veTokens and Understanding veTokenomics: https://www.coingecko.com/learn/vetokens-and-vetokenomics
  2. What is veTokenomics and how does it work? : https://cointelegraph.com/news/what-is-vetokenomics-and-how-does-it-work
  3. What is veTokenomics? An analysis on the veToken Model: https://phemex.com/blogs/what-is-vetokenomics-an-analysis-on-the-vetoken-model
  4. Understanding veTokenomics: A Comprehensive Guide: https://www.ankr.com/blog/understanding-ve-tokenomics-a-comprehensive-guide/
  5. What Are Bribes in Crypto and Decentralized Finance?: https://pexx.com/chaindebrief/what-are-bribes-in-cryptocurrency-and-decentralized-finance/

MITOSIS official links:

GLOSSARY
Mitosis University
WEBSITE 
X (Formerly Twitter)  
DISCORD
DOCS

Read next

Comments ()