ETH has underperformed this cycle with much of its narrative and spotlight overshadowed by several other projects and assets

The majority of the DAOs treasury has been sitting stagnant idly holding ETH Some has finally been staked but earning low yield

If this status quo continues, then the limited treasury will continue to cause negative sentiment to which people feel that the treasury is too insignificant to really achieve anything nor be valuable enough to divest. So it would be a better idea to invest

Given market is likely to recover in 2025 over the coming months. And large caps are significantly down over 40-80%. Now is a low risk period to accumulate other assets.

High level proposal is to swap at least 10 ETH into large cap assets, with a small portion into higher risk assets

Large caps (80% of the funds in descending amounts): SOL, SUI, AVAX, XRP, BNB, TRX Sol- 40% SUI- 20% AVAX, TRX, XRP, BNB - 10%

Higher risk exotic assets (20% of the funds in equal amounts): LINK, PEPE, DOGE, BRETT, WIF

The idea behind the strategy is that:

1. The DAO will continue to have a significant amount of ETH so we wont miss out on any upside
2. The large caps move in relatively similar motion to ETH, however narratively they have proven to perform better during risk on environments. Allowing us to see more gains and helps diversify our risk
3. a 20% allocation to higher risk assets is on the basis that most of these perform approximately 5 to 10x better than any of the large cap low risk assets. Thereby theoretically returning 5x or better gains whilst only risking 1/5 of the capital.

# Key milestones:

• it is important to recognise key ROI milestones so we can determine instances to "take profits" and convert back into ETH or stablecoins if we choose and/or continue to hold these assets

• the goal is not to try and time the tops or bottoms. But each time the value of the invested assets outperforms ETH by a factor that is a multiple of 50% i.e. 1.5x, 2x, 2.5x etc then the multisig committe should be empowered to convert these assets back into ETH or stables to lock in and preserve the gains for the community

• given that there is NO NEGATIVE downside in taking profits. There should be no need for a proposal to be passed each time to take profits, as the lead time alone could also mean time sensitive window to take profits is missed.

Any profits/gains attained from this endeavour will benefit and empower the DAO to achieve further activities and grow using its increased treasury

Additional Conditions:

a second choice is available to increase the invested allocation to 20ETH if the sum of choice 1 (10eth) and choice 2 (20eth) is greater than choice 3 (reject both options) then the proposal should pass as long as it reaches qorum given both choice 1 and 2 are both in favour with the distinction merely being the amount approved

The choice with the most votes (choice 1 or 2) determines the amount to be invested

Technical details:

• The multisig team will use existing ETH and EVM supported wallets that support these coins and chains wherever possible. particularly ERC20 on L1 and L2 chains
• Wherever possible bridged versions of assets will also be used for lower fees and liquidity and wallet consolidation (e.g. certain ETH assets exist on both ETH l1 as well as Solana in bridged/wormhole form). The most liquid/secure form will be discussed with the community and chosen. Tron for example will be bridged over to Solana so this avoids needing to create a fresj TRX wa;;et
• Assets such as SUI, these assets are incompatible from an ecosystem perspective but compatible from a unified wallet perspective (such as Phantom). So preference will be to choose a unified wallet wherever possible

Some L1 assets outside of Ethereum ecosystem have bridged assets that mirror the price but in the form of ERC20 coins, so those will be preferred over creating a new wallet

• For assets requiring new wallets or forms of storage, if the chain supports a multisig (or equivalent/similar) solution, then one will be created using the same signatories where ever possible
• however in the scenario where any asset can only be held in a fresh wallet app and address that doesn't support multisig, then those wallets will have the private key share with the multisig team. From a risk perspective this should only apply to 1 or 2 assets that represent less than 12% of the approved funds (approx $3000). Any concerns around loss of funds due to lack of multisig security should factor in the low dollar value represented under this risk scenario. 12% would be less than the risk due to price volatility across these assets alone.

The overall proposal expects the upside benefit of 2x up to several multiples in ROI gains, with any downside exposure to be more than losing 12% of assets from 1 insecure wallet. Therefore any concerns of technical solution or wallet solution should not even be a concern if you are willing to accept the fundamental risk of thisdiversification proposal to begin with

TLDR: The strategy basically diversifies the DAO away from pure ETH with a balanced allocation, and risking only 20% of the approved amount into higher risk assets.

If we do not approve this, we risk sitting on a stagnant treasury for another crypto cycle

There is no more details I love you