ConstantRateProviderFactory on Base and Arbitrum

[sschuldenzucker]

Type of Smart Contract

Other

Additional Contract Information

• Does this rate provider pertain to an ERC4626 contract?
• If so, is the intention for this ERC4626 asset to be boosted?
• If so, shall the underlying asset be used to add/remove liquidity in a pool if possible? (i.e. add USDC for waUSDC)
• If so, shall the wrapped asset also be used to add/remove liquidity in a pool? (i.e. add waUSDC directly)

Type of Smart Contract (if Other)

Factory for rate providers that quote a constant rate

Contract Source Code

https://basescan.org/address/0xc0555b555857AAf2b5b28601eaAcFba2F8BBFB09#code

Asset Contract Source Code

No response

Additional Links

https://basescan.org/address/0xc0555b555857AAf2b5b28601eaAcFba2F8BBFB09#code
https://arbiscan.io/address/0xF502791715F287989374c452Fa78b475A3194a90

Protocol Documentation

No response

Protocol Audits

No response

Terms and Conditions

• The protocol to be integrated has been audited by at least one security firm or independent researcher.
• If deployed, the contract & all involved downstream contracts are verified on etherscan.
• The contract does not rely upon an EOA to supply any critical data (e.g., price).
• If upgradeable, the contract's administrator is not an EOA.

Additional Comments & Clarifications

This is a factory that creates ConstantRateProvider contracts. These are rate providers that always quote the same value. They are used as a scaling rate to scale the order of magnitude of (e.g.,) WETH amounts into the order of magnitude of (e.g.,) USD amounts for Gyro volatile pools. The pool curve itself is responsible for representing the actual price, not the rateprovider.

We made this factory to reduce review effort for future ConstantRateProvider deployments, under the assumption that future constant rateproviders deployed from the factory can be whitelisted automatically.

Operation

The factory is analogous to the pool factories. It exposes a single method, .create(uint256 value). When this is called (by anyone), the following happens:

• A new ConstantRateProvider is deployed that always quotes the given value.
• An event RateProviderCreated(address) is emitted with the address of the new ConstantRateProvider.
• The new rateprovider is registered in the factory so that factory.isRateProviderFromFactory(rateprovider) will return true in the following.

State and Control

The ConstantRateProviders created by this factory do not have any mutable state and no permissioned control. The factory itself has no mutable state beyond the isRateProviderFromFactory mapping and no permissioned control.

[sschuldenzucker]

Hey guys, are there any updates on this? Would be great if rateproviders created from these factories could be auto-approved. If not, we can also create individual issues (perhaps we can automate that if it's easier).

[mkflow27]

Hey @sschuldenzucker Constant Rate Providers can be easily approved. In the past there was on issue where the asset that was references in the registry pointed to the wrong pool asset, creating minor frontend disturbances.

Whenever you open an issue for the constant rate providers, please ping @Zen-Maxi or @zekraken-bot They can create the pr & merge.

I'll close this issue if ok, based on #319?

[sschuldenzucker]

Sounds good, thx!

…

-- Dr. Steffen Schuldenzucker Bindingstr. 7 60598 Frankfurt am Main Tel.: +49 160 901 67 389 E-Mail: ***@***.***

On 27. Mar 2025, at 13:54, mkflow27 ***@***.***> wrote: mkflow27 left a comment (balancer/code-review#290) Hey @sschuldenzucker Constant Rate Providers can be easily approved. In the past there was on issue where the asset that was references in the registry pointed to the wrong pool asset, creating minor frontend disturbances. Whenever you open an issue for the constant rate providers, please ping @Zen-Maxi or @zekraken-bot They can create the pr & merge. I'll close this issue if ok, based on #319? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you were mentioned. <https://github.com/sschuldenzucker> <https://github.com/Zen-Maxi> <https://github.com/zekraken-bot> <#319> <#290 (comment)> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIMX2AGQRZZSB7W3M6QK232WPRHFAVCNFSM6AAAAABXVDZ3W2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDONJXHEZTINBRGM> mkflow27 left a comment (balancer/code-review#290) <#290 (comment)> Hey @sschuldenzucker <https://github.com/sschuldenzucker> Constant Rate Providers can be easily approved. In the past there was on issue where the asset that was references in the registry pointed to the wrong pool asset, creating minor frontend disturbances. Whenever you open an issue for the constant rate providers, please ping @Zen-Maxi <https://github.com/Zen-Maxi> or @zekraken-bot <https://github.com/zekraken-bot> They can create the pr & merge. I'll close this issue if ok, based on #319 <#319>? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#290 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIMX2AGQRZZSB7W3M6QK232WPRHFAVCNFSM6AAAAABXVDZ3W2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDONJXHEZTINBRGM>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.