Working to get a public Dune query set up, but currently SSV has 192 active validators via CSM with another ~ 1,000 in the queue for deposits. That’s nearly 17% of all submitted CSM keys - SSV is by far the largest DVT provider in CSM as of today.
A CSM validator (as you know) requires 2.4 ETH for the first ($4800) and 1.3 ETH for each validator thereafter ($2600). 5 validators (7.6 ETH) today would receive a ~ 6.5% reward rate and almost $1000 at current price.
CSM is already over optimized as seen by the deposit queue for available capacity being filled in 90 minutes.
Based on this math + the very strong adoption of SSV in CSM today, there should not be concerns around this IMO.
And again - most importantly - in that 5 validator example, the CSM Node Operator supplied 4.75% of the capital, stETH holders supplied 95.25%. In that context, 20% is a very generous reward share (again compared to Simple DVT at 10%). The primary beneficiary of these incentives should be the capital supplier, not the Node Operator.
I’m more concerned that compared to solo staking the CSM keys, the incremental benefit of moving the keys to SSV is quite low, particularly after paying the SSV network fees and up-front liquidation capital.
The more SSV adoption we have, the more fees will be paid back to the Lido vault.
I think we will have better adoption if there is a stronger incentive for the key managers to use SSV instead of solo staking.
I think the best thing to do for now is to track the CSM-SSV adoption rates going forward, and see how many new users join in the next month or two. That will allow us to see whether the reduced rewards are impacting the onboarding rate. And if it slows significantly, it may be worth reviewing the fee split ratio.
Voting is now live: