The Dusk halving doesn’t tell me how much staking will earn
At first, I thought I could estimate staking yield fairly accurately just by looking at Dusk’s emission schedule. But when I set the emission amount against how much DUSK is being staked, I found that these two things are related, but not the same.
Under the current mechanism, the network emits 19.8 DUSK per block. The total planned emissions are 500 million DUSK over 36 years, and the emission rate halves every four years. This part is fairly easy to predict because it’s defined at the protocol level.
But the yield for each staker depends on other variables.
If total active stake increases, each validator’s or delegator’s share of the overall reward pool decreases, assuming all other factors remain unchanged. In addition, participation in consensus and transaction fees also matter. So even with the same emission per block, the actual APY can still change significantly.
This is where I used to confuse the two concepts.
Halving only indicates the rate at which new DUSK enters the reward system. It doesn’t say how much my stake will receive. A fixed emission schedule simply makes the supply of rewards easier to predict, but it doesn’t eliminate the competition among staking participants.
So if I want to evaluate staking, I won’t just look at the halving schedule. I’ll also track the total active stake and how that stake amount changes over time.
The more predictable the emissions are, the more important the competition among stakers becomes.
In my view, for Dusk, the question worth considering isn’t “how many rewards per block?” but rather “how many DUSK are competing together to receive those rewards?”
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk
$STBL $LAB
At first, I thought I could estimate staking yield fairly accurately just by looking at Dusk’s emission schedule. But when I set the emission amount against how much DUSK is being staked, I found that these two things are related, but not the same.
Under the current mechanism, the network emits 19.8 DUSK per block. The total planned emissions are 500 million DUSK over 36 years, and the emission rate halves every four years. This part is fairly easy to predict because it’s defined at the protocol level.
But the yield for each staker depends on other variables.
If total active stake increases, each validator’s or delegator’s share of the overall reward pool decreases, assuming all other factors remain unchanged. In addition, participation in consensus and transaction fees also matter. So even with the same emission per block, the actual APY can still change significantly.
This is where I used to confuse the two concepts.
Halving only indicates the rate at which new DUSK enters the reward system. It doesn’t say how much my stake will receive. A fixed emission schedule simply makes the supply of rewards easier to predict, but it doesn’t eliminate the competition among staking participants.
So if I want to evaluate staking, I won’t just look at the halving schedule. I’ll also track the total active stake and how that stake amount changes over time.
The more predictable the emissions are, the more important the competition among stakers becomes.
In my view, for Dusk, the question worth considering isn’t “how many rewards per block?” but rather “how many DUSK are competing together to receive those rewards?”
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk
$STBL $LAB