Is it recommended to be 100% delegated for a baker?For a baking server, is timesyncd good enough for clock...

Crack the bank account's password!

Was Opportunity's last message to Earth "My battery is low and it's getting dark"?

How to get a 2D Plot from a 3D Listplot?

Buying a "Used" Router

Sing Baby Shark

Is there a way to pause a running process on Linux systems and resume later?

Smooth projection of a surf plot - tikz/gnuplot

Calculating the strength of an ionic bond that contains poly-atomic ions

Putting a vertical line in each Histogram using GraphicsGrid

How can I put a period right after the algorithm's number in the algorithm's title?

How do I avoid the "chosen hero" feeling?

In the Lost in Space intro why was Dr. Smith actor listed as a special guest star?

What are some idioms that means something along the lines of "switching it up every day to not do the same thing over and over"?

How do I figure out the right pronunciation for transitions?

How do I fight with Heavy Armor as a Wizard with Tenser's Transformation?

Maybe pigeonhole problem?

Sticky Strike or Sticky Delta

"I showed the monkey himself in the mirror". Why is this sentence grammatical?

How can I prevent an oracle who can see into the past from knowing everything that has happened?

What happened to Hermione’s clothing and other possessions after she wiped her parents’ memories of her?

Taking an academic pseudonym?

Is Screenshot Time-tracking Common?

Performance and power usage for Raspberry Pi in the Stratosphere

If I tried and failed to start my own business, how do I apply for a job without job experience?



Is it recommended to be 100% delegated for a baker?


For a baking server, is timesyncd good enough for clock resolution?What is the penalty for double baking?setting up a solo baker with 10k XTZHow to reactivate an inactive baker?What is the optimal frequency for delegating your excess proceeds as a solo baker?Regarding Baker-Node interactionHow do rewards for revelations work?Does the baker, endorser and accuser have to run next to the same node?What details should I look into when choosing the right baker to delegate?Docker vs local build for baking on mainnet?













1















I am wondering if my baker will miss any endorsements ( or blocks ) being 100% delegated.



I have heard that they still must have some free capacity because required deposit may vary from cycle to cycle and at some point it may affect staking bond and/or staking capacity and/or available capacity.



What may happen potentially to those bakers who have negative available capacity? Will it affect their delegators?



It looks like amount required from baker each cycle reminds a saw, and it is not constant. If someone could explain that process in detail, I would appreciate. Thanks










share|improve this question









New contributor




labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    1















    I am wondering if my baker will miss any endorsements ( or blocks ) being 100% delegated.



    I have heard that they still must have some free capacity because required deposit may vary from cycle to cycle and at some point it may affect staking bond and/or staking capacity and/or available capacity.



    What may happen potentially to those bakers who have negative available capacity? Will it affect their delegators?



    It looks like amount required from baker each cycle reminds a saw, and it is not constant. If someone could explain that process in detail, I would appreciate. Thanks










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.























      1












      1








      1


      1






      I am wondering if my baker will miss any endorsements ( or blocks ) being 100% delegated.



      I have heard that they still must have some free capacity because required deposit may vary from cycle to cycle and at some point it may affect staking bond and/or staking capacity and/or available capacity.



      What may happen potentially to those bakers who have negative available capacity? Will it affect their delegators?



      It looks like amount required from baker each cycle reminds a saw, and it is not constant. If someone could explain that process in detail, I would appreciate. Thanks










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.












      I am wondering if my baker will miss any endorsements ( or blocks ) being 100% delegated.



      I have heard that they still must have some free capacity because required deposit may vary from cycle to cycle and at some point it may affect staking bond and/or staking capacity and/or available capacity.



      What may happen potentially to those bakers who have negative available capacity? Will it affect their delegators?



      It looks like amount required from baker each cycle reminds a saw, and it is not constant. If someone could explain that process in detail, I would appreciate. Thanks







      baking bond-pool






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 14 hours ago







      labeo













      New contributor




      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 14 hours ago









      labeolabeo

      205




      205




      New contributor




      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      labeo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1














          Unless you have infinite funds, you cannot prevent from being over delegated, since you cannot prevent users from delegating to you.



          So, you shouldn’t care too much about it, maybe only give rewards to the delegators that were the first to contribute to the 100%, and not reward the other ones. This way, it is a clear incentive for them to find another delegate.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1





            Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

            – labeo
            6 hours ago













          • What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

            – lefessan
            4 hours ago






          • 1





            one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

            – Ezy
            2 hours ago













          • How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

            – lefessan
            1 hour ago











          • Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

            – Ezy
            1 hour ago





















          4














          From a purely theoretical perspective when you are a baker who is capable to reaching 100% target of its priority 0 baking rights, the optimal situation in terms of your capital is to have all of it blocked as security deposit because it means all your capital is working. In such situation as soon as some bond is unlocked it would get relocked again by a new baking and at the same time you would never miss a single block/endorsement baking right. To be in this situation means that the baker is exactly 100% delegated at all times: there's just enough delegators pointing to you as your capital can absorb. It is the optimal situation for both the baker and the delegators.



          In reality bakers are rarely in this situation, in practice they are either "under"-delegated or "over"-delegated.




          • if you are under-delegated: it is suboptimal for the "baker" this means that you could have accepted more delegations and received more baking rights without impacting your success rate, your personal ROI is suboptimal. On the other hand this situation is fine for delegators because they still receive 100% of their expected rewards on average for their level of staking (minus the baker's fee of course), their personal gross ROI is optimal (assuming you don't make any operational mistake while baking of course)

          • if you are over-delegated: is is suboptimal for the delegators because your capital is not enough to cover for all the baking rights of the operation. There's less rewards coming in the bakers' account than the expected amount to pay all the delegators. In such situations the baker usually pays himself first (his personal ROI is optimal) so he received his expected value however the effective amount received by delegators will depend on the policy of the baker (pay those who came first in priority ? or distribute the loss equally to everyone ?). So in this scenario the baker rewards are usually "covered" by the baker policy but not the delegator's rewards (the delegators gross ROI is suboptimal).


          So all in all, given that delegators often enter into a delegation and do not monitor day to day situation of the baker's bond and pay a fee to that baker, they usually expect the baker to do this monitoring job and give them a heads-up if they believe they might get over-delegated in the near future in order to give appropriate time for delegators to find an alternative.



          For example in the beginning of mainnet, as per the protocol the initial bond requirement was kept intentionally low (started from 0%) and gradually ratcheted up over the cycles. This means that many bakers have been to start their operation with quite small actual bond requirements which allowed them to ride the opportunity and accept much more delegations than their capital would allow once the bond requirement would achieve its long term level (512XTZ per block and 64XTZ per endorsement). This created a situation where a number of baker got not immediately over-delegated but forward-over-delegated.






          share|improve this answer































            3














            Bakers who are over-delegated will miss bakes/endorsements due to insufficient bonds. Depending on your baker's policy, everyone may be diluted rewards-wise, or the last delegators will simply receive no rewards.



            The bond requirements do vary, so it's good if bakers have some reserves to cope with this. As staking increases (e.g. the % of staking out of the circulating supply increases), bond requirements will start to drop as bakers receive less baking rights for the same stake.






            share|improve this answer























              Your Answer








              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "698"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });






              labeo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f582%2fis-it-recommended-to-be-100-delegated-for-a-baker%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              1














              Unless you have infinite funds, you cannot prevent from being over delegated, since you cannot prevent users from delegating to you.



              So, you shouldn’t care too much about it, maybe only give rewards to the delegators that were the first to contribute to the 100%, and not reward the other ones. This way, it is a clear incentive for them to find another delegate.






              share|improve this answer



















              • 1





                Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

                – labeo
                6 hours ago













              • What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

                – lefessan
                4 hours ago






              • 1





                one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

                – Ezy
                2 hours ago













              • How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

                – lefessan
                1 hour ago











              • Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

                – Ezy
                1 hour ago


















              1














              Unless you have infinite funds, you cannot prevent from being over delegated, since you cannot prevent users from delegating to you.



              So, you shouldn’t care too much about it, maybe only give rewards to the delegators that were the first to contribute to the 100%, and not reward the other ones. This way, it is a clear incentive for them to find another delegate.






              share|improve this answer



















              • 1





                Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

                – labeo
                6 hours ago













              • What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

                – lefessan
                4 hours ago






              • 1





                one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

                – Ezy
                2 hours ago













              • How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

                – lefessan
                1 hour ago











              • Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

                – Ezy
                1 hour ago
















              1












              1








              1







              Unless you have infinite funds, you cannot prevent from being over delegated, since you cannot prevent users from delegating to you.



              So, you shouldn’t care too much about it, maybe only give rewards to the delegators that were the first to contribute to the 100%, and not reward the other ones. This way, it is a clear incentive for them to find another delegate.






              share|improve this answer













              Unless you have infinite funds, you cannot prevent from being over delegated, since you cannot prevent users from delegating to you.



              So, you shouldn’t care too much about it, maybe only give rewards to the delegators that were the first to contribute to the 100%, and not reward the other ones. This way, it is a clear incentive for them to find another delegate.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 6 hours ago









              lefessanlefessan

              2,142320




              2,142320








              • 1





                Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

                – labeo
                6 hours ago













              • What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

                – lefessan
                4 hours ago






              • 1





                one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

                – Ezy
                2 hours ago













              • How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

                – lefessan
                1 hour ago











              • Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

                – Ezy
                1 hour ago
















              • 1





                Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

                – labeo
                6 hours ago













              • What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

                – lefessan
                4 hours ago






              • 1





                one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

                – Ezy
                2 hours ago













              • How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

                – lefessan
                1 hour ago











              • Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

                – Ezy
                1 hour ago










              1




              1





              Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

              – labeo
              6 hours ago







              Okay that part is clear but the reason why I am worried is because my efficiency my drop should I be over delegated. As result my ROI may drop, and as result everybody may be affected, even those people who did not cause over delegation

              – labeo
              6 hours ago















              What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

              – lefessan
              4 hours ago





              What matters is not if you miss extra baking slots, it is not to miss the ones that you should have done, i.e. you should almost always have all your balance frozen in deposits. If you miss a block because you have not enough deposits, it’s not your fault (but you should warn your delegators of the situation).

              – lefessan
              4 hours ago




              1




              1





              one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

              – Ezy
              2 hours ago







              one of the reasons people pay bakers a fee is also to monitor over delegation in order to avoid being diluted in such a circumstance. People pay the fee in order not to have to monitor this metric day-in, day-out so i don't believe it is appropriate for a baker "not to care too mcuh about it". The actual policy of who takes the hit first in case of over delegation (FIFO, proportional etc..) is an orthogonal consideration

              – Ezy
              2 hours ago















              How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

              – lefessan
              1 hour ago





              How should a baker avoid over-delegation ? Yes, they can remove their address from advertising sites, but still, they cannot reject extra delegations. The only way they have is to add money to their balance, but for that, they need to that money. For me, the fee is only for the work of maintaining a server online and securizing the system.

              – lefessan
              1 hour ago













              Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

              – Ezy
              1 hour ago







              Being unable to avoid over-delegation is correct however this does not mean that the baker should not care too much about it this is the reason i downvoted your answer. Also it does not reflect the actual behavior of baker around this important question: most bakers do care much about over-delegation and communicate accordingly around it.

              – Ezy
              1 hour ago













              4














              From a purely theoretical perspective when you are a baker who is capable to reaching 100% target of its priority 0 baking rights, the optimal situation in terms of your capital is to have all of it blocked as security deposit because it means all your capital is working. In such situation as soon as some bond is unlocked it would get relocked again by a new baking and at the same time you would never miss a single block/endorsement baking right. To be in this situation means that the baker is exactly 100% delegated at all times: there's just enough delegators pointing to you as your capital can absorb. It is the optimal situation for both the baker and the delegators.



              In reality bakers are rarely in this situation, in practice they are either "under"-delegated or "over"-delegated.




              • if you are under-delegated: it is suboptimal for the "baker" this means that you could have accepted more delegations and received more baking rights without impacting your success rate, your personal ROI is suboptimal. On the other hand this situation is fine for delegators because they still receive 100% of their expected rewards on average for their level of staking (minus the baker's fee of course), their personal gross ROI is optimal (assuming you don't make any operational mistake while baking of course)

              • if you are over-delegated: is is suboptimal for the delegators because your capital is not enough to cover for all the baking rights of the operation. There's less rewards coming in the bakers' account than the expected amount to pay all the delegators. In such situations the baker usually pays himself first (his personal ROI is optimal) so he received his expected value however the effective amount received by delegators will depend on the policy of the baker (pay those who came first in priority ? or distribute the loss equally to everyone ?). So in this scenario the baker rewards are usually "covered" by the baker policy but not the delegator's rewards (the delegators gross ROI is suboptimal).


              So all in all, given that delegators often enter into a delegation and do not monitor day to day situation of the baker's bond and pay a fee to that baker, they usually expect the baker to do this monitoring job and give them a heads-up if they believe they might get over-delegated in the near future in order to give appropriate time for delegators to find an alternative.



              For example in the beginning of mainnet, as per the protocol the initial bond requirement was kept intentionally low (started from 0%) and gradually ratcheted up over the cycles. This means that many bakers have been to start their operation with quite small actual bond requirements which allowed them to ride the opportunity and accept much more delegations than their capital would allow once the bond requirement would achieve its long term level (512XTZ per block and 64XTZ per endorsement). This created a situation where a number of baker got not immediately over-delegated but forward-over-delegated.






              share|improve this answer




























                4














                From a purely theoretical perspective when you are a baker who is capable to reaching 100% target of its priority 0 baking rights, the optimal situation in terms of your capital is to have all of it blocked as security deposit because it means all your capital is working. In such situation as soon as some bond is unlocked it would get relocked again by a new baking and at the same time you would never miss a single block/endorsement baking right. To be in this situation means that the baker is exactly 100% delegated at all times: there's just enough delegators pointing to you as your capital can absorb. It is the optimal situation for both the baker and the delegators.



                In reality bakers are rarely in this situation, in practice they are either "under"-delegated or "over"-delegated.




                • if you are under-delegated: it is suboptimal for the "baker" this means that you could have accepted more delegations and received more baking rights without impacting your success rate, your personal ROI is suboptimal. On the other hand this situation is fine for delegators because they still receive 100% of their expected rewards on average for their level of staking (minus the baker's fee of course), their personal gross ROI is optimal (assuming you don't make any operational mistake while baking of course)

                • if you are over-delegated: is is suboptimal for the delegators because your capital is not enough to cover for all the baking rights of the operation. There's less rewards coming in the bakers' account than the expected amount to pay all the delegators. In such situations the baker usually pays himself first (his personal ROI is optimal) so he received his expected value however the effective amount received by delegators will depend on the policy of the baker (pay those who came first in priority ? or distribute the loss equally to everyone ?). So in this scenario the baker rewards are usually "covered" by the baker policy but not the delegator's rewards (the delegators gross ROI is suboptimal).


                So all in all, given that delegators often enter into a delegation and do not monitor day to day situation of the baker's bond and pay a fee to that baker, they usually expect the baker to do this monitoring job and give them a heads-up if they believe they might get over-delegated in the near future in order to give appropriate time for delegators to find an alternative.



                For example in the beginning of mainnet, as per the protocol the initial bond requirement was kept intentionally low (started from 0%) and gradually ratcheted up over the cycles. This means that many bakers have been to start their operation with quite small actual bond requirements which allowed them to ride the opportunity and accept much more delegations than their capital would allow once the bond requirement would achieve its long term level (512XTZ per block and 64XTZ per endorsement). This created a situation where a number of baker got not immediately over-delegated but forward-over-delegated.






                share|improve this answer


























                  4












                  4








                  4







                  From a purely theoretical perspective when you are a baker who is capable to reaching 100% target of its priority 0 baking rights, the optimal situation in terms of your capital is to have all of it blocked as security deposit because it means all your capital is working. In such situation as soon as some bond is unlocked it would get relocked again by a new baking and at the same time you would never miss a single block/endorsement baking right. To be in this situation means that the baker is exactly 100% delegated at all times: there's just enough delegators pointing to you as your capital can absorb. It is the optimal situation for both the baker and the delegators.



                  In reality bakers are rarely in this situation, in practice they are either "under"-delegated or "over"-delegated.




                  • if you are under-delegated: it is suboptimal for the "baker" this means that you could have accepted more delegations and received more baking rights without impacting your success rate, your personal ROI is suboptimal. On the other hand this situation is fine for delegators because they still receive 100% of their expected rewards on average for their level of staking (minus the baker's fee of course), their personal gross ROI is optimal (assuming you don't make any operational mistake while baking of course)

                  • if you are over-delegated: is is suboptimal for the delegators because your capital is not enough to cover for all the baking rights of the operation. There's less rewards coming in the bakers' account than the expected amount to pay all the delegators. In such situations the baker usually pays himself first (his personal ROI is optimal) so he received his expected value however the effective amount received by delegators will depend on the policy of the baker (pay those who came first in priority ? or distribute the loss equally to everyone ?). So in this scenario the baker rewards are usually "covered" by the baker policy but not the delegator's rewards (the delegators gross ROI is suboptimal).


                  So all in all, given that delegators often enter into a delegation and do not monitor day to day situation of the baker's bond and pay a fee to that baker, they usually expect the baker to do this monitoring job and give them a heads-up if they believe they might get over-delegated in the near future in order to give appropriate time for delegators to find an alternative.



                  For example in the beginning of mainnet, as per the protocol the initial bond requirement was kept intentionally low (started from 0%) and gradually ratcheted up over the cycles. This means that many bakers have been to start their operation with quite small actual bond requirements which allowed them to ride the opportunity and accept much more delegations than their capital would allow once the bond requirement would achieve its long term level (512XTZ per block and 64XTZ per endorsement). This created a situation where a number of baker got not immediately over-delegated but forward-over-delegated.






                  share|improve this answer













                  From a purely theoretical perspective when you are a baker who is capable to reaching 100% target of its priority 0 baking rights, the optimal situation in terms of your capital is to have all of it blocked as security deposit because it means all your capital is working. In such situation as soon as some bond is unlocked it would get relocked again by a new baking and at the same time you would never miss a single block/endorsement baking right. To be in this situation means that the baker is exactly 100% delegated at all times: there's just enough delegators pointing to you as your capital can absorb. It is the optimal situation for both the baker and the delegators.



                  In reality bakers are rarely in this situation, in practice they are either "under"-delegated or "over"-delegated.




                  • if you are under-delegated: it is suboptimal for the "baker" this means that you could have accepted more delegations and received more baking rights without impacting your success rate, your personal ROI is suboptimal. On the other hand this situation is fine for delegators because they still receive 100% of their expected rewards on average for their level of staking (minus the baker's fee of course), their personal gross ROI is optimal (assuming you don't make any operational mistake while baking of course)

                  • if you are over-delegated: is is suboptimal for the delegators because your capital is not enough to cover for all the baking rights of the operation. There's less rewards coming in the bakers' account than the expected amount to pay all the delegators. In such situations the baker usually pays himself first (his personal ROI is optimal) so he received his expected value however the effective amount received by delegators will depend on the policy of the baker (pay those who came first in priority ? or distribute the loss equally to everyone ?). So in this scenario the baker rewards are usually "covered" by the baker policy but not the delegator's rewards (the delegators gross ROI is suboptimal).


                  So all in all, given that delegators often enter into a delegation and do not monitor day to day situation of the baker's bond and pay a fee to that baker, they usually expect the baker to do this monitoring job and give them a heads-up if they believe they might get over-delegated in the near future in order to give appropriate time for delegators to find an alternative.



                  For example in the beginning of mainnet, as per the protocol the initial bond requirement was kept intentionally low (started from 0%) and gradually ratcheted up over the cycles. This means that many bakers have been to start their operation with quite small actual bond requirements which allowed them to ride the opportunity and accept much more delegations than their capital would allow once the bond requirement would achieve its long term level (512XTZ per block and 64XTZ per endorsement). This created a situation where a number of baker got not immediately over-delegated but forward-over-delegated.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 1 hour ago









                  EzyEzy

                  2,005325




                  2,005325























                      3














                      Bakers who are over-delegated will miss bakes/endorsements due to insufficient bonds. Depending on your baker's policy, everyone may be diluted rewards-wise, or the last delegators will simply receive no rewards.



                      The bond requirements do vary, so it's good if bakers have some reserves to cope with this. As staking increases (e.g. the % of staking out of the circulating supply increases), bond requirements will start to drop as bakers receive less baking rights for the same stake.






                      share|improve this answer




























                        3














                        Bakers who are over-delegated will miss bakes/endorsements due to insufficient bonds. Depending on your baker's policy, everyone may be diluted rewards-wise, or the last delegators will simply receive no rewards.



                        The bond requirements do vary, so it's good if bakers have some reserves to cope with this. As staking increases (e.g. the % of staking out of the circulating supply increases), bond requirements will start to drop as bakers receive less baking rights for the same stake.






                        share|improve this answer


























                          3












                          3








                          3







                          Bakers who are over-delegated will miss bakes/endorsements due to insufficient bonds. Depending on your baker's policy, everyone may be diluted rewards-wise, or the last delegators will simply receive no rewards.



                          The bond requirements do vary, so it's good if bakers have some reserves to cope with this. As staking increases (e.g. the % of staking out of the circulating supply increases), bond requirements will start to drop as bakers receive less baking rights for the same stake.






                          share|improve this answer













                          Bakers who are over-delegated will miss bakes/endorsements due to insufficient bonds. Depending on your baker's policy, everyone may be diluted rewards-wise, or the last delegators will simply receive no rewards.



                          The bond requirements do vary, so it's good if bakers have some reserves to cope with this. As staking increases (e.g. the % of staking out of the circulating supply increases), bond requirements will start to drop as bakers receive less baking rights for the same stake.







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered 13 hours ago









                          Stephen AndrewsStephen Andrews

                          1,854114




                          1,854114






















                              labeo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                              draft saved

                              draft discarded


















                              labeo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                              labeo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                              labeo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Tezos Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f582%2fis-it-recommended-to-be-100-delegated-for-a-baker%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Szabolcs (Ungheria) Altri progetti | Menu di navigazione48°10′14.56″N 21°29′33.14″E /...

                              Discografia di Klaus Schulze Indice Album in studio | Album dal vivo | Singoli | Antologie | Colonne...

                              How to make inet_server_addr() return localhost in spite of ::1/128RETURN NEXT in Postgres FunctionConnect to...