Proposal - Tech Working Group: Creating A Development Ecosystem To Provide Revenue To The DAO

Note: This is a living document, the content below may potentially be subject to change based on community input.

Jupiter & The TWG - The Centre Of A Thriving Development Ecosystem

Jupiter provides the Solana ecosystem with the most solid DeFi base that crypto has seen. It is already capable of so much, but also has the most room for growth. In terms of what is capable of being built on Jupiter, we are just scratching the surface with only a small number of groups even starting to realise the potential.

Through the first 2 rounds of LFG, I spent a LOT of time talking to the catdet community, and they really came together to see and believe in this vision for Jupiter, with so many great discussions across the Jupiter discord about the expansion of what Jupiter is capable of.

In comes the proposal, as suggested by many Catdets I have spoken to, to form a Tech Working Group. The sole mission of this working group is to build alongside Jupiter, advancing the features that the core development team do not have plans for, to bring forwards a full toolset built on Jupiter to bring forwards the ecosystem of JUP. The goal of this working group would be to onboard groups of developers, working on products that have a shared vision for Jupiters future.

The first group to onboard onto the Tech Working Group would be the project I applied to LFG as a part of, Monkey Dex. We have already been building for nearly 2 years, approaching the release of our first major advancement to Jupiter bringing a full CEX-style copytrading platform to Jupiter.

We want what we are building to become more of a part of the expansion of the Jupiter ecosystem and kickstart further development to expand what Jupiter can do. Other developers will be able to apply to be a part of the Tech Working Group and discussions will be had with the DAO about criteria for onboarding developers, from proof of work to experience.

Through discussions there are a variety of different ways this Tech Working Group could be formed, and we wish to put forwards some suggestions at the end that could be put to vote as to which the DAO would prefer.


  • As a working group, our goal would be expanding a toolset of features for Jupiter, starting with copy trading of Jupiter swaps.
  • To create a platform that can provide additional value back into the DAO, through features or funding.
  • Increase expand the cross-chain capabilities of Jupiter through implementing bridges to use alongside new Jupiter products.
  • To encourage further development of Jupiter based tech, taking on board suggestions from the DAO about what features are wanted, and encouraging developers in the JUP DAO to come forwards and share their experience to make these features happen.


  • Communication with the Jupiter development team to ensure collaboration between the working groups developers & Jupiter.
  • To consistently develop new technologies that the core development team are not building.
  • Utilising new Jupiter based tech to provide benefits to the DAO (such as potential fee decreases on products for Jupiter holders, revenue sharing to the dao etc. Discussed more in proposals section).
  • To provide consistent updates to the DAO, maintaining clear communications through Discord & the Jup Research forums on the working groups development progress.
  • Providing insights into growth metrics, detailing the value brought to Jupiter.
  • Vetting and management of new developers proposals to partake in the TWG, bringing these proposals & funding discussions to the DAO for discussions.


  • Jupiter is already on a path of exponential growth, this working group its to help push it even further. The success of Jupiter, its expansion across ecosystems, and its continued adoption across all uses of DeFi brings massive benefit to the DAO.
  • Providing the DAO with ownership of revenue produced by these expansive features to Jupiter, giving back to the DAO ecosystem to continue its further success.
  • Encouraging developers to start moving towards Jupiter as an expansion tool for future products, extending the reach Jupiter already has.
  • The kickstart of more and more developers wanting to participate in the Jupiter ecosystem.

How Would This Further Jupiters Reach?

By bringing developers together to build a wide toolset of DeFi features that are built on Jupiter, we allow for the growth of a wide variety of DeFi products that all are at heart Jupiter. There will in time be a wide umbrella of DeFi applications all leading back to benefiting Jupiter at heart so no matter what actions you want to do, the most efficient solution would be a Jup based one.


The Tech Working Group would comprise of groups of developers, who provide part ownership of their revenue to the DAO. Starting with the first of the tech working group with Monkey, projects will build directly with the DAO getting feedback and ideas for future expansions to our Jupiter toolset.

In return for the support from Jupiter DAO, a % (8% in the case of Monkey Dex) of all revenue generated from our products will go directly to the DAO. These funds can either go to the CWG to distribute for usage as necessary, or become a part of active staking rewards for Jupiter holders.

With this, Jupiter essentially becomes a ‘JUP Ventures’ in itself and its own ecosystem, providing resources for development in the eco and reaping rewards from those who participate. But instead of using personal funds that are under the projects control, instead the DAO’s funds will be used and remain under the DAO’s control to be distributed as salaries & goal based rewards, minimising risk for the DAO before they start to see returns.

This encourages developers to build on Jupiter, whilst helping to maintain their individuality as products making their hard work feel valued and respected as their own work. This allows developers who come in to build with Jupiter the freedom to build their own products whilst gaining invaluable advice from the DAO to help steer the ship.

3 Month Trial Period:

Expenses for TWG & First Development Group: $87,000 total for salaries & goal based funding only

Salaries - TWG Lead (~$8k/month), initial developer group including 2 developers (~$16k/month)

Goal based funding - 15k - If copy-trading is released & 4.85M of daily volume is reached, exact figure explained in the next section - Funds to be returned to the treasury upon goal non-completion,

Expenses will be rediscussed when necessary based on success of developer groups & expansion rate of the TWG if the trial period is successful and the DAO wishes to carry on with the TWG as a part of JUP DAO.

Each developer group that applies will have a 3 month re-assessment period, where the DAO & the developer group will discuss as to wether being part of the TWG is beneficial for both parties. If either party decides to end the agreement at this point, revenue share will be active until the DAO is made even from trial costs.


Based on the first developer group, providing 8% revenue share for a product taking a 0.2% fee:

Daily volume of 4.85M$ would provide the DAO with 776$ revenue a day, whilst costing the DAO 774 for salaries, allowing anything above 4.5M of daily volume to create a sustainable source of income for the DAO.

As developer groups apply, fees and % share will be discussed with the DAO to maintain a rate at which the DAO is comfortable with the ROI based on the risk of the product. Fees & revenue shares are not set in stone and can be changed through discussions with the DAO to ensure all parties are happy.

Building A More Robust & Mature Community

The Tech Working Group will create a new area for a developer community to grow inside Jupiter. There are many talented developers in our community with currently no real option to easily communicate and work together for an aligned goal.

The TWG also heavily encourages catdet input into these developer groups products, allowing the community themselves to help build and shape the future of DeFi by coming together and sharing their ideas.

Next Steps

  • To create a way for developers to submit proposals to the TWG, and for these proposals to be displayed to the DAO to discuss - UPDATE there is currently a proposal for talent & recruitment working group that would be an ideal solution for this, working with the TWG to provide a way for new developer groups to apply.
  • To push forwards with development group one to have a successful release of the initial copy trading platform on Jupiter.


The Tech Working Group would form a way to incentivise building alongside Jupiter & the DAO. Bringing in developers from any chain to come and partake in a development hub to help grow Jupiter as a whole.

Initial Members:
Mic - Tech Working Group Lead

Development Group 1 - Monkey Dex:

Morpheus - Anestis G. Finstad
Apa - Erik Stromberg


This working group looks really promising. Although I have one question regarding this part:

The funding for this 3 month trial period would be:
$87,000 for expenses.
$8k a month for the TWG Lead for 3 months: $24,000
$16k a month for 2 developers for 3 months: $48,000

For the 3 month trial period, that would be a total of 87k + 24k + 48k = $159,000

Is this correct?.

Also, this part:

I think, these funds would be better if they become part of the ASR instead, which would give more value to $JUP, considering the CWG already has their own funding covered.

Everything else looks really promising and interesting. Hopefully it gains attention of the whole community.


Hey @Joseito ,

The expenses would be salaries alone, so 24k + 48k plus 15k bonus upon ROI reach. Totalling at 87k! Salaries / goal based salary would be the only cost factors of the TWG, unless the need for something else like a site for displaying data of the developer groups comes up as an issue from the trial in which case some small finding would go to creating that, but to be honest the jupresearch site works pretty well for displaying data efficiently for the DAO to see.

And thanks for the input onto usage of revenue, this is one of the parts I am most interested in gathering community feedback on because there are so many options. ASR was one of my first thoughts, the idea then would be calculating just how much that would be spread across and would it appear ‘worthwhile’ when them figures are split across 260,000 voting power.


Thanks for the clarification :sunglasses::+1:


This is a very exciting (and logical) proposal. I am a big fan of copy trading, and would love to see this functionality added to Jupiter. The fact that MonkeyDex is already developing this, it makes logical sense to complete the development and then ‘plug it’ into the Jupiter aggregator site. Also, I would like to add how impressed I have been with both Mike from Monkey Dex and Morpheus. With Morpheus, his innovative programmable NFTs would also be another potential vehicle for consideration of future plans. The guy works hard, is active in Discord (all the time) and his work ethic is second to none. Also, Mike from Monkey, follows a similar work ethic, has a similar great vibe and is also very active in Jupiter’s Discord aswell, so he is clearly very supportive of Jupiter and the Jupiter culture and ethos. The opportunities are quite significant. The budget of 87k for the trial period, seems very reasonable for the trial period and they will be earning every penny, knowing that what happens after the trial is dependent upon results. These are significant results, not just a website or something ‘wordy’, but actual working products. If this WG comes up for a vote, I will be supporting this proposal.


YES! I prefer any project that would pay dividends directly through active staking rewards. Any Jupiverse expansion that pays indefinitely back to the Jup DAO increases our token value and boosts staking rewards. I believe this working group to be promising.

We may need to redefine the structures of LFG. Optimal to have separate voting and fee schedules for third-party and first-party launches.


Morpheus would be perfect for the Catdet NFT Collection. The collection could be a great first project for the proposed Tech Working Group.

SAME! This is definitely promising


This is another interesting concept that I will update to initial proposal to include:

Implementation of a working group ‘bounty board’ of features that other wg’s need.

Working Groups can list job details, time frames & compensation packages that can be presented to all developer groups so each group can pick any additional work that matches their skillsets.


Making the DAO a hub for talented developers is a great vision. Tech is the most important industry the world, the largest companies are tech. Many talented developers/engineers in top tech companies would be a priceless addition to our DAO. These developers would likely leave their companies like Google, Amazon, Facebook, if given the opportunity to work remotely for an organization that pays fairly and has a better work culture and mission than their current workplaces. The JUP Team are great and experts in this, and a tech working group would work closely with the team to build out the JUP ecosystem and have some directions from the team while being directed by the DAO and being the first WG that provides revenue to the DAO.


Read throught and it sounds really good on many points

Working to add features while main teams can still focus on other stuff and growing jup is really briliant imo !

Rev share to the DAO and to active stakers would be one more incentive for the token and holders !

I really like this proposal !


It looks promising, and it will contribute a lot to JUP.


Exactly, Jupiter has so much potential as a development ecosystem, and the DAO provides the opportunity to make it possible in a sustainable way for people to work full time on new advancements to it. These developers are likely already a part of JUP DAO so encouraging their skills to be utilised to benefit the DAO too is a win win.


I’m very excited about this idea! I have been thinking a lot along the lines of what a DAO and a motivated community can achieve. We have a huge pool to draw on that offers a diverse set of skills and talents, passions and ideas. Providing a channel where these talents can get together and see what happens could be very valuable.

My thoughts about this tended to be a bit more philanthropic in nature. I’ve been thinking about a community launched projects and their potential to affect social good issues.

If i had a TWG to approach about this…a working group that had a list of all interested talent and their skillsets, this would make recruiting within the community a more dynamic process.

I imagine this DAO as a place where we can not only explore innovative DeFi technologies, but then deploy them in a manner that promotes social good.

My personal focus on a community project would be less about extracting value from a userbase, than engaging that userbase in a manner that benefits all parties. this would involve community outreach as well as a focus shift.

I’m also very interested in novel tech concepts as they could be applied in a DeFi setting AND to a social good model. (Think an LST token where the yield captured is funneled to the Red Cross during emergencies)…maybe not that specifically, but I’m thinking of new ways we can leverage traditional DeFi models in ways that can offer new and exciting products for users to interact with AND provide significant value to social good issues as decided by the community.

I’m sorry…I feel like i hijacked your post…The moral of my little aside is that a Tech Working Group would be an invaluable tool for the community and the platform! Definitely has my support!


Yall have my vote! Keep up the good work.

1 Like

Thank you for your support! I think having a community suggestion board would be a really cool idea, where developers will be able to come on and see a whole range of ideas that the TWG would like to see developed from the communities ideas.

As long as we build solutions that are sustainable for the developers, Jupiter & the DAO, I would view any ideas as beneficial to try and push :heart:


Hello, am a bit on the fence with this proposal – would like to clarify a few things with you.

So in regards to above quote, has the JUP core devs expressed a desire from their end to collaborate on development with your team? I’m kind of reading this as its an offer of assistance, but unclear if JUP team actually wishes to share access and integrate the features you have mentioned. Additionally, we have not discussed as a DAO if these features (or any others) are what people actually want. I would hope there is preliminary proposals to first approve new features before funding development and offering it upon the team to adopt. Would like more information about specifics with regards to these features (as that is the focus of the work), and is there consensus with the team to integrate and approve such features. As you mention, JUP team is not working on these – but we know they’re capable, so I’m left wondering why the JUP team would not simply expand their own team on a contractual basis with more devs to work on said features instead. Its understandable the value of dev teams, but its not clear why a working group approach is opted over the core team hiring more internally.

There is a web-working group already, can you talk more about the ‘platform’ itself that you intend to work on. Is this platform something different and on another domain than the JUP website? You mention fee revenue citing JUP platform, so I’m assuming you’re talking more specifically about features added to the existing platform? Its difficult to picture in my mind what exactly are we looking at as a deliverable. I understand what copy-trading is, but does this integrate into the JUP site, and if so… what does that UI look like, and again does the core team desire this too.

You also mention here about adding bridges with more crosschain functionality. Can you outline specifically how this would build on, improve, or substitute the existing bridge function here > Bridge | Jupiter

Again, assuming the added features are being added to the main jup domian – im then skeptical about what you’re considering as ‘revenue back to the dao’, when the service itself is benefacting directly from the traffic that Jupiter has already attracted. Correctly me if I’m wrong – but this sounds akin to a sort of ‘cashback’ offer on an ebay store. Yes you’re bringing a product/service, but onto a platform that for reasons of its own merit, your product/service is essentially garnishing revenue from ‘it’. Giving back 8% is another way of saying 'we’re taking 92% of the revenue that our product makes on your platform.

Whats comes to mind here, is that this is more of a quid-pro-quo – would the value of the 92% revenue have been made otherwise if it were not to leverage the existing brand of Jupiter? Probably not.

Instead I would counter propose with the proposition that any revenue made from Jup platform should go to the DAO treasury in full. From there, it can be distributed to working groups via request for larger funding when it is needed.

If I have misunderstood anything, please do clarify. Workgroups proposing to earn a % of fees is something that most definitely requires much greater scrutiny, as that figure is exponential.

Last point – I see development as a more contractual thing where you find devs to meet the need. This feels more like forming a group of devs with intention to expand it, then seeking the need that requires ‘x’ amount of devs to justify ongoing placement. So there is a ‘gap’ here with trying to understand how you would maintain cost efficiency of the expanding group, and how does that relate to the need of ongoing and specific development features that you have planned?

If your team is indeed working closer and collaborating with Jup team, and they consent with expressed desire of that. Then that would provide more reassurance to voters. And if so, would like to see JUP team members that you have collaborated with already, weight in on their thoughts or support on this.

Thanks for your time.


Hello Worza! And thank you for such an in depth response!

Firstly I want to clarify, as this has been mentioned elsewhere as well when this proposal was released, this is a HEAVILY modifiable proposal based on Catdet feedback. It has already changed, and will continue to change until it is the best it can be. So detailed feedback is invaluable and really appreciated.

I feel like the vast majority of this response however, is indeed based on a misunderstanding :smile: These products will be individual expansions to the Jupiter ecosystem, outside of Jupiters API’s are open to the public, so the creation of products outside of is heavily encouraged.

The idea of ‘expanding the ecosystem’ is to create a situation that wherever you want to go for a solution, that solution you use ends up being Jupiter as its core. Jupiters core team is building a LOT but not building everything, for example they’ve stated before their focus is Solana only, so anything that allows cross chain functionality would be a beneficial expansion.

There have been a few solutions for this suggested, but yes, any further development groups would be heavily decided by the DAO. My aim would be to gather as much data as possible for the DAO on each proposal, from the size of the workload, details on work already completed towards that goal, timings on how long it will take to build, if there is any competitors already in the market etc. Each group will also have their own ‘reassessment periods’ at which point i’ll be creating a post detailing all their growth metrics / development progress for the DAO to decide whether continuing is worthwhile or not.

The ‘platform’ as stated before will be the products created, as they aren’t the site.

Jupiter does not have a bridge, they have links to bridge sites, that is all. Bridges are a vastly expanding ecosystem themselves that are consistently changing. For example with the copytrading, the goal is the be able to deposit funds on any chain, it will automatically bridge to Solana, copy trade admins that are on solana meaning that all the trades are routing through Jupiter providing Jupiter volume, and you can then withdraw on any chain you wish. This is what I mean as an example of expanded cross chain utilities.

Same as before, not the main jup domain :grin:

100% agreed. That’s exactly why I’m aiming to gain as much feedback as possible, as well as providing as much data to the DAO as progress is made/not made. During reassessment periods, if the DAO is not seeing the value, they can choose to re discuss pay, revenue or continuation with that development group. Provide the DAO with as much data as possible should allow for these discussions to be as much of an open forum as possible.

Each developer group will function as their own unit with their own goals, aims, targets. Each unit will have their own separate costs + revenue share discussed with the DAO beforehand. Factors that will affect this are experience, work already completed on the product, readiness to launch a working product etc. The closer a product is to launching, the lower the risk to the DAO of having to wait a long time to start seeing returns. These are all discussions that will be had with the DAO during each reassessment period also.

Thank you for providing such good insight on your thoughts! I hope I have addressed most of them :heart:

The long term goal would be to utilise developers in our community, to make it so that any time solution you want to go to and use, the best one will be one that utilises Jupiter.


Thank you for clarifying all this and so promptly – I feel much more confident now with supporting this proposal. As we discussed in discord, I realize now that what you’re proposing is essentially plugging features into JUP externally through API, as opposed to direct updates to the website… This completely flips what I was alluding to with fee revenue – to confirm, it is revenue from fees collected on a separate platform that would otherwise not exist given the focus of JUP dev’s.
In this way, you’re bringing new value to Jupiter – as opposed to potentially ‘taxing’ existing value from Jupiter. Happy to walk my prior points back regarding this misunderstanding, and thanks again for clarifying.

So this brings me to my next question now that I understand the finer points a bit more. The 92% of fees – so this is intended to also substitute the workgroup costs as more dev teams are onboarded overtime?

So is this basically saying that vol above 4.85 would subsidize the total cost of salaries as it stands with the initial team size proposed? If so, then what is being requested is more-or-less a kind of ‘backstop’ for supporting the workgroup costs until it reaches a sustainable point with costs and revenue?

Overall, I think the initial costs of this proposal are fair and good – I’m struggling to further critique this which is saying a lot haha :smiley: You’re very forthcoming and transparent with the fiscal side of things, and that’s great to see. Also, you’ve given much consideration in prioritizing the consensus of the DAO with regards to deliverables, and how this balance can be accommodated ongoingly.

You have convinced a rather hard headed skeptic here :smiley: Looking forward to supporting this initiative, thanks again for your time and efforts – much appreciated :pray:



I’ve included the leads salary in this too as it’s just for the trial period. Each developer group that’s onboarded will have their own fee structures for their products / their own revenue share %’s etc. So these ‘ROI targets’ should be less as it would be for the developers only, not the developers + lead. However considering for the trial there is only 1 group, I chose to include the leads salary as a clear view of the costs and return limits.

The idea is to provide stable constant income, anyone who’s been in the space knows that funding is extremely sporadic and volatile. Volume, fees, private sales are all not guaranteed and create a very high risk environment for anyone wanting to participate full time in the ecosystem. With this you’re risking missing out on some profits from the revenue, but in return for a completely stable salary coming in that is not at risk as long as you work hard and provide value for the DAO.

Each group will have independent %’s and costs. So i’ll use Monkey as an example. The TWG supports developers and their developments only, but the projects will certainly be more than that. From marketing to moderators to other expenses. Monkey plans on using some of this to provide trading incentives, and incentives for copy-trading admins to be as profitable for users as possible.

TWG funding is to ensure they can transition to working full time building advancements to Jupiter whilst maintaining the life they’d have working in a similar web2 position for their skill sets. Creating what I believe to be the only system that allows you to build new products with a guaranteed stream of income, only when building with Jupiter.

Really appreciate the feedback, the costs of this proposal will inevitably be higher than a lot as it expands, just due to the fact that acquiring the talent needed involves bringing on very skilled and experienced developers. My aim in the group is to ensure we find a way to balance this with a way that benefits the DAO in a way that ‘outweighs’ the cost risks.

It’s inevitable that we hit highs and lows, but the reassessment periods are exactly for this reason, to ensure the DAO gets good opportunities to provide their feedback on the value being received. Sometimes that value may not be monetary either, for example when a product is just starting development the ‘value’ will be being shown advancements such as prototypes and detailed growth explanations.