Are bakers not paying promised rewards?Only 60% of the rewards made by a baker are distributed to its delegators?Why did the network ignore my baked block?What are the chances of my baker getting selected to bake?Why my endorser did not endorse the block 316956?When are Tezos Rewards Unfrozen?How to manage rewards for small delegators?My private node is not connecting to the peer mentioned in the start commandHow to set up auto transfer of baking and endorsement rewards to respective delegation accounts?How to become a baker - what are all the technical/financial requirements?Only 60% of the rewards made by a baker are distributed to its delegators?
How long to clear the 'suck zone' of a turbofan after start is initiated?
How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learning a new tool?
System.debug(JSON.Serialize(o)) Not longer shows full string
How do I find the solutions of the following equation?
Different result between scanning in Epson's "color negative film" mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?
What is the difference between "behavior" and "behaviour"?
Sequence of Tenses: Translating the subjunctive
India just shot down a satellite from the ground. At what altitude range is the resulting debris field?
Why are there no referendums in the US?
Method to test if a number is a perfect power?
Short story about space worker geeks who zone out by 'listening' to radiation from stars
when is out of tune ok?
How to check is there any negative term in a large list?
How to safely derail a train during transit?
Is there a problem with hiding "forgot password" until it's needed?
Would this custom Sorcerer variant that can only learn any verbal-component-only spell be unbalanced?
Is expanding the research of a group into machine learning as a PhD student risky?
Is HostGator storing my password in plaintext?
Two monoidal structures and copowering
Customer Requests (Sometimes) Drive Me Bonkers!
What happens if you roll doubles 3 times then land on "Go to jail?"
How to write papers efficiently when English isn't my first language?
Anatomically Correct Strange Women In Ponds Distributing Swords
Do the temporary hit points from the Battlerager barbarian's Reckless Abandon stack if I make multiple attacks on my turn?
Are bakers not paying promised rewards?
Only 60% of the rewards made by a baker are distributed to its delegators?Why did the network ignore my baked block?What are the chances of my baker getting selected to bake?Why my endorser did not endorse the block 316956?When are Tezos Rewards Unfrozen?How to manage rewards for small delegators?My private node is not connecting to the peer mentioned in the start commandHow to set up auto transfer of baking and endorsement rewards to respective delegation accounts?How to become a baker - what are all the technical/financial requirements?Only 60% of the rewards made by a baker are distributed to its delegators?
There is an interesting new service that compares ROI among bakers, called Bakers Performance Index. It differs from other ways to check this (e.g. see this post), in that they delegate 10 XTZ to a list of bakers for evaluation, and report actual rewards received. Since there is no reason why bakers should pay some tezos owners more than others, this seems to be a very accurate test for effective ROI.
What struck me though is the low ROI. For some, it's actually zero. Consider for instance the first set of columns, which seem to show an average of payment for cycles 34 to 88 (site has no documentation, so I'm just guessing).
The highest ROI is just under 3%, and that baker has an expected ROI of 7.10%. That seems like a massive difference. Same applies to the rest of bakers. What's going on? Why such difference? I am missing something? Or is this just lack of accountability, enabling bakers to underpay?
baker rewards
add a comment |
There is an interesting new service that compares ROI among bakers, called Bakers Performance Index. It differs from other ways to check this (e.g. see this post), in that they delegate 10 XTZ to a list of bakers for evaluation, and report actual rewards received. Since there is no reason why bakers should pay some tezos owners more than others, this seems to be a very accurate test for effective ROI.
What struck me though is the low ROI. For some, it's actually zero. Consider for instance the first set of columns, which seem to show an average of payment for cycles 34 to 88 (site has no documentation, so I'm just guessing).
The highest ROI is just under 3%, and that baker has an expected ROI of 7.10%. That seems like a massive difference. Same applies to the rest of bakers. What's going on? Why such difference? I am missing something? Or is this just lack of accountability, enabling bakers to underpay?
baker rewards
1
This question would seem more interesting as "how to calculate expected ROI". Doing some rough calculations, 7% seems about right for annual. 3% seems about right for cycles 33-84. I think they just consider different time periods.
– Tom
17 hours ago
add a comment |
There is an interesting new service that compares ROI among bakers, called Bakers Performance Index. It differs from other ways to check this (e.g. see this post), in that they delegate 10 XTZ to a list of bakers for evaluation, and report actual rewards received. Since there is no reason why bakers should pay some tezos owners more than others, this seems to be a very accurate test for effective ROI.
What struck me though is the low ROI. For some, it's actually zero. Consider for instance the first set of columns, which seem to show an average of payment for cycles 34 to 88 (site has no documentation, so I'm just guessing).
The highest ROI is just under 3%, and that baker has an expected ROI of 7.10%. That seems like a massive difference. Same applies to the rest of bakers. What's going on? Why such difference? I am missing something? Or is this just lack of accountability, enabling bakers to underpay?
baker rewards
There is an interesting new service that compares ROI among bakers, called Bakers Performance Index. It differs from other ways to check this (e.g. see this post), in that they delegate 10 XTZ to a list of bakers for evaluation, and report actual rewards received. Since there is no reason why bakers should pay some tezos owners more than others, this seems to be a very accurate test for effective ROI.
What struck me though is the low ROI. For some, it's actually zero. Consider for instance the first set of columns, which seem to show an average of payment for cycles 34 to 88 (site has no documentation, so I'm just guessing).
The highest ROI is just under 3%, and that baker has an expected ROI of 7.10%. That seems like a massive difference. Same applies to the rest of bakers. What's going on? Why such difference? I am missing something? Or is this just lack of accountability, enabling bakers to underpay?
baker rewards
baker rewards
asked 19 hours ago
luchonacholuchonacho
483215
483215
1
This question would seem more interesting as "how to calculate expected ROI". Doing some rough calculations, 7% seems about right for annual. 3% seems about right for cycles 33-84. I think they just consider different time periods.
– Tom
17 hours ago
add a comment |
1
This question would seem more interesting as "how to calculate expected ROI". Doing some rough calculations, 7% seems about right for annual. 3% seems about right for cycles 33-84. I think they just consider different time periods.
– Tom
17 hours ago
1
1
This question would seem more interesting as "how to calculate expected ROI". Doing some rough calculations, 7% seems about right for annual. 3% seems about right for cycles 33-84. I think they just consider different time periods.
– Tom
17 hours ago
This question would seem more interesting as "how to calculate expected ROI". Doing some rough calculations, 7% seems about right for annual. 3% seems about right for cycles 33-84. I think they just consider different time periods.
– Tom
17 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
I am Axel, the developer behind bakersperformanceindex.com and I hope this tool can help you in reviewing the baking services you're using.
The basic idea behind it was:
1/ delegate the same amount of xtz to baking services, in our case 10xtz
2/ delegate at the very same cycle, in our case at cycle 34
3/ collect and display data in a simple and raw manner
So I delegated 10xtz at cycle 34 to 60 bakers.
There are basically:
3 columns: cycle 34-->n-2, cycle n-1, cycle n
3 sub-columns: Rewards/ROI/Balance
Rewards/ROI/Balance are headers for each column.
Let's take an example: Hayek Lab for the column cycle 34 --> cycle 88 (at this time 27th march 2019, cycle 90 in Tezos Time)
Rewards: 0.268
ROI: 2.681%
Balance 10.268
So between cycle 34 & 88, Hayek Lab had distributed 0.268 xtz of rewards for 10 xtz delegated, which makes a ROI of 2.68% for this period, so a period of 54 cycles. If we annualize with the following figures:
Number of cycles in a year: 365/3 = 121,66
121,66/54 = 2,25 (we've baked for 54 cycles in a 121,66 cycles)
Annualized return for Hayek Lab: 2,25*2,68=6,03%
I think numbers are consistent
If we take the figures for cycle 89, we have:
Rewards 0.0058
ROI: 0.056% (we have a ROI of 0,056% for one cycle)
Balance:10.274 so this is the balance we have after baking during 55 cycles.
Annualized ROI with the ROI at cycle 89: 0,0058*121,66= 6,77%
Figures are once again consistent.
If I do not annualize ROI is because, imagine the baker you choose, for one reason or another, does not distribute the rewards, your annualized ROI is not the same.
I just want to rely on proven figures, all the data displayed is the data we have right now and not plans on the future.
After one year or 121 cycles or at cycle 155, we will have one year data so the ROI will be quite exact.
2/If some bakers display 0, is just we did not get any reward from them for various reasons:
a/ 10xtz < Minimun Delegated Amount accepted
b/ Anonymous delegation not authorized by baker
c/ baker is a scam, node not working...
3/ I wish I could delegate 1000 xtz to all baking services at cycle 100. I am trying to convince bakers to get on board.
4/ Many new features to come, but development takes time & ressources.
5/ You can get in touch with me at bakersperformanceindex@protonmail.com for sharing ideas.
New contributor
1
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I believe the period for which the data was collected and presented on this page is not sufficiently long to be representative.
The page states that data on returns was measured between cycle 34 and 88, which is 54 cycles, roughly 160 days or 5.25 months.
In your example, the ROI of 7.1% as estimated by the baker is stated as annual returns, i.e. 12 months, and the ROI on the page thus represents only 44% of this timeframe. Therefore, it seems that after 12 months, the baker will likely reach the estimated ROI. Nothing suspicious here.
As for those bakers with a 0% ROI, I assume that they have not yet been included in this project and data is just missing, though I have not checked that.
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
add a comment |
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f932%2fare-bakers-not-paying-promised-rewards%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I am Axel, the developer behind bakersperformanceindex.com and I hope this tool can help you in reviewing the baking services you're using.
The basic idea behind it was:
1/ delegate the same amount of xtz to baking services, in our case 10xtz
2/ delegate at the very same cycle, in our case at cycle 34
3/ collect and display data in a simple and raw manner
So I delegated 10xtz at cycle 34 to 60 bakers.
There are basically:
3 columns: cycle 34-->n-2, cycle n-1, cycle n
3 sub-columns: Rewards/ROI/Balance
Rewards/ROI/Balance are headers for each column.
Let's take an example: Hayek Lab for the column cycle 34 --> cycle 88 (at this time 27th march 2019, cycle 90 in Tezos Time)
Rewards: 0.268
ROI: 2.681%
Balance 10.268
So between cycle 34 & 88, Hayek Lab had distributed 0.268 xtz of rewards for 10 xtz delegated, which makes a ROI of 2.68% for this period, so a period of 54 cycles. If we annualize with the following figures:
Number of cycles in a year: 365/3 = 121,66
121,66/54 = 2,25 (we've baked for 54 cycles in a 121,66 cycles)
Annualized return for Hayek Lab: 2,25*2,68=6,03%
I think numbers are consistent
If we take the figures for cycle 89, we have:
Rewards 0.0058
ROI: 0.056% (we have a ROI of 0,056% for one cycle)
Balance:10.274 so this is the balance we have after baking during 55 cycles.
Annualized ROI with the ROI at cycle 89: 0,0058*121,66= 6,77%
Figures are once again consistent.
If I do not annualize ROI is because, imagine the baker you choose, for one reason or another, does not distribute the rewards, your annualized ROI is not the same.
I just want to rely on proven figures, all the data displayed is the data we have right now and not plans on the future.
After one year or 121 cycles or at cycle 155, we will have one year data so the ROI will be quite exact.
2/If some bakers display 0, is just we did not get any reward from them for various reasons:
a/ 10xtz < Minimun Delegated Amount accepted
b/ Anonymous delegation not authorized by baker
c/ baker is a scam, node not working...
3/ I wish I could delegate 1000 xtz to all baking services at cycle 100. I am trying to convince bakers to get on board.
4/ Many new features to come, but development takes time & ressources.
5/ You can get in touch with me at bakersperformanceindex@protonmail.com for sharing ideas.
New contributor
1
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I am Axel, the developer behind bakersperformanceindex.com and I hope this tool can help you in reviewing the baking services you're using.
The basic idea behind it was:
1/ delegate the same amount of xtz to baking services, in our case 10xtz
2/ delegate at the very same cycle, in our case at cycle 34
3/ collect and display data in a simple and raw manner
So I delegated 10xtz at cycle 34 to 60 bakers.
There are basically:
3 columns: cycle 34-->n-2, cycle n-1, cycle n
3 sub-columns: Rewards/ROI/Balance
Rewards/ROI/Balance are headers for each column.
Let's take an example: Hayek Lab for the column cycle 34 --> cycle 88 (at this time 27th march 2019, cycle 90 in Tezos Time)
Rewards: 0.268
ROI: 2.681%
Balance 10.268
So between cycle 34 & 88, Hayek Lab had distributed 0.268 xtz of rewards for 10 xtz delegated, which makes a ROI of 2.68% for this period, so a period of 54 cycles. If we annualize with the following figures:
Number of cycles in a year: 365/3 = 121,66
121,66/54 = 2,25 (we've baked for 54 cycles in a 121,66 cycles)
Annualized return for Hayek Lab: 2,25*2,68=6,03%
I think numbers are consistent
If we take the figures for cycle 89, we have:
Rewards 0.0058
ROI: 0.056% (we have a ROI of 0,056% for one cycle)
Balance:10.274 so this is the balance we have after baking during 55 cycles.
Annualized ROI with the ROI at cycle 89: 0,0058*121,66= 6,77%
Figures are once again consistent.
If I do not annualize ROI is because, imagine the baker you choose, for one reason or another, does not distribute the rewards, your annualized ROI is not the same.
I just want to rely on proven figures, all the data displayed is the data we have right now and not plans on the future.
After one year or 121 cycles or at cycle 155, we will have one year data so the ROI will be quite exact.
2/If some bakers display 0, is just we did not get any reward from them for various reasons:
a/ 10xtz < Minimun Delegated Amount accepted
b/ Anonymous delegation not authorized by baker
c/ baker is a scam, node not working...
3/ I wish I could delegate 1000 xtz to all baking services at cycle 100. I am trying to convince bakers to get on board.
4/ Many new features to come, but development takes time & ressources.
5/ You can get in touch with me at bakersperformanceindex@protonmail.com for sharing ideas.
New contributor
1
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I am Axel, the developer behind bakersperformanceindex.com and I hope this tool can help you in reviewing the baking services you're using.
The basic idea behind it was:
1/ delegate the same amount of xtz to baking services, in our case 10xtz
2/ delegate at the very same cycle, in our case at cycle 34
3/ collect and display data in a simple and raw manner
So I delegated 10xtz at cycle 34 to 60 bakers.
There are basically:
3 columns: cycle 34-->n-2, cycle n-1, cycle n
3 sub-columns: Rewards/ROI/Balance
Rewards/ROI/Balance are headers for each column.
Let's take an example: Hayek Lab for the column cycle 34 --> cycle 88 (at this time 27th march 2019, cycle 90 in Tezos Time)
Rewards: 0.268
ROI: 2.681%
Balance 10.268
So between cycle 34 & 88, Hayek Lab had distributed 0.268 xtz of rewards for 10 xtz delegated, which makes a ROI of 2.68% for this period, so a period of 54 cycles. If we annualize with the following figures:
Number of cycles in a year: 365/3 = 121,66
121,66/54 = 2,25 (we've baked for 54 cycles in a 121,66 cycles)
Annualized return for Hayek Lab: 2,25*2,68=6,03%
I think numbers are consistent
If we take the figures for cycle 89, we have:
Rewards 0.0058
ROI: 0.056% (we have a ROI of 0,056% for one cycle)
Balance:10.274 so this is the balance we have after baking during 55 cycles.
Annualized ROI with the ROI at cycle 89: 0,0058*121,66= 6,77%
Figures are once again consistent.
If I do not annualize ROI is because, imagine the baker you choose, for one reason or another, does not distribute the rewards, your annualized ROI is not the same.
I just want to rely on proven figures, all the data displayed is the data we have right now and not plans on the future.
After one year or 121 cycles or at cycle 155, we will have one year data so the ROI will be quite exact.
2/If some bakers display 0, is just we did not get any reward from them for various reasons:
a/ 10xtz < Minimun Delegated Amount accepted
b/ Anonymous delegation not authorized by baker
c/ baker is a scam, node not working...
3/ I wish I could delegate 1000 xtz to all baking services at cycle 100. I am trying to convince bakers to get on board.
4/ Many new features to come, but development takes time & ressources.
5/ You can get in touch with me at bakersperformanceindex@protonmail.com for sharing ideas.
New contributor
I am Axel, the developer behind bakersperformanceindex.com and I hope this tool can help you in reviewing the baking services you're using.
The basic idea behind it was:
1/ delegate the same amount of xtz to baking services, in our case 10xtz
2/ delegate at the very same cycle, in our case at cycle 34
3/ collect and display data in a simple and raw manner
So I delegated 10xtz at cycle 34 to 60 bakers.
There are basically:
3 columns: cycle 34-->n-2, cycle n-1, cycle n
3 sub-columns: Rewards/ROI/Balance
Rewards/ROI/Balance are headers for each column.
Let's take an example: Hayek Lab for the column cycle 34 --> cycle 88 (at this time 27th march 2019, cycle 90 in Tezos Time)
Rewards: 0.268
ROI: 2.681%
Balance 10.268
So between cycle 34 & 88, Hayek Lab had distributed 0.268 xtz of rewards for 10 xtz delegated, which makes a ROI of 2.68% for this period, so a period of 54 cycles. If we annualize with the following figures:
Number of cycles in a year: 365/3 = 121,66
121,66/54 = 2,25 (we've baked for 54 cycles in a 121,66 cycles)
Annualized return for Hayek Lab: 2,25*2,68=6,03%
I think numbers are consistent
If we take the figures for cycle 89, we have:
Rewards 0.0058
ROI: 0.056% (we have a ROI of 0,056% for one cycle)
Balance:10.274 so this is the balance we have after baking during 55 cycles.
Annualized ROI with the ROI at cycle 89: 0,0058*121,66= 6,77%
Figures are once again consistent.
If I do not annualize ROI is because, imagine the baker you choose, for one reason or another, does not distribute the rewards, your annualized ROI is not the same.
I just want to rely on proven figures, all the data displayed is the data we have right now and not plans on the future.
After one year or 121 cycles or at cycle 155, we will have one year data so the ROI will be quite exact.
2/If some bakers display 0, is just we did not get any reward from them for various reasons:
a/ 10xtz < Minimun Delegated Amount accepted
b/ Anonymous delegation not authorized by baker
c/ baker is a scam, node not working...
3/ I wish I could delegate 1000 xtz to all baking services at cycle 100. I am trying to convince bakers to get on board.
4/ Many new features to come, but development takes time & ressources.
5/ You can get in touch with me at bakersperformanceindex@protonmail.com for sharing ideas.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 14 hours ago
AxelAxel
311
311
New contributor
New contributor
1
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
1
1
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
Thanks! Two suggestions. Why not add effective ROI, estimated annual ROI, and some simple FAQ/documentation? :)
– luchonacho
14 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
You should certainly display annualized figures, call them what you want but otherwise the data cannot be use to compare between baker A and baker B. Also you need to provide gross and net figures because at 10 xtz of delegation the rewards are significantly impacted by transaction fees.
– Ezy♦
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I believe the period for which the data was collected and presented on this page is not sufficiently long to be representative.
The page states that data on returns was measured between cycle 34 and 88, which is 54 cycles, roughly 160 days or 5.25 months.
In your example, the ROI of 7.1% as estimated by the baker is stated as annual returns, i.e. 12 months, and the ROI on the page thus represents only 44% of this timeframe. Therefore, it seems that after 12 months, the baker will likely reach the estimated ROI. Nothing suspicious here.
As for those bakers with a 0% ROI, I assume that they have not yet been included in this project and data is just missing, though I have not checked that.
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
add a comment |
I believe the period for which the data was collected and presented on this page is not sufficiently long to be representative.
The page states that data on returns was measured between cycle 34 and 88, which is 54 cycles, roughly 160 days or 5.25 months.
In your example, the ROI of 7.1% as estimated by the baker is stated as annual returns, i.e. 12 months, and the ROI on the page thus represents only 44% of this timeframe. Therefore, it seems that after 12 months, the baker will likely reach the estimated ROI. Nothing suspicious here.
As for those bakers with a 0% ROI, I assume that they have not yet been included in this project and data is just missing, though I have not checked that.
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
add a comment |
I believe the period for which the data was collected and presented on this page is not sufficiently long to be representative.
The page states that data on returns was measured between cycle 34 and 88, which is 54 cycles, roughly 160 days or 5.25 months.
In your example, the ROI of 7.1% as estimated by the baker is stated as annual returns, i.e. 12 months, and the ROI on the page thus represents only 44% of this timeframe. Therefore, it seems that after 12 months, the baker will likely reach the estimated ROI. Nothing suspicious here.
As for those bakers with a 0% ROI, I assume that they have not yet been included in this project and data is just missing, though I have not checked that.
I believe the period for which the data was collected and presented on this page is not sufficiently long to be representative.
The page states that data on returns was measured between cycle 34 and 88, which is 54 cycles, roughly 160 days or 5.25 months.
In your example, the ROI of 7.1% as estimated by the baker is stated as annual returns, i.e. 12 months, and the ROI on the page thus represents only 44% of this timeframe. Therefore, it seems that after 12 months, the baker will likely reach the estimated ROI. Nothing suspicious here.
As for those bakers with a 0% ROI, I assume that they have not yet been included in this project and data is just missing, though I have not checked that.
answered 17 hours ago
MarcBMarcB
482113
482113
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
add a comment |
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
Oh! I thought they were annualised! Interesting. Yes, that then explains the issue. The documentation is non-existent and that should be made clear.
– luchonacho
17 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
If they dont annualize thats bad
– Ezy♦
16 hours ago
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f932%2fare-bakers-not-paying-promised-rewards%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
1
This question would seem more interesting as "how to calculate expected ROI". Doing some rough calculations, 7% seems about right for annual. 3% seems about right for cycles 33-84. I think they just consider different time periods.
– Tom
17 hours ago