Overview
Ramses Exchange is a ve(3,3) decentralized exchange operating on Arbitrum, combining the vote-escrowed tokenomics pioneered by Curve/Solidly with concentrated liquidity features. The protocol allows veRAM holders to vote on gauge emissions, directing RAM token incentives to specific liquidity pools — creating a marketplace where protocols bribe veRAM voters to attract liquidity.
The ve(3,3) model (named after the combination of Curve's vote-escrow and Olympus DAO's (3,3) game theory) was first implemented by Andre Cronje's Solidly on Fantom. While Solidly itself failed due to design flaws, forks like Velodrome (Optimism), Aerodrome (Base), and Ramses (Arbitrum) refined the model.
Ramses differentiates from other ve(3,3) forks by implementing concentrated liquidity (similar to Uniswap V3) alongside the standard volatile and stable AMM pools. This allows liquidity providers to concentrate capital in active price ranges for improved efficiency.
Smart Contracts
Ramses' smart contract architecture includes:
- Concentrated Liquidity (CL) Pools: Uniswap V3-style tick-based liquidity with customizable ranges
- Volatile AMM Pools: Standard x*y=k pools for long-tail assets
- Stable AMM Pools: Curve-style stableswap invariant for pegged assets
- Gauge System: Emission distribution based on veRAM voting
- Bribe Marketplace: Protocols deposit bribes to incentivize gauge votes
The combination of CL and ve(3,3) is technically sound and represents the current state-of-the-art for Solidly-style DEXs. Contracts have been audited, though the complexity of combining multiple pool types with the voting system increases attack surface.
Security
Ramses has operated without major exploits, though the protocol is relatively young. The codebase draws from well-tested foundations (Uniswap V3 for CL, Solidly for ve(3,3)), which provides some baseline confidence.
The concentrated liquidity implementation requires careful management — impermanent loss is amplified in CL positions, and liquidation-style risks exist if prices move outside LP ranges. The gauge and bribe system adds governance attack surface.
Liquidity
Liquidity is moderate for an Arbitrum DEX. Ramses has attracted meaningful TVL through its emission incentives and bribe marketplace. Concentrated liquidity pools generally offer better capital efficiency than standard AMM pools, meaning less TVL is needed to support comparable trade sizes.
The bribe marketplace creates an ongoing liquidity incentive mechanism — protocols pay to attract liquidity to their pairs, and veRAM voters are compensated for directing emissions. This flywheel works well when emission value exceeds the cost of bribes.
Adoption
Ramses has established itself as one of the notable ve(3,3) DEXs on Arbitrum, though it competes directly with Camelot, Chronos, and others. Trading volume is meaningful but not dominant.
The protocol has attracted several DeFi protocols that use the bribe system to secure liquidity. This B2B adoption model is a strength of the ve(3,3) design — protocols become stakeholders in the DEX's governance.
Tokenomics
RAM is the emission token, distributed to liquidity providers through gauges. veRAM is the locked governance token, created by locking RAM for up to 2 years. veRAM holders earn trading fees, bribes, and rebase rewards.
The ve(3,3) model attempts to align incentives — lockers are rewarded for long-term commitment through anti-dilution rebases and bribe income. However, emission rates must be carefully managed to prevent token inflation from overwhelming demand. The sustainability of ve(3,3) tokenomics remains an open question across all implementations.
Risk Factors
- Emission sustainability — high token emissions can lead to persistent sell pressure
- ve(3,3) model risk — long-term viability of Solidly-style tokenomics is unproven
- Fork competition — multiple ve(3,3) DEXs on Arbitrum fragment liquidity
- Concentrated liquidity risk — amplified impermanent loss for LPs
- Arbitrum dependency — chain-specific risk and L2 competition
- Bribe economics — flywheel depends on continued protocol willingness to pay bribes
Conclusion
Ramses Exchange scores 4.2, reflecting solid execution of the ve(3,3) model with the addition of concentrated liquidity on Arbitrum. The protocol has found reasonable product-market fit in the "liquidity-as-a-service" niche, where DeFi protocols bribe for liquidity. The main risks are sustainability-related: can emission economics remain positive long-term? Can Ramses maintain relevance amid ve(3,3) fork proliferation? The concentrated liquidity addition is a meaningful differentiator, but the ve(3,3) model's long-term sustainability remains the central question for all implementations.