The dYdX Chain will be a proof-of-stake blockchain network and, as such, if and when deployed on mainnet, it will require an L1 protocol token for staking to validators in order to secure the chain and for stakers of the L1 token to govern the network.
The dYdX community could elect to use DYDX, the governance token of dYdX v3, as the L1 token of the dYdX Chain (if and when deployed after mainnet release). If such an election were to materialize, given that DYDX is an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token, the DYDX token would need to be migrated from Ethereum to the dYdX Chain.
Thanks for compiling the course of actions to be taken to migrate the DYDX tokens to the new dYdX Chain. As @0xCLR said, we don’t see any reason not to use DYDX as the L1 token of the dYdX Chain either. If the dYdX community and core team were to introduce the new token, it would be good to check out how Polygon is planning to migrate their token (MATIC → POL).
We also have a couple of questions and comments:
the dYdX Foundation has undertaken two activities in connection with a potential migration of the DYDX token from Ethereum to the dYdX Chain. First, it commissioned the development of an Ethereum smart contract (the “Ethereum Smart Contract ”) that, if deployed, would enable a permissionless and autonomous one-way bridge for the DYDX token to be migrated from Ethereum to the dYdX Chain (as further described below)
We interpreted this as the work of those key components has already been commissioned and started. Sounds like it’s a “done” deal. At this point, we believe we can focus on how we achieve the migration smoothly. It’s not clear about who’s commissioned to work on them, though. Is it dYdX Trading or another undisclosed party?
(2) whether wethDYDX should have the same governance and utility functions as DYDX on dYdX v3
If we utilize wethDYDX for the governance purpose, the community could keep the delegates who are not validators but over time, it would become a “debt” to deal with in the future, which we believe is something we should avoid. They could only work as “honorable” tokens. Any utilities that we can think of?
(3) if the dYdX community decides DYDX should be the L1 protocol token of the dYdX Chain, then how to organize and carry out any required token migration and/or any other necessary actions.
We could form a working group or something equivalent to swiftly make actions while the group members are selected by the governance. This would work as an experiment to evaluate the council system that has been proposed in the past. Curious about the other community members think.
This is great and am looking forward to v4. Agreed, I dont no reason why DYDX shouldnt be the L1 token on the chain.
For wethDYDX, I only foresee the protocol wanting to keep the Ethereum version of it solely for the endorsed delegates unless there has been ideas on auth z that are already in the works. More of this can be found in previous discussions.
As for working groups on the migration, if the token bridge has not been decided, I have set up a similar post for consideration in the past : Bridging to v4. A working group to study followed by a vote will be great.
If possible, itd be great to discuss on why the bridge is only ‘one-way’ for DYDX tokens from ETH → DYDX Chain as well.
Subject: Urgent Request for Support: ERC-20 DYDX Token Migration Issue
Hello dYdX Team,
I am a DYDX holder who still holds a significant amount of ERC-20 DYDX tokens on the Ethereum network. Unfortunately, I was unable to migrate to the new dYdX Chain before the bridge was closed.
At present, ERC-20 DYDX liquidity is extremely low. Most major exchanges have stopped supporting ERC-20 deposits, which means that the only available option is to swap via DEX with very high slippage — leading to a substantial financial loss. In my case, the potential loss is extremely large compared to the original value.
I believe there are still many other holders facing the same situation. Therefore, I respectfully request that the dYdX DAO or Foundation consider:
Temporarily reopening the ERC-20 → dYdX Chain migration bridge for remaining holders.
Partnering with additional centralized exchanges (e.g., Binance, OKX, KuCoin) to support automatic ERC-20 to dYdX Chain migration.
These steps would greatly help affected community members, preserve trust in the dYdX ecosystem, and show that the DAO values fairness and inclusivity.
Thank you for your attention and support. I remain a strong believer in the future of dYdX and hope that a solution can be found.
Subject: Urgent Request for Support: ERC-20 DYDX Token Migration Issue
Hello dYdX Team,
I am a DYDX holder who still holds a significant amount of ERC-20 DYDX tokens on the Ethereum network. Unfortunately, I was unable to migrate to the new dYdX Chain before the bridge was closed.
At present, ERC-20 DYDX liquidity is extremely low. Most major exchanges have stopped supporting ERC-20 deposits, which means that the only available option is to swap via DEX with very high slippage — leading to a substantial financial loss. In my case, the potential loss is extremely large compared to the original value.
I believe there are still many other holders facing the same situation. Therefore, I respectfully request that the dYdX DAO or Foundation consider:
Temporarily reopening the ERC-20 → dYdX Chain migration bridge for remaining holders.
Partnering with additional centralized exchanges (e.g., Binance, OKX, KuCoin) to support automatic ERC-20 to dYdX Chain migration.
These steps would greatly help affected community members, preserve trust in the dYdX ecosystem, and show that the DAO values fairness and inclusivity.
Thank you for your attention and support. I remain a strong believer in the future of dYdX and hope that a solution can be found.
We understand the difficult position you’re in as a result of missing the bridging deadline. To provide clarity and context, here’s an overview of the dYdX community governance decisions and the timeline.
Governance & Timeline
The wethDYDX Smart Contract (“the Bridge”) was active for over 18 months, giving holders a lengthy window to migrate from ethDYDX on Ethereum to DYDX on the dYdX Chain. The dYdX community, through a fully open and transparent governance process, decided to discontinue support for the Bridge in two steps:
December 7, 2024 – A text proposal passed to cease support for the Bridge by June 2025.
June 13, 2025 – A parameter change proposal passed to finalise the discontinuation of support for the Bridge on the dYdX Chain.
During the more than 6 months between these 2 governance proposals, the Foundation and other ecosystem stakeholders repeatedly communicated the decision and timelines through governance proposals, forum posts, Foundation blogs and documentation, third-party articles, frequent reminders on social media and community channels, and announcements by major exchanges.
Responsibility & Next Steps
As parameter change proposals, like discontinuing support for the Bridge on the dYdX Chain, decided through dYdX governance are binding, automatically implemented and enforced through code, and the Bridge is no longer supported on the dYdX Chain, the Foundation does not have the authority or ability to unilaterally reactivate it or to coordinate any token swaps. Responsibility ultimately rested with ethDYDX holders to act within the period when the Bridge was active.
While the Bridge cannot be reopened without a new governance proposal — which, if created, may not align with the rationale for its closure — you are free to explore any avenues you feel are appropriate.
You can find the blog post about the discontinuation of support for the Bridge here.
Thank you for your detailed reply and for clarifying the governance decisions and timeline regarding the discontinuation of the wethDYDX Bridge.
While I understand and respect the governance process, I am now in a very difficult position — my DYDX tokens remain on Ethereum (ERC20) and cannot be traded or bridged to the new chain, which has caused a significant loss of liquidity and utility for my holdings.
Since reopening the Bridge is not currently possible, could you please:
Recommend any official partners, exchanges, or OTC desks that can facilitate a safe migration from ERC20 DYDX to DYDX Chain.
Suggest any community-led initiatives or proposals that could address the situation for holders like myself who missed the deadline.
I am willing to cover reasonable fees for any safe and legal solution. Your guidance would be greatly appreciated.
Am I correct in understanding that if I invested in dydx a long time ago, it was stored in my cold wallet and I did not have access to the wallet? So you simply deceived me by saying that I cannot now transfer my tokens to the dydx network?
Hello, I am writing for the second time about dydx erc20 tokens. I have capital in Dydx erc20, but I have no way to exchange them at a normal rate since the official bridge is no longer working, and Dex platforms offer an exchange of -90%. This is practically zeroing out the capital with such an exchange, given that the average purchase price of dydx is higher than current prices. I ask the managers and the dydx team to respond and take care of those who did not have time to use the official bridge. As I have already read, there are 42 million such late coins and this is a large community that was abandoned without support! Please renew the bridge or somehow influence this situation
Condemnation of the dYdX team:
As someone who bought in at $17, participated in early staking, and actively helped promote dYdX in the community, I feel deeply disappointed and disheartened by the official response.
Currently, there are 41.7 million ethDYDX tokens involved, worth around $25.02 million at today’s price. This cannot be brushed off with a simple statement that they have been “removed from circulation.” Such handling directly causes significant losses for users who failed to migrate in time. The project team could have cooperated with exchanges to use them as a bridge and provided users with a long-term (even permanent) migration channel, instead of shirking responsibility by saying, “We are a decentralized project.” For early supporters, this attitude is truly heartbreaking.
