When navigating through to the Daedalus Incentivized Testnet v1 wallet, and navigating to the Stake pools, we are presented with this info bar when hovering over the different stake pools
Rank: Rank in the list based on total amount of Controlled Stake Controlled Stake: total amount of Stake set through the pool Profit Margin: The cut the pool operator takes Cost per epoch: What you pay to be listed in this pool for each epoch Performance: Server performance. As a minimum it should adhere to these requirements …yes, RTFM. Produced blocks: How many blocks the pool have created in total. Please note even though it has produced 0 blocks, there is an inclusive algorithm in the backend for fair distribution. So choosing a low block producer might be the most beneficial way to proceed.
In order to help you decide, you can also use the Cardano Staking Calculator (use the Advanced feature), and input the values set by the Pool operators.
There is also the Cardano Pool Tool where you are able to sort pools based on your preferred preferences. https://pooltool.io/pools
You need to click on “Explore Pools” from the main page for the itn (Incentivized Test Net Rewards)
In conjunction to this, there must be a rule to inform the user who is staking IF the terms are changed, at a pool, to be able to switch within a set timeframe.
My suggestion for this is an automated one. IF pool changes ANY attributes, ALL stake is set back to User wallet
ready to be staked again to their preferred pool of their choosing, with a short notification that terms where changed on their current pool.
I had the same thought — what’s to stop a pool operator from luring people in with favorable conditions, then suddenly racking up the flat fee and making off with everyone’s ADA.
But then, that’s such an obvious scam I’m reasonably confident someone in IOHK also thought of it beforehand, re. kqkbiRKCdn1M’s comment.
(Those Kordano pools e.a.… not sure if trolling or scamming. But yeah, definitely being a D. It would be funny if it weren’t for the fact that sooner or later they’re still likely to cash in regardless. There’s always that one poor sucker…)
I actually think it ought to be even more ‘independent’ than that. A field I think IOHK could learn from is real estate (websites). In the UK, Righmove.co.uk is a good example. With this website and I imagine others like it, you can tick certain boxes (e.g. yes flat, no detached house, yes terraced house etc.) but are also given access to dial-type controls for things that are rather a scale not Yes/No in nature (e.g. minimum and maximum price for instance can easily be set like this). And then lastly as you tweak all these parameters you see the changes live changing on a map of your area.
Basically, where I’m getting at – I don’t even want to see the pools that would not interest me in the first place, the same way I would not want to see houses that cost $10 million, obviously. So in Daedalus this could be something like – don’t even show pools me that are under 85% performance (dial style feature), that have a fee of above 5%, and that have a per epoch fee. I think this would make things infinitely simpler for people. There’s hundreds and hundreds of pools, why would I want to be exposed to that deluge if the vast majority are not of interest to me anyway? And how do you rank things considering all the variable, some people might value performance over cost… Just let people exclude stuff that is outside their comfort zone.
Hi. I created 2 Daedalus wallets separating my Ada. Now I have delegated in 2 different pools.
1-. 100% yield. If the yield of 95% group change falls
two-. 0 Ada for Epoca.
3-. Commission between 1% -3%.
4-. Ada total pool between 8 and 50 million.
5-. You have confirmed at least 1 block.
Hmmm, I’m a bit surprised about how the rewards are distributed. For example: If you compare ANP (ADA North Pool, now number 16, 4.03 days uptime, 1.29% size, 70M Ada total stake, 8200 Ada Rewards) and CRFN (Crypto Functional, now number 19, 4.03 days uptime, 1.14% size, 62M Ada total stake, 600 Ada Rewards) then ANP has gained more than ten times the rewards as CRFN. How is this possible? Much more transactions in the block(s) ANP processed than in the one(s) from CRFN?
Roarh, the RANK doesn’t seem to relate to the CONTROLLED STAKE as you describe. For example, right now looking through the test wallet delegation center, the #1 ranked pool has 70.9 Million Controlled Stake while the #2 ranked pool has 303 million.
I can confirm I have switched stakepools a couple of times and I continued to receive rewards with no apparent penalty. On the contrary, after the switch is implemented (after two epochs) my percent of rewards improved every time!