The sheet above shows all the BOLD-related liquidity pools, as well as relevant statistics on them (TVL, Volumes, Revenues or projected APR).
It turns out that there is no USDaf/USDC pool, and it is preferable to have one, as USDC is the gateway used by the vast majority of swaps.
Without a pool with USDC, users willing to get USDaf must go through several successive pools, which increases swap fees.
Here is a look at a 1M USDC swap: 32% of funds pass through two different pools, and the remaining 68% pass through three pools, each of which charges a fee
This is a long-term problem, so there is no need to act immediately, but it will be necessary to do so if the supply of USDaf increases significantly.
The good news is, Liquity already found the solution 
https://x.com/LiquityProtocol/status/2008184970062311895
What do you think?
Perhaps your opinion is different, and any feedback is welcome 