I personally like the idea of capturing this metric as it would provide some sort of Gross APY (an Indexer level performance ratio prior to the distribution with delegators). In that context, we can look at existing dashboards how delegator APYs are tracked today since such an Indexer performance ratio would be related to that. What we currently find are figures that are often close, but not always the same. This is how the APY shows across three different dashboards for this Indexer:
1:
2:
3:
Those of us approaching APY like a game horseshoe (close is good enough), might be perfectly fine knowing the expected APY is likely to be somewhere in the range of numbers shown in the three dashboards. The problem enters by defining what should be added in the Explorer. None of the three dashboards is necessarily more right or wrong, it’s just that APYs (future and historic) can be calculated in a number of different ways and hence lead to different results. Today, we don’t have a standard algorithm defined for that and maybe it is worth starting these discussions within the community which certainly is a larger topic in scope. In order to keep this Forum post focused on the new rewards cut settings mechanism, I would recommend not adding new scope that is not directly related to it, but rather cover it in a separate proposal.
With regards to the proposed UI changes, we have another Forum post open that discusses Explorer UI design to improve stake decentralization (Graph Explorer – Decentralization & Reputation UI Changes). In there, we are looking to streamline the data points shown in the Explorer to focus delegators on the most critical data points. Feel free to add to the suggestions made there.