Try Quests to earn AVAXOPtimitic or Pessimistic?
Introduction
Layer 2 (L2) is a collective term to describe a specific set of Ethereum scaling solutions. A layer 2 is a separate blockchain that extends Ethereum and inherits the security guarantees of Ethereum.
Optimism is a Layer-2 Ethereum scaling solution. It combines numerous transactions into one, and then pushes that transaction to a different blockchain for additional processing.
It then provides the transaction receipts back to Ethereum by utilizing a data compression mechanism, thus lowering the burden of transactions on Ethereum Mainnet.
Arbitrum is a Layer 2 cryptocurrency platform that makes smart contracts scalable, fast, and private. Arbitrum interoperates closely with Ethereum, so Ethereum developers can easily cross-compile their contracts to run on Arbitrum. Arbitrum achieves these goals through a unique combination of incentives, network protocol design, and virtual machine architecture. Arbitrum has three modes: channels, AnyTrust sidechains, and rollup. Channels and sidechains provide the AnyTrust Guarantee which ensures that the code will run correctly as long as any validator is honest.
Polygon is a decentralized Ethereum scaling platform that enables developers to build scalable user-friendly dApps with low transaction fees without ever sacrificing on security.
Method
In the current dashboard, I tried to analysis some metrics on Optimism and compare its performance with 2 major layer 2 chains such as Polygon and Arbitrum in order to found that have to be optimistic or pessimistic about Optimism!
The assessed metrics in this dashboard include the transactions and unique users, transactions fee volume, success and failed rate, NFT user interaction and Distribution of Wallets and Other Chains over time.
For This, I used following tables on Flipsidecrypto database:
> * optimism.core.fact_transactions , optimism.core.fact_event_logs , optimism.core.ez_nft_sales > * arbitrum.core.fact_transactions , arbitrum.core.fact_event_logs > * polygon.core.fact_transactions, polygon.core.fact_event_logs
The time period for these evaluations past 6 month in weekly was selected, but you can change it by your own choice in the above tapes.
✍🏻 Conclusion
To begin, it may not be fair to compare very young Layer2 chains like Optimism and Arbitrum with an extremely seasoned chain like Polygon. However, I have made an effort to study more and more average-based parameters in the above analysis in an effort to produce more balanced results.
- With regards to the bigger picture. Comparing Optimism to the other two chains, it has a number of drawbacks.
- Unfortunately, Optimism has higher transaction costs than the other chains, making it less attractive to the typical user.
- Optimism's increased transaction volume per user may be a good sign for the network's future.
- It's good news that Optimism's rate of successful transactions is rising. Its transaction success rate has recently surpassed that of Polygon, and perhaps it will soon be able to surpass that of Arbitrum as well.
- Users of the optimism coin are less likely to use the polygon and arbitrum chains.
- This chain's growth rate of new users is lower than that of the other two, and the number of new users joining each day is lower than that of the other two as well.
- Positive and encouraging signs of optimism regarding NFT sales have emerged. Optimism's NFT ecosystem is seeing an increase in sales, active buyers, and active sellers, which may be promising for the future of the chain.
About:
-
Author: HaM☰d
\
-
Discord: 0xHaM☰d#8391
\
-
Twitter: @arjmandi_hamed
\
-
Email: h_arjmandi2012@yahoo.com
Hey there 👋!
Firstly, I appreciate you sticking with it until the conclusion.
I'm Hamed, a civil engineering Ph.D.
student interested in data analysis.
I've made many similar dashboards and visualizations since I started at Flipside in January.
Please take a look at my various contact details and let me know what you think.
:telescope:Findings:
- As of above PIE charts, 22 percent of all Optimism's addresses, 12.8% of all Arbitrum's addresses and 76.2% of all Polygon's addresses were found to be not active on other chains.
- Ethereum-Optimism, Arbitrum-Polygon and Polygon-BSC, appears to be the most common combination of chains where existing user has been on, respectively.
- The most of users on Polygon hadn’t tend to be active on other chains, that I think this huge percent could be because of low transactions fees and maybe more active Robots and sibyl attackers.
The above bar charts shows the breakdown of the number of wallets across the different combinations of chains where users of networks were found to be.
:hourglass_flowing_sand: The following section shows the transactions per users, New users and share of new users over time
:telescope:Findings:
In terms of transactions per user, Arbitrum clearly has the lowest tx performed per user over time. and Polygon has the highest over time.
In May 9th, transactions per address on Optimism reached the highest, at 37.8 and passed the Polygon with 27.1 per address.
- New users on Polygon are significantly increased and on Optimism is the lowest level than others. and the new user growth for all three networks are sharply increased.
:telescope:Findings:
Polygon’s new users with more than 1 transactions and more than 1 day action are in the most percentages, 92% & 90%, respectively.
In terms of NFT sales, as of following charts the Optimism has less sales Volume, but more number of active sellers and buyers compared to the other 2 chains.
Polygon has Most sales volume and less number of active sellers and buyers over time.
:telescope:Findings:
The volume of spent fees had decreased since its all-time high in May 9th to date, but overall, the fees volume on Optimism is higher than two others. and in average over time, while till August 20th, Arbitrum have had most volume of fees, but after 20th, Optimism passed Arbitrum and reached $0.16 in average.
Polygon success and failed transactions are over than two others, but in a decreasing trend in failed transactions count.
The rate of success transactions on Arbitrum is the most, and Polygon and Optimism are changeable in this metric over time.
:telescope:Findings:
In this section tried to take a glance on network performance by calculate transactions count, unique users count, amount of paid fees by users, success and failed transactions and rate of success transactions over time.
As of charts in the right, weekly count of transactions have smoothly increased since July 4th, after a drop on June 20th till July 4th.
and count of unique users have increased over past 6 month.
Deference between polygon and two others are so great that is because of longer history on polygon network rather than Optimism and Arbitrum.
As can be seen in the third chart and next of that, the amount of spent fees on all three network peaked at over $1.23M for polygon and $1.4 for Optimism and Arbitrum on May 9th.
:hourglass_flowing_sand: What other chains were networks users utilized?
With the EVM tables on Flipside, we can explore whether a particular address is also involved in other chains.
Users of Metamask can toggle freely across different chains with the same wallet address. When bridging funds, users often transfer funds across different chains with the same wallet.
In the following section I tried to track chains interactions between wallets on assessed networks.
Chains explored:
> * Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism, BSC, AVAX, Harmony
:telescope:Findings:
Above charts shows the types of new users actions over time for each networks.
As can be seen, the highest New users > 1 Tx active on polygon is too more than two others, and in recent three weeks this criteria reached at highest top over past 6 month.
Also New users > 1 Day active (performing transactions on 2 or more distinct days), have had a spike in the recent week on Polygon. However, New NFT interactors on Optimism and Arbitrum have had a spike on late of August, and after a drop on July, peaked at 5.14K and 3.71K on Arbitrum and Optimism, respectively in third week on Sep. This significant numbers and high percentages of New users interacting on Optimism and Arbitrum in compare of Polygon and same pattern on New NFT buyers over time shows an upward trend on adoption of NFTs activities on these networks.
According to cumulative NFT interactors and New NFT buyers charts, it’s observable that against to Polygon network, these two metrics on Optimism & Arbitrum has increased over past 6 month, and the growth in these two network are too sharp than Polygon.
As of right PIE chart, distribution of total number of New NFT interactors are steady for three networks.
:telescope:Findings:
Total number of NFT buyers on all three networks is approximately same.
The most sales volume in $USD is belongs to Polygon with 95%.
Sales transactions count on Polygon is the highest than others, but in consider of short history of two other networks, 25.5 & 27% share of sales for those are so significant.