Introduction

The Proof of Stake (PoS) mechanism of the popular layer-1 blockchain platform Avalanche addresses or resolves the trilemma of blockchain scalability, security, and decentralization. In a manner similar to Ethereum, smart contracts enable the development of decentralized applications and services on its network.

For layer 2, there is more than one scalable option. The ability to see the bright side of things is one. Optimistic rollups make advantage of a method that condenses massive volumes of data into manageable packages. In comparison to Ethereum, the cost of using layer 2s like Optimism and Arbitrum is significantly lower.

Rollups are a tactic employed by optimism, more specifically optimistic rollups.

On the Ethereum mainnet, a rollup simply combines the information from multiple transactions into one (layer 1). Non-fungible token (NFT) mints, token exchanges, etc., can all make use of these.

The rollup methodology operates on the assumption that anything is true unless it is disproved. An alleged fraudulent transaction can be contested by submitting a "fraud evidence" and then recalculating the transaction using state data from a specified time frame. For this reason, the fuel cost of doing the fraud-proof calculation is covered.

Method

In this dashboard I tried to compare the Avalanche network with Optimism and Arbitrum in NFT marketplace to achieve a visions of these network on user behaving and cashflow.

For this I used core.fact_event_logs tables in Flipsidecrypto database of this two network to find formerly mentioned metrics.

Its necessarily to mentioned that, to calculate the AVAX token price I used avalanche.sushi.ez_swaps table and found WAVAX/USDC pair and by use of that, found the daily average price of AVAX to calculate the sales volume in $USD.

> So let's take a look at the findings

Analysis

Part I: Overall View

In this part we acheive a overall view of this two network as assessed metrics such as following findings:

Conclusion

• The day with the highest sales volume for Avalanche was July 12th, with 2135 sales number.

  But in the other days Avalanche marketplaces have had significantly higher than Optimism & Arbitrum in assessed metrics.

• Cumulative sales transactions count on Avalanche, in total was two time more than Arbitrum and four times more than Optimism.

• New users > 1 tx implies to users that have had more than 1 transactions on NFT marketplaces on both netowrks.

• Total spent fees on avalanche is significantly more than tow others, and on Arbitrum is more than Optimism.

• For NFT interactions from May on Avalanche & early August on Optimism & Arbitrum, onwards, over half of the new users will take less than 0-1 days (median) before interacting with NFTs

• Total amount of sales volume in $USD are was nearly 100m USD in avalanche and 277.7k in Optimism and 2.8m in Arbitrum, respectively, this huge deference are because of newly marketplace in Optimism & Arbitrum than Avalanche.

About:

• Author: HaM☰d

  \

• Discord: 0xHaM☰d#8391

  \

• Twitter: @arjmandi_hamed

  \

• Email: h_arjmandi2012@yahoo.com

What’s Going on Optimism, Arbitrum & Avalanche NFT marketplaces?

What we will looking at in this dashboard?

> > 1. Interaction of Users with NFT Marketplace. > 2. Days of Users that Have Had Interaction on NFTs. > 3. Transactions Count of Sales in Total and daily. > 4. Unique Sellers & Buyers Count in Total & Daily. > 5. Sales Volume in $USD, ETH & AVAX. > 6. Average & Median in Volume and Sales Count. > > \

Hey there 👋!

Firstly, I appreciate you sticking with it until the conclusion.

I’m Hamed, Ph.D. In Civil Engineering and interested in data science.

I've made many similar dashboards and visualizations since I started at Flipside in January.

Please have a look at my various contact information and let me know what you think.

Part II: Daily Evaluation of Metrics

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

July was the most Vibrant for Optimism NFTs marketplace, so that on July 27th, 2100 number of NFTs were sold, in contract of 1625 number in Avalanche.

But in Arbitrum June was a vibrant month with the highest volume day on June 21th, with 2.4k transactions and nearly 2k buyers on that day.

The day with the highest sales volume for Avalanche was July 12th, with 2135 sales number.

But in the other days Avalanche marketplaces have had significantly higher than Optimism in assessed metrics.

Cumulative sales transactions count on Avalanche, in total was two time more than Arbitrum and four times more than Optimism.

In overall, more than 81k sales transactions were cumulated on Avalanche, and 20.1k on Optimism and 40k on Arbitrumin return.

Part III: Daily Evaluation of Users NFT Interaction Metrics

Part IV: Daily Evaluation of Volume Metrics

Part V: Compare of NFT Interaction Metrics in Total & Mutual Buyers

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

In this section we can see that new users in NFTs interaction on Avalanche networks are more higher than Optimism & Arbitrum, so that in all of assessed metrics Avalanche network has more than 1.5 times higher than Optimism.

New users > 1 tx implies to users that have had more than 1 transactions on NFT marketplaces on all three networks.

On May 24th, 46 Sellers have had selling NFT in all three networks, and 88 buyers and 188 sellers are mutual in all three networks.

As following charts, total amount of sales volume in $USD are was nearly 100m USD in avalanche and 277.7k in Optimism and 2.8m in Arbitrum, respectively, this huge deference are because of newly marketplace in Optimism & Arbitrum than Avalanche.

:1st_place_medal: Top 10 Sales NFTs

• Finally, as of end section, the top 10 most popular collections in this two network are visible in the following DONUT charts.

> Ckikn in the Avalanche, ==Mirror== in the Optimism and ==Smol sharks== in the Arbitrum are in the first place of top ten, respectively.

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

The first three charts shows the % of new users who eventually interact with NFTs over time.

• Generally, we see that there was a substantially higher % of users who interact (==mint==, ==list==, ==transfer==, ==buy==) with NFT over buying them
  • The dip in July was likely due to the unusually high volume of wallets created, most of which were only online for a day
• Interestingly, NFT adoption was not consistent across time , this tells that there are bear-bull phases of NFT adoption on all three networks.
• While the trend of NFT buyers and interactors seems to be similar in trend, we saw a split towards late 2022
  • While the % of buyers steadily declined, we still saw a lot of variation in users who interacted with NFTs
  • This suggests that new users in this period may have minted or transferred NFTs but did not buy any from secondary marketplaces.
• Growth of NFT Users (Interactions and Purchase) surged from June to August on Optimism & Arbitrum and from March to August on Avalanche.
  • Cumulatively, while there are 411k, 573k & 0.9m wallets on Optimism, Arbitrum & Avalanche, respectively, from March, only 91k+, 140k & 184k+ was active for > 1 day.
  • For NFT interactions ~1.9k, 2.7k & 2.1k of these new wallets interacted with any NFT (dabbled into NFT) - which may include ==mints==, ==listing==, ==buying==, or ==selling==. Of these, only 323k, 1k & 1.9k, users ever bought NFT on Optimism, Arbitrum & Avalanche, respectively.
  • Across both categories, we saw the cumulative growth going steeper between January and August 2022

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

Only a small fraction of both networks users interact or bought NFTs

• While Avalanche has seen a high volume of on March, the spike in late-Jul on Optimism was essentially negated if we were to filter out new wallets by whether they have been online for > 1 day (performing transactions on 2 or more distinct days)

• By this criteria, we see that the number of new users that were active > 1 day has declined suddenly from 184k-85k from late July to ~ <34-16k in early August on Optimism & Avalanche, respectively.

• The number of new users who interacted or bought NFT followed a same trend.

• On average, we see that newer users who came onto all three networks and interacted with NFTs did so more early compared to those who did so earlier

  • For NFT interactions from May on Avalanche & early August on Optimism & Arbitrum, onwards, over half of the new users will take less than 0-1 days (median) before interacting with NFTs
  • This has declined to 0 days to date, suggesting that wallets created and interacted with NFT during this period did so immediately

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

• NFT volume mimics user growth, NFT volume on Optimism, Arbitrum & Avalanche has declined steadily since July & May, respectively

  The above charts shows the daily sales volume and count of NFTs on ETH & AVAX.

  \

• The price of NFTs sold has been on an increasing trend on Avalanche and dropping on Optimism & Arbitrum since July as average and median sales volume.

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

July & May was the NFT bull season for Optimism, Arbitrum & Avalanche, respectively.

The above charts shows the cumulative sales volume in $USD, ETH & AVAX and count of sales NFTs.

• From June, a total of 277k sales volume (in $USD) was generated, with 20k sales count on Optimism, $39.81k in Arbitrum, in return these for Avalanche was 67m & 126k, respectively.

• Majority of this growth occurred during the June to July period for Optimism, and to date for Arbitrum and May to date for Avalanche.

  \

:hourglass_flowing_sand: Findings:

• The spent fee on Avalanche is significantly more than the two others. It seems there is something wrong with fees on Avalanche. There is more than 4.2m in USD that does not make sense. I can’t find what is wrong with that.
• But in Optimism and Arbitrum, the spent fees are so low that these layer 2 networks show a revelution on the Ethereum ecosystem.