Introduction

In crypto, gas means the cost required to carry out a transaction in the Ethereum blockchain, although in other blockchains it is called a transaction fee.

Based on supply and demand, Ethereum miners, whose equipment and power support the network, set a price to perform calculations. When demand is high, miners usually charge more for gas transactions. When demand is low, gas prices usually fall.

Fees are paid in Ethereum's main currency. Other blockchains, including Algorand, usually charge a fixed amount of their native token as a transaction fee, and some charge more transaction fees during peak consumption hours, depending on the demand.

The Ethereum network usually has high gas consumption due to the high demand, as a result, the transaction fee is expensive for the user, and for this reason, some blockchains were developed to reduce this transaction fee, which they call the second layer, and they are based on Ethereum, which Blockchain is the first layer. But some other blockchains, have low gas consumption from the beginning and generally receive a fixed amount of their native token.

In this dashboard, we examine different blockchains from the perspective of transaction fees and gas consumption.

Image source

Methodology

Our goal in this dashboard is to review different blockchains including Ethereum, Solana, Algorand, Flow, Near, Optimism, Osmosis, and Polygon from the point of view of the amount of gas consumed in the last 30 days. For this purpose, we take help from Flipside data.

In general, the following are investigated for each of the blockchains:

• Total amount USD of gas spent on the chain in the last 30 days.
• Average cost of gas in USD per $1,000,000 of liquidity transferred on each chain 30 days
• Average block gas price hourly and daily
• The top 10 addresses on each chain that spend the most on gas in the past month
• Daily amount spent on gas by chain tracked over the last 30 days
• Chart gas spend to network token price

Tables fact_hourly_token_prices , fact_transactions, fact_prices, ez_token_transfers, and fact_events are usually used to obtain data.

At first, the data related to each of the chains is investigated separately, and at the end of the dashboard, a summary of the results and the comparison of the chains is mentioned.

Analysis

Solana

Algorand

Flow

Near

Optimism

Osmosis

Polygon

Observations:

• In the Ethereum chain, due to the high demand, the gas consumption is higher than other chains, and as it is clear from the graph, the average fee of transactions increases with the increase in the number of transactions, and it can be said that the correlation between the number of transactions and gas consumption is positive.
• Over the past 30 days, the average transaction fee has varied on different days, and the maximum transaction fee on the Ethereum network occurred on November 8.
• The average fee of transferring $1M of liquidity on the Ethereum has had a downward trend and has fluctuated between 523 and 2,500 USD.
• In general, the amount of gas consumed on the Ethereum network is high, so that in the last 30 days, more than $109M have been spent by users for the fee of transactions.
• It seems that there has been an inverse relationship between the price of Ethereum and the transaction fee in the last 30 days.
• The transaction fee on the Ethereum network is so high that the TOP Wallet has paid nearly $933K for the transaction fee.

Observations:

• In the Solana chain, the gas consumption for transactions is much lower than the Ethereum network, so that the maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was equal to $0.002.
• Network congestion (number of transactions) has a direct relationship with transaction cost.
• To transfer $1M of liquidity on the Solana chain, the average transaction cost is very low, so that in the last 30 days, it was equal to $1.4 at its maximum.
• With the increase in the price of the native token of the Solana chain (SOL), the transaction cost has also increased.
• The highest total transaction fee paid by a single wallet in the last 30 days was $8,700.

Observations:

• In the Algorand chain, the gas consumption for transactions is much lower compared to the Ethereum network, but it is almost twice as much compared to Solana.
• The maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was $0.00488.
• It seems that the network congestion (number of transactions) has an inverse relationship with the transaction cost.
• To transfer one million dollars of liquidity on the Algorand chain, the average transaction cost is low, so that in the last 30 days, it was equal to 59 dollars at its maximum.
• With the increase in the price of the native token of Algorand (Algo), the transaction cost has also increased.
• The highest total transaction fee paid by a wallet in the last 30 days was $3168.

Observations:

• In the Flow chain, the gas consumption for transactions is much lower than the Ethereum network, and its amount is also very low compared to Solana and Algorand.
• The maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was $0.00036.
• In the Flow network, it seems that network congestion (the number of transactions) has an inverse relationship with the transaction cost.
• To transfer one million dollars of liquidity on the Flow chain, the average transaction cost is low, so that in the last 30 days, it was equal to $24 at its maximum.
• The highest total transaction fee paid by a wallet in the last 30 days was $440.

Observations:

• In the Near chain, the gas consumption for transactions is much lower than in the Ethereum network, and it can be said that it behaves similarly to Solana.
• The maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was $0.00517.
• In the Near network, it seems that the network congestion (number of transactions) has a direct relationship with the transaction cost.
• To transfer one million dollars of liquidity on the Near chain, the average transaction cost is low, so that in the last 30 days, it was equal to 379 dollars at its maximum.
• The transaction fee is directly related to the price of the Near token.
• The highest total transaction fee paid by a wallet in the last 30 days was $28.7K.

Observations:

• In the Optimism network, gas consumption is paid for transactions with Ethereum bridged on this network, and according to the technology used in this network, the transaction cost is much lower than the Ethereum network, but compared to the chains mentioned above, It costs more.
• The maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was $0.47.
• In the Optimism network, it seems that network congestion (number of transactions) has a direct relationship with transaction cost.
• To transfer one million dollars of liquidity on the Optimism chain, the average transaction cost is low, so that in the last 30 days, it was equal to 2442 dollars at its maximum.
• The cost of transactions has no significant relationship with the price of the native token of this network (OP).
• The highest total transaction fee paid by a wallet in the last 30 days was $66.5K.

Observations:

• In the Osmosis network, the gas consumption for transactions is much lower than the Ethereum network and behaves similar to Solana and Near.
• The maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was $0.00459.
• It seems that the network congestion (number of transactions) has a direct relationship with the transaction cost, but this relationship has been reversed in recent days.
• For the transfer of one million dollars of assets on the Osmosis chain, the average transaction cost is low, so that in the last 30 days, at its maximum, it was equal to 3782 dollars.
• The cost of transactions is directly related to the price of the native token of this network (OSMO).
• The highest total transaction fee paid by a wallet in the last 30 days was $261.2.

Observations:

Polygon is one of the second layer chains developed in order to reduce the transaction cost of the Ethereum chain.

• In the Polygon network, the gas used for transactions is paid with the MATIC token, and its value is lower compared to Ethereum.
• The maximum average transaction cost in the last 30 days was $0.2.
• In the Polygon network, it seems that the network congestion (number of transactions) has no meaningful relationship with the transaction cost, and in general, no interpretation can be made.
• For the transfer of one million dollars of liquidity on the Osmosis chain, the average transaction cost is low, so that in the last 30 days, at its maximum, it was equal to $2,219. The cost of transactions has a direct relationship with the price of the native token of this network (Metic), but it seems that other factors are also influential. The highest total transaction fee paid by a wallet in the last 30 days was $48.97 thousand.

Summary & Conclusion

• If we separate the Ethereum chain and compare the rest of the chains, it can be seen that Optimism has the highest transaction cost among the chains, and although it has a lower transaction cost than Ethereum but it consumes more gas than other chains. Of course, having a strong network security like Ethereum covers this higher cost than other chains.
• Among the analyzed chains, it can be said that Flow, Solana and Algorand have the first to third place in terms of the lowest transaction cost, and Osmosis, Near, Optimism, and finally Ethereum are in the next places.
• Osmosis chain seems to have undergone an update in the last 30 days, as the average transaction cost has decreased sharply and its relationship with network congestion (number of transactions) has also reversed.
• In terms of liquidity transfer, it can be said that Solana is the best network for this because its transaction cost is almost negligible.

Any Question?

Thank you for being with me so far in this analysis. If you have any questions, you can ask through the following ways. I will be pleased to answer the questions.

Discord: mr_nobody73#9620

Twitter: Mr_Nobody73

**Twitter link for this dashboard: **

Ethereum