In the above and side charts, users of three networks were compared with each other in terms of time between transactions.

As can be seen, in all three networks, the number of transactions with an interval between transactions of less than 1 day is the highest compared to other transactions.

By looking at the chart on the right and comparing the users of the three networks with each other, it can be seen that the users who have transacted in the Ethereum network less than a day apart have a significant difference from the others; According to what was said above about the wallets of this network in terms of the high number of users with one transaction, this is completely logical. This is because in the method used to calculate the time difference, for each wallet, the smallest and largest block_timestamp were included, and for users who have only one transaction, the two values ​​are equal and the time difference is 0 and less than 1 day. For the other two networks, this is one of the reasons for the high number of users with a transaction interval of less than 1 day.

In the above charts, the status of network users in terms of the number of transactions is shown next to each other.

As can be seen, the number of individual wallets that have ==between 10 and 100 transactions== in the ==Flow and Solana networks== is more than other individual wallets; This is despite the fact that in the ==Ethereum network==, the number of separate wallets that ==have only 1 transaction== is the most.

Individual wallets that ==have only one transaction== are in second place in the ==Solana network== in terms of number, while ==wallets that have between 1 and 10 transactions== in the ==flow network== are in second place compared to other wallets in their network.

By comparing the wallets that ==have more than 100 transactions== in the Flow, Ethereum, and Solana networks, we will see that in all three networks, this number of wallets is the least compared to the others.

In the Solana network, 1.32% of the wallets ==have more than 100 transactions==, while in the Ethereum network, 0.73% of the wallets have more than 100 transactions. And about 0.35 percent of the flow network wallets have more than 100 transactions.

In the chart on the side, you can see a better comparison of the transaction status of different networks.

Flow vs Other L1s Pt (II)

How does Flow compare to other L1s in terms of user retention? Is a user who made a transaction previously likely to make another transaction a week or a month later? Compare and contrast this type of activity vs other L1s like Solana and Ethereum.

\n

Method:

With the help of the fact_transactions table related to the Flow, Ethereum, and Solana databases, user transactions and the time between them were examined.

Next, the number of transactions of users of each network was checked and compared. For this purpose, I grouped users and then counted the transactions of each user.

Finally, the three networks of Flow, Solana, and Ethereum were compared in terms of the number of separate active users on different days and also the number of transactions.

Flow is a proof of stake blockchain designed to be the foundation of Web3 and the open metaverse, supporting consumer-scale decentralized applications, NFTs, DeFi, DAOs, PFP projects, and more. Powered by Cadence, an original programming language built specifically for digital assets, Flow empowers developers to innovate and push the limits that will bring the next billion to Web3. Created by a team that has consistently delivered industry-leading consumer-scale experiences including CryptoKitties, NBA Top Shot, and NFL ALL DAY, Flow is an open, decentralized platform with a thriving ecosystem of creators from top brands, development studios, venture-backed startups, crypto leaders, and more.

\n

In the above charts, the transactions of the networks, as well as individual wallets, have been compared with each other.

As can be seen, the behavior of users in the Ethereum network has been relatively balanced and without noticeable changes.

Meanwhile, we saw high fluctuations in the number of transactions in the Flow and Solana networks.

Between April 30 and May 6, high fluctuations in the number of individual wallets active in the flow network can be observed.

Conclusion:

• In this dashboard, it was observed that flow network users who had between 10 and 100 transactions are much more than other users of this network. This behavior was also common among Solana network users, but compared to other transactions in this network, it was less than in the Flow network.

  Unlike these two networks, the number of users with 1 transaction was the highest in the Ethereum network.

• the users who have transacted in the Ethereum network less than a day apart have a significant difference from the others; According to what was said above about the wallets of this network in terms of the high number of users with one transaction, this is completely logical. This is because in the method used to calculate the time difference, for each wallet, the smallest and largest block_timestamp were included, and for users who have only one transaction, the two values ​​are equal and the time difference is 0 and less than 1 day. For the other two networks, this is one of the reasons for the high number of users with a transaction interval of less than 1 day.

• In terms of transactions number, the behavior of users in the Ethereum network has been relatively balanced and without noticeable changes.

  Meanwhile, we saw high fluctuations in the number of transactions in the Flow and Solana networks.

  Between April 30 and May 6, high fluctuations in the number of individual wallets active in the flow network can be observed.