Axelar Bridge

In previous bounties, we have tracked token flows using Satellite. Today, let's take that a step further and plot out user types and their behavior leveraging Axelar's bridge. How often are people using Satellite - one-time transfers into IBC or more consistent/steady streams? Does this vary based on wallet size? Does this vary based on the ecosystem they are bridging from/to?

What is Axelar?

Axelar consists of two layers: The network and the API above it. \n At Axelar’s core is a permissionless overlay network. It delivers Turing-complete cross-chain communication via proof-of-stake and permissionless protocols. In this way, it’s similar to Akamai and other CDNs that enabled the rise of YouTube, Zoom and a globally interconnected web. Axelar validators monitor gateways on the interconnected chains (smart contracts) and run a decentralized protocol to process cross-chain messages between them.

How Axelar works

Axelar is for Web3 what Stripe is for mobile and internet applications: it works on the back end, connecting various networks into one-click experiences for all users.Sitting on top of the network are APIs and protocols, an application-development layer that developers use to compose across any number of chains. Developers go cross-chain without new programming languages or the need to roll out or manage complicated infrastructure. They focus on building the functionality that differentiates their dApp. Once integrated, all new interconnected blockchains automatically become interoperable with the application, enabling limitless network effects.The first generation of cross-chain solutions were bridges, transferring wrapped assets between chains. Axelar enables developers to send any payload: a cross-chain message can call a function on another chain and integrate it into a one-click experience for any user, holding any asset. We call this General Message Passing.

Uniform architecture

Demand for cross-chain transactions has spawned ad-hoc bridges that weaken security and limit interoperability. Axelar uses permissionless protocols, the Cross-Chain Gateway Protocol (CGP, analogous to Border Gateway Protocol) and the Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CTP, analogous to File Transfer Protocol) to provide uniform security, translation and routing across any two connected chains.

about this dashboard

in this dashboard I found the

1- compare user number

2- compare transaction number

3- USD amount of the address

4- compare type of the bridge

5- bridge from/to

and in some case I found the different between IBC and consistent

in this part I found the different part of the consistent and IBC in the user number.

as you see in the first of the year IBC user number is too more than consistent and by the time every thing change and you see that at the end user number of the consistent increase and IBC user number decrease with low amount, but as you see the user number of the IBC is more than other.

so in this part we see that by the time user number of the consistent increase,

and user number of the IBC decrease by low amount,

as a total view user number of the IBC is more than consistent in all time.

and in 17 Sep user number of the consistent start to increase up to now.

so in this part I compare the user number and after this part I want to compare the transaction number.

in the previous part we see that by the time user number of the IBC decrease and user number of the consistent increase , but by the total user number of the IBC was more than consistent.

in this part we see that when user number of the IBC was more than consistent in the first of the year the transaction number of the IBC is too more than consistent in that part and by the time when we arrive to the end we saw that user number of the consistent increase. and again we see that transaction number of the consistent is more than IBC.

so in this part we see that like previous part by the increase of the user number transaction number increase and we see his action in consistent more than IBC.

so in the upper two chart I analyze the IBC and consistent transaction and user number lets analyze the USD amount in the next part.

in this part I want to see that user number have what amount in their wallet.

as you see I separate the amount for 6 part and the result is:

low than 1 $ is about 12.6 % of the total wallet
between 1-10 $ is about 18.9 % of the total wallet.
between 10-100 $ is about 29 % of the total wallet.
between 100-1000 $ is about 31 % of the total wallet.
between 1000-10000 $ is about 6.71 % of the total wallet.
and more than 10000 is just 1.6 % of the total wallet.

so we see that most of the user had between 10-1000 $ in their wallet, and just low than 1.6% of the wallet related to the whale.

NOTE : in this part I named the whale for who had more than 10000$ in there wallet.

after this part I want to analyze the bridge type.

in this part I want to analyze that each user had what number of the bridge.

in the IBC:

we see in this part that most of the user had low than one bridge or one bridge in their wallet (about 64.9%)

and about 38.5% of the wallet had between 1-10 bridge, and as you see just 2.49 % of the user had between 10-100 bridge in there wallet and just 0.11 % of the wallet had more than 100 bridge.

in the consistent part:

again we see the same thing but with the different percentage.

we see in this part that most of the user had low than one bridge or one bridge in their wallet (about 57.8 %)