Introduction

Optimism as a Layer2 scaling solution for Ethereum L1 is growing everyday from different aspects, from TVL to Number of users, native apps and bridges. This is one of the most important criteria to assess a chain success, To be interoperatable and composable. After mainnet launch of optimism native bridge, various different bridges emerged connecting optimism to other chains and most importantly providing L1 to optimism routes. Hop protocol is one of the first apps which provided this feature with simple UI and high security.

Methodology

We are going to compare Optimism native bridge stats with Hop protocol bridge from L1 to Optimism. We are essentially looking to see if there is any similarity, difference of trait that stands out and distinct their users in this simple criteria. We are using Flipsidecrypto database to render this analysis, and right now it's not possible to query L2 to L1 stats easily because of its limitations. So we narrow down our analysis to amount of ETH deposited to Optimism by each bridge, the budget distribution of different tiers, and distribution of active users for each bridge.

Data & Analysis

Optimism team was constantly working these past 6 month to progressively render a better product and I'm sure these changes had effect on its userbase. I remember fees were much higher when I first attempted to use its native bridge, but this problem wasn't present few weeks later. Now lets Start with Amount of ETH deposited from L1 Ethereum to Optimistic Ethereum by Native bridge and Hop bridge

As you can see both bridges are following almost identical charts, But Amounts are different. Native bridge stands a higher value in most of the weeks, but there are cases where Hop passes Optimism bridge successfully or comes very close. This is more obvious in comparative chart.

As I Though this wouldn't be enough to distinguish their users, I implemented some other metrics. I divided Users by the amount they bridged over to Optimism:

• Low budgets are people with amounts <= 0.1 ETH
• Medium Budgets are people with > 0.1 and <= 1 ETH
• High Budgets are > 1 ETH And counted number of users for each tier. This is how it looks like:

Some Insights:

• almost 50 percent of native and Hop users bridged over 1 Eth.
• low budget users are more willing to use native bridge and constitute more than 35 percent of its interactions. They probably avoiding extra fees that come with Hop.

Finally I assumed users with more than 5 time bridge as an active user to see if there is any different in between.

Results shows that native bridge users are more comfortable with repeating their interaction and people who use bridge constantly are more willing to do it on Optimism native bridge