Bounty Question: Compare and contrast the NFT market and ecosystem across at least three different chains (you can do more if you wish, but there must be at least three included.) Explain how the various chains differ in terms of metrics such as:

• Total Sales
• Total Unique Buyers
• Total Volume
• Average Sales/Day
• Average Buyers/Day
• Average Sales Price/Day

What is NFT?

NFT means non-fungible tokens (NFTs), which are generally created using the same type of programming used for cryptocurrencies. In simple terms these cryptographic assets are based on blockchain technology. They cannot be exchanged or traded equivalently like other cryptographic assets.

Like Bitcoin or Ethereum. The term NFT clearly represents it can neither be replaced nor interchanged because it has unique properties. Physical currency and cryptocurrency are fungible, which means that they can be traded or exchanged for one another.

Methodology

In this dashboard, the following methods are used to compare NFT sales in 4 networks:

1️⃣➡ The following 4 tables were used as basic tables to compare the sales of NFTs on these 4 networks:

• flow.core.ez_nft_sales

• solana.core.fact_nft_sales

• optimism.core.ez_nft_sales

• flipside_prod_db.algorand.nft_sales

  \

2️⃣➡ Considering that the flow.core.ez_nft_sales table supports fewer days than other nft_sales tables, the results of all networks were calculated based on the number of days in the flow.core.ez_nft_sales table (151 days) to match the results It is possible to make side-by-side comparisons between networks.

3️⃣➡ Optimizm tables had sales prices in USD, but the sales prices in Algorand and Solana tables were the native tokens of these networks. Therefore, to obtain the amount of USD per sale for these two networks, two different solutions were used. In the case of the Flow network, some of the sales have been with the native Flow token and the rest with tokens worth $1.

4️⃣➡ For the Solana network, the SOL wrapped token is priced in the ethereum.core.fact_hourly_token_prices table. Considering that the price of tokens in this table is available hourly, the NFT sales transactions carried out were separated by hour and day, and the price of the token at the same hour and day was used to multiply by the sale amount, the USD amount of each get a sale.

5️⃣➡ For the Algorand network, the flipside_prod_db.algorand.prices_swap table was used, and the price of the ALGO token was obtained in the same way as I explained for Solana, at the same time as the sale transaction of NFTs, the amount of each sale in USD.

6️⃣➡ For the Flow network, transactions were divided into two parts. Those that were done with the native Flo token and those that were done with $1 tokens. In the first part, the amount of each sale according to the day, hour and minute was multiplied by the price of the Flow token in the same minute to get the amount of USD for each sale. Then these data were combined with the data obtained from other sales and the necessary results and analyzes were performed on them.

7️⃣➡ In the following, these 4 networks were evaluated from several dimensions. First, a comprehensive review of all 4 networks was carried out. In this review, the following parameters were evaluated:

• Number of sales

• Number of buyers

• Amount of sales (in USD)

• Average sales per buyer

• Average amount per sale

• Average amount paid per buyer

• Average number of sales per day

• Average number of buyers per day

• Average amount of purchases per day

• The number of marketplaces in each network

  \

8️⃣➡ Then a daily review of these 4 networks was carried out. In this review, the first 6 parameters above were checked daily for all 4 networks.

9️⃣ ➡ Next, for all 4 networks, the following three parameters along with their overall average (in this 151-day period) were drawn separately so that a broader view of what happened can be seen:

• Number of sales

• Number of buyers

• Amount of sales (in USD)

  \

🔟 ➡ At the end, the top ten buyers of each network (in terms of the number of purchases) were obtained. The parameters are the amount of USD paid by each and the number of NFTs (for the Solana and Elgorand networks) and the number of unique collections from which each user has purchased at least one NFT (for the Flow and Optimism networks).

Considering that the question asks us to compare the sale of NFT in the Flow network with the sale of NFT in several other networks, I decided to put the Flow network as the main target in my analysis and compared it with three other networks. .

📌 Let's check these charts together...

▶ Number of Sales: In terms of the number of sales, Flow network is in the second place. About 4.5 million sales less than the Solana network and about 3.3 million more than the Algorand network have resulted in this ranking. With more than 3.5 million sales, the Flow network accounts for 26% of the total sales of these 4 networks.

▶ Number of Buyers: In terms of the number of buyers, Flow network is still in the second place. The share of this network from the total number of buyers of these 4 networks is slightly more than 16%. (with about 87k unique buyers). This shows that Flow network users make more purchases.

▶ Amount of Sales: Here again, the share of Flow has decreased compared to the previous two parameters. (8.2% with $79 m in sales). This shows that although buyers on the Flow network are buying more NFTs on average, the price of these NFTs is lower compared to Solana, causing a large share of the Flow network to be lost.

▶ In checking the daily averages, because all networks are divided by an equal number, the results are smaller, but their ratio has not changed. But other average parameters show interesting points.

▶ Average Sales per Buyer: How many purchases (or sales) each buyer made on average in each network neutralizes the weight of the numbers. In this parameter, Flow has the first rank. It was also mentioned above that the change of shares is such that this happens for sure. Each buyer on Flow network has made an average of more than 40 purchases in these 151 days. (about 16 more purchases than buyers in the Algorand network, which is about 1.66 times)

▶ Average Amount of Sales per Buyer: Each buyer in the Flow network had an average purchase of about $915. This is about 43.5% of the average purchase of each buyer in the ==Solana== network and 152% of the average purchase of each buyer in the ==Algorand== network.

▶ Average Amount per Sale: In this parameter, Flow network has the last rank. It was also mentioned above that the prices seem to be lower on the Flow network than on ==Solana==, where it was found that in general, each sale had a lower USD value (on average) than all the other 3 networks.

🔍 Top Buyers

🔍 Networks in Three Parameters

🔍 Daily Review

🔍 Comerhensive Review

📌 Let's check these charts together...

▶ In examining the number of daily sales of the Flow network, a valley-like graph can be seen. The point at the bottom of the valley has been touched and crossed for a long time, and the Flow network is going through an upward trend in the number of sales these days. This upward trend exists only in the Solana network (which, of course, has been increasing with an almost constant slope during this 5-month period). Algorand network has experienced a stable trend and Optimism network has also experienced a terrible drop, and the sales situation of this network these days is definitely not comparable to its situation in the previous months.

▶ Looking at the number of unique daily buyers on the Flow network, you can still see a valley-like graph, but the width of this valley has become much wider and its upward trend in recent days is very small. The Solana network is not experiencing the same trend with sales numbers here. The number of daily buyers of this network had reached the lowest level in this 5-month period at the end of August, but the number of buyers has increased again and it has been somewhat explosive.

▶ In terms of USD volume of daily sales, Flow network has the same trend as the previous two parameters. But here the upward course after touching the bottom of the valley has been very brilliant. From early July to August, there has been a multi-fold (sometimes more than 5-fold) increase in the amount of USD sales on the Flow network. The Solana network has also experienced a decrease of more than 90% compared to the beginning of this 5-month period, and despite a significant increase in the past days from September, it still has a long way to go before reaching the bright days of April and May.

▶ The average number of purchases per buyer in the Flow network has decreased. While a brilliant upward trend can be seen in the Solana network (at least 300% growth in these five months).

▶ Algorand and Optimism networks have also repeated more or less the same stable and downward trends in most parameters.

📌 Let's check these charts together...

▶ In the graphs above, the daily status of each of these networks is displayed compared to the average value of each parameter in these 151 days. In these charts, you can see all three parameters of each network at a glance and compare their trends. It can be seen that with a good approximation, the trends in the triple diagrams of each network are similar.

📋 Conclusion

📌 The Solana network is the best network in the field of NFT sales by a significant difference in most parameters, which is not an unexpected result considering its history and extent.

📌 The Flow network has achieved a high number of sales with a lower buyer ratio, but the low price of NFTs in this network compared to the other three networks, has not allowed it to gain a significant rank in terms of the volume of USD sales.

📌 The Algorand network has had a neutral trend in most parameters in this 5-month period, and it seems that if nothing happens, this trend will continue.

📌 The Optimism Network is not having good days in the field of NFT sales after the bright days in April and May, and the trends are not such as to promise a possible positive change in the near future.

😎 | Thank you for reading my dashboard and I hope you enjoyed it…

📌 Let's check these charts together...

▶ The top buyer on the Flow network (0x9b5c09949ff1b4b2) bought only one NFT collection. He has bought 18,533 NFTs so far, paying an average of $2.19 per NFT, for a total of over $40.5k. This figure is only 18% of what the second buyer (0xed8707e2ae5bba5a) paid to buy 15.86k NFT from 5 collections. His average payout per NFT was around $14.29.

▶ The top buyer on the Solana network (7Rb5BKMC85HamvoEHvA4AR8kgpVubUjq679KcCosmrUs) bought over 13.4k NFTs worth over $ 2.74k, which is less than two percent of what the second buyer (Dy2SPDhgYJqkc1rGsKb2xTW6GyUZ7b2t66kXYioZ4NhL) paid for his 10.27k NFTs. The top buyer paid about $0.21 per NFT and the second place paid $13.8 per NFT. The third party (36PN7ECf3xzS7Hi8XUUcD47Fw9uLEq5iLrEJcVaaoPtd) paid an average of $141 per NFT.

▶ The top buyer on Algorand network (MULILZCPNVCE3DZHTIWY4B2SDY2H3U2QN6KWZFFSS6JSFU6FWZFSXO3BBM) bought 2.18k NFT. $16.3k spent to buy this NFTs. An average of $35.5 per NFT. This average for second buyer NFTs (5TOOCJSAZBPBV4LFH26JBJYPJXGQ4XCYAT44Z6ETZT6DHQIEIBTYBYW4CM) is around $18.

▶ The top buyer on the Optimism network (0x00ffbfd8d0deaaff8812b623aa0dee493f3f7cbb) has bought 1114 NFTs from 23 different collections. An average of $157 per collection and $3.23 per NFT. The second buyer (0xbacc037c8d60d10cc5ed660b073603056e0afbf4) paid $2.15k to buy 988 NFTs from 7 collections. He paid an average of $308 per collection and $2.18 per NFT.