Introduction

• In this analysis, You will read about Arbitrum name service called Arb.id. The concept of Chain name services may be familiar to you. The most popular name service is ENS, which was launched on the Ethereum chain 2-3 years ago. As a result of ENS, each chain decided to create a name service for its users. Not all of them were successful like ENS.

  Recently, Arb.id launched and permitted users to make auctions for up to 5 domains if they were whitelisted. After the Auction, the highest bidders won the domain.

  As part of this analysis, I examined user activity during Arbitrum name service auctions.

Analyzed by Hess - Reading Time Almost 8 Min.

Bid Activities on Arb.id

• Approximately 7.8K unique wallets participated in the Arb.id auction, with 30K bids. Again, I should emphasize that only whitelisted users were eligible to participate in the first phase.

  February 13 through February 18 was the date of the auction. Most users seem to wait until the last day of the auction. I think it's reasonable. It is cheaper for them to wait for other users to place their bids and place the final one after they do so.

• On the last day of the auction, 4.3K unique wallets participated, and 19.9K bids were placed. In the last day, about 60% of all bids were placed.

Winners Vs. Losers

How did auction work? Each domain was auctioned off based on the highest bid. If a user loses an auction, their ETH is refunded. I examined winners and losers of the Arb.id auction in this part.

During the last day, the competition became more intense. In total, 19.9K bids were placed, but 5.5K were refunded. In the final day of the auction, users bid 1 million dollars, but half of that was refunded.

In total, winners spent 879K US dollars on Arbitrum name service, and losers refunded 584K US dollars. The auction was won by 67.3% of users and lost by 32.3%.

Bidders Breakdown

• The large group made two bids of users during the Arbitrum name service auction. There were about 2.3K unique wallets that made two bids. After that, only one bid was made by the second large group of users. There is a lot of ignorance about the future of Arbitrum name service among users. There could be a time when arb.id becomes unsuccessful, and all money disappears. It seems that users prefer to take only one domain name.
• In terms of money spent in bidding, the large group spent between 10 and 25 US dollars. A second large group of users (2.1K unique wallets) spent between 5 and 10 dollars. For 5-6 characters, the minimum bid was $5. As of now, it appears that most users have registered domains with 5-6 characters. Each 224 unique wallets spent over 1K USD.

Who are the Bidders?

• Most of the bidders were Arbitrum old users. Overall, 92.4% of total users were Arbitrum old users and only 7.8% of total bidders were new to the Arbitrum ecosystem.
• Based on the transaction event name, The most popular activities for Arb.id’s users was transfer and swap. It seems most of the bidders were active users on Arbitrum ecosystem. Because most of the activities were used by these users. I can see Mint, Deposit and Add Liquidity activities were popular too

ENS Vs. ARB.id

Although ENS Domain didn't have an auction, I compared Arbitrum name service bids with ENS sales between February 13 and February 18.

• As of February 13, ENS sales averaged 100-200 domains per day, whereas Arb.id sales averaged 500-1.9K. According to the daily share of sales, 97% of sales were related to Arbs. There are more sales of Arbitrum names than ENS these days, as they are trending in these days.

THANK YOU FOR READING!

ALL CODES AND CONTENTS WERE WRITTEN BY HESS.

:bird: Twitter: 0xhess

:t-rex: Discord: hess#0890

:calendar: Analyze Date: 2023/FEB/19

What is Arb.id?

• The Arbitrum Name Service (Arb.id) is a distributed, open, and extensible naming system based on the Arbitrum blockchain. Arb.id's job is to map human-readable names like 'hess.arb' to machine-readable identifiers such as Arbitrum addresses, other cryptocurrency addresses, content hashes, and metadata.

What is Arbitrum?

• A Layer 2 scaling chain based on Ethereum (ETH-USD) that uses optimistic rollups is Arbitrum (ETH-USD). Because of the low TPS drawback of Ethereum, secondary layer blockchains like Arbitrum and Polygon (MATIC-USD) are necessary to scale the Ethereum network truly. Arbitrum is able to increase transactions per second by batching transactions together and considerably reducing the user fees associated with conducting activity on the Ethereum blockchain.
• Source:

Method

• Since all bids were based on ETH tokens and all activities could be found in arbitrum.core.ez_eth_transfers, I used that table to find Bids and Activities. According to the Arb.id document, each bid was sent to 0x2cc5c04546fcfef63ac751ae71ad1e5647c6e447. As a result, I entered the address of Arb.id in the ETH_to_address and origin_to_address columns. Now, I have all auctions data.

Full Analysis

\

Bids Volume

• There were 7.8K unique wallets that made 874 ETH bids worth 1.4M US dollars. This is a good start for Arb.id. But 874 ETH is the total bid, and those who didn't win could get their ETH back.

  As with the number of bids and users, the highest amount of bids was placed on the last day of the auction. A total of 624 ETH were spent in the final auction day, which is worth 1M US dollars.

  Bids averaged 48 US dollars. In the auction, the highest bid amount was 42K US dollars, and the lowest was 0.3 US dollars. The minimum amount of bid was different depending on the number of name service characters.

• ARBs had similar daily sales volume to ENS until February 17, despite the total number of sales being lower. The volume of ENS was higher on some days. More volume was generated only on the last day of ARB's auction.

  There is a noticeable difference between the average price of ENS domains and Arbs domains. Arbitrum name service costs 48 US dollars on average, and ENS domains average 325 dollars.

• By using Ethereum tags names, I was able to identify who are the bidders. The majority of users were Arbitrum active users. They were also active on Avalanche, BSC, Ethereum, Optimism, and Polygon chains. Across all chains, bidders appear to be pretty active. A half of them were popular for sales of Opensea and X2Y2 NFTs.

Conclusion

• The Arbitrum name service (Arb.id) had 7.8K unique users and 30K bids.
• In bidding, bidders spent 874 ETH worth 1.4 million dollars.
• Average bids were 48 US dollars, and the highest bid was 42K US dollars.
• Domains were won by 67.7% of total bidders, while others were lost.
• The large group made two bids of users, and they spent between 10 and 25 dollars.
• A total of 92.4% of bidders were old users of the Arbitrum ecosystem. Transfers and swaps were the most popular activities on Arbitrum.
• The bidders are known active users on a variety of chains, such as Optimism, Ethereum, Polygon, and BSC.
• There is an average cost of 325 US dollars for ENS domains and 48 US dollars for Arbs domains.
• ARBS accounted for 87% of total sales, while ENS accounted for 13%.