Try Quests to earn cryptoEVM - 4. The “Flippening” Comparison
Observations
By default, this dashboard is set in the period from the beginning of 2023 to January 18, 2023, and the observations provided are in this period.
As can be seen, according to the three graphs above, in the default time frame, the number of blocks and transactions executed in the Optimism network was more than that of the Arbitrum network.
The number of active users in the Optimism network is more than the Arbitrum network. And the amount of fee paid in Optimism network is more and also, each user in Optimism network has done more number of transactions than Arbiterum network and in general the transactions of each block was 1 transaction in Optimism network and less than 1 transaction in Arbiterum network.
The fee paid per user in the Optimism network was higher than in the Arbitrum network, and the reason for this could be more transactions performed in this network.
INTRO
- What is the Optimism network and what is its purpose?
The Optimism network is a second layer solution, which was created to solve the scalability problems of the Ethereum network. Optimism in the word means optimism, and the Optimism network was created based on this approach. The Optimism network uses Optimisitic Rollup to increase scalability. In this solution, the Optimism network collects and executes transactions in its network and sends them in a compressed form to the Ethereum network, causing the scalability, speed of transactions and their fees to be significantly reduced.
In the optimistic approach that the Optimism network uses, all transactions that are validated by network validators are considered valid and processed. This process ensures that transactions are not validated separately and their processing time is greatly reduced. Also, each member of the network or validators has up to one week to check the set of transactions and if a fake transaction is found, inform the network and receive a reward.
- What is the second layer of Arbitrum?
By aggregating transactions and executing them off-chain, Arbitrum greatly lowers the cost of each transaction. However, data related to transactions (Data Availability) is recorded in layer one, so for any external observer, the results are reproducible and can be ensured.
The purpose of creating the Arbitrom network (and other rollups) is to solve the scalability problem of the Ethereum network. Blockchains seek to establish three features: scalability, decentralization and security. The conclusion we reached in the world of digital currencies over the past decade was that it is very difficult (if not impossible) to establish all three of these features in one network. Therefore, each network seeks to solve one of the missing sides in its own way; The base layer of the Ethereum network, which has two features of security and decentralization, is left to solve the problem through roll-ups. The increasing demand for Ethereum network block space has made the network more expensive (gas cost) in recent years. Arbitrum and other layer 2 utilities can greatly reduce the pressure by increasing the capacity of this network.
Purpose
The purpose of creating this dashboard is to compare some data related to Arbitrum and Optimism network. The readers of this dashboard can compare some of the data related to these two networks by placing different time frames and in different time forms and become familiar with these data. Data such as the number of transactions of each network and fees paid by active users of these two networks. Users of this dashboard can also find out data such as correct and incorrect transactions of these two networks at certain times by setting different time periods. The users of this dashboard can be informed about these two networks in different periods of time in terms of the number of new users and the speed of transactions, as well as the interaction of these two networks with common blockchain programs such as Dex, DeFi, and Dapp,etc…
The users of this dashboard will also be able to know about the transmissions of layer 1 (Ethereum) to these two networks, as well as to know about swap transactions and swap users of these two networks in different time periods.
METHOD
This dashboard looks at two layer 2 networks from several different perspectives. In this dashboard, you can look at these two networks from several angles by setting different time intervals and different time frames.
The data reviewed in this dashboard are:
- Executed transactions
- Fees paid
- Active users
- Correct and incorrect transactions
- Transaction execution speed
- New users
- The interaction of these two networks with blockchain programs
- Bridging from Ethereum layer 1 to these two networks
- Transactions executed in swap services
To call the data related to the transactions from the core_fact_transaction table, the database of two networks has been used, and to call the interaction part, it has been used from the tables related to the label and placing the blockchain projects in terms of the label type and label name as transaction receivers in the Dim_label table. To call the data related to the bridge, the ez_token_transfer table has been used, which has been applied by placing the address of the contracts related to the Optimism bridge and the Arbitrum bridge as the recipient of the transaction. And to call the transactions and users of the swap service, the fact_event_logs table has been used, and the swap event name has been used in this table.
In this dashboard, by placing time parameters, the user has been given the opportunity to obtain the desired data by placing different time periods and in different time frames.
Observations
The graphs on the left show the success of transactions executed in 2 networks, as well as the percentage of success and failure of transactions in terms of the total number of transactions made and the number of users who made these transactions, as well as the number of transactions completed per user. They show in the set time period in this dashboard.
As we can see, more than 4.5% of the transactions made in Arbitrum and more than 3.8% of transactions in Optimism have failed. In Optimism network, more than 17% of users have failed transactions, and as we can see, the number of failed transactions per user in Arbitrum network is more than successful transactions.
part I - Executed Transactions
Total and Average Stats
By Time Frame Stats
Observations
The graphs above compare the 2 networks in the daily time frame in terms of the number of transactions performed, the number of active users, fees paid, and blocks executed. As we can see, in this period of time, the Optimism network has shown a relative superiority over the Arbitrum network.
Successful transactions
By Time Frame Tx Status Stats
Observations
The graphs above show successful and unsuccessful transactions on a daily basis, as well as the percentage of successful and unsuccessful transactions on a daily basis.
In the graphs above, we can see the success of daily transactions in terms of the number of transactions and the number of users and transactions performed per user.
As we can see, the number of failed transactions per user in the Arbitrom network is very high.
January 12 was not a good day for both networks in terms of the number of successful transactions.
Transaction speed
Observations
The graphs above show the number of transactions performed in each network in hours, minutes and seconds, and this presentation is based on daily time. As we can see, in the default time frame, the Optimism network has performed more successfully than the Arbitrum network in terms of the number of transactions executed per different times.
New Users
Observations
The graphs above show the number of new users who have joined the Optimism and Arbitrum networks in daily and cumulative status during the default time period. As we can see, the number of new users in the Optimism network was more than the Arbitrum network during this time period.
Part II - The Interaction With Blockchain programs
Observations
The graphs above show the interaction of these two networks with the programs launched on them, in terms of the number of transactions and the number of users. Also, the share of each program in the default time period for each network and the names of the platforms that have the most users and the most transactions are shown.
As we can see, the most activity of the users of both networks is in the layer 2 section, and after that, Dex and Defi platforms have the most users and transactions. We can see that the Hop platform, which is a bridge platform from layer 1 to 2, shows the most activity, followed by the Uniswap and SushiSwap dexes
Part III - Bridging
Observations
The above diagrams are related to the main activity of these two networks, i.e. bridging. These graphs show the volume of bridge (USD) and the number of bridgers and the number of bridge times based on daily and overall time. They also show the top 10 assets that were transferred from the Ethereum network to these two networks during the default period.
As we can see, in terms of transferring assets to layer 2, the Arbitrum network has performed better than the Optimism network in this specific period of time. The largest amount of assets transferred in this period of time in the Optimism and Arbitrum network were stablecoins.
Part IV - Swap Activity
Observations
Swap assets is one of the most important things that these two layer 2 networks do. The graphs above compare these two networks in terms of the number of swap transactions and the number of swappers. As we can see, the Optimism network has performed better than the Arbitrum network in terms of the number of swap transactions and the number of swappers.