There is a saying that has been circulating in the public chain circuit – “The period before the official landing of ETH 2.0 is the last window for all new generation public chains.
Although the definite word of this sentence is the landing of ETH 2.0, what it actually wants to say is whether Ether can break through the shackles of performance and achieve expansion. With the explosive growth of the Polygon ecosystem and the launch of Arbitrum, the popularity of Layer2 is rising rapidly, and more and more users are gradually realizing that the era of Layer2 is really coming. is coming.
So, as the Layer2 era is approaching, is the window for the new generation of public chains closed? In order to further explore whether a certain trend shift has occurred, we will visually compare the development status of Layer2 project ecology and other public chain ecologies through data in the following.
Data Comparison: Layer2 vs External Public Chains
As of this writing, there is only Polygon (Arbitrum is not yet fully open to users) that has formed a certain scale in the Layer2 in-race ecosystem. Although there is some controversy in the community about whether the sidechain scaling solution currently adopted by Polygon belongs to Layer 2, considering that Polygon has already provided (Plasma) and is exploring more scaling technology directions (Rollup), it is obviously more unreasonable to kick it out of the Layer2 track, so in the following, we will still consider Polygon as a representative project of the Layer2 track and compare it with some of the most representative public chains.
At present, exchange public chains such as BSC and new generation high-performance public chains such as Solana and Fantom have accumulated a certain ecological scale, so we will take these three projects as representatives and compare them with Polygon from multiple data dimensions.
Before the comparison, we need to state one point first: compared with Ether Layer1, both Layer2 and external public chains are still in the early stage, and the number of samples (projects) available for comparison is small, and the difference of development stage of each project also has a great impact on the specific data situation. Therefore, the results presented in the comparison are only the individual trend differences of the sample, and do not fully represent the trend differences of the whole track. This paper pulls out these projects, not to draw an arbitrary conclusion, but just to find out whether there are some trend signs in the mixed market environment through this way.
Comparison Dimension 1: Volatility of Volume of Locked Positions (TVL)
However, after the 519 black swan event, the crypto market has suffered a serious setback and almost all the ecosystem’s TVLs have dropped in varying degrees, so it is not realistic to look at the growth trend. Therefore, the first dimension we chose to compare will be the TVL volatility of different ecosystems, specifically, how much a particular ecosystem’s current TVL data has declined from its historical highs.
Let’s take a look at Polygon first. Considering that there will be detailed differences between different data aggregation platforms, we will use data from DeBank for Polygon, BSC, and Fantom when selecting data sources.
While almost all of the major ecological TVLs fell due to the 519 Black Swan, a few of the stronger ecologies were not affected much by the event, and Polygon was one of the lucky few.
The data shows that Polygon’s TVL growth trend has been almost completely undisturbed by the market downturn, with TVL peaking at $7.08 billion on June 3 and currently (June 10) at $6.76 billion, a decline of just 4.5%.
Since Solana is not yet included in DeBank, Defi Llama was chosen as the data source for the Solana ecosystem.
The above chart clearly shows that the fluctuation trend of Solana’s TVL data contrasts with Polygon’s, and the black swan event of 519 obviously has a greater impact on the overall lock-up level of the ecosystem.
Solana’s current (June 10) TVL figure of $881 million represents a 45.6% decline from its all-time high of $1.62 billion on May 16, according to the data.
Looking only at TVL trends after mid-May, BSC’s position is closer to Solana’s.
The data shows that BSC’s TVL peaked at $34.81 billion on May 9, and the current (June 10) TVL is $15.42 billion, a decline of 55.7%.
It is worth mentioning that the DeFi project on the BSC chain seems to have been targeted by a hacker group recently and is experiencing frequent attacks, which will obviously have a significant negative impact on the TVL data of the ecosystem. Currently, the BSC community has taken some targeted measures, including setting up a security alliance, planning a community white hat bounty program, establishing a SAFU fund or insurance agreement, etc. It is expected that with the gradual implementation of such measures, the ecological sentiment will be somewhat warmed up.
Compared with the previous ecologies, Fantom is a bit more early, but recently the discussion about Fantom within the community has increased significantly, so we decided to pick it as a major emerging public chain ecology.
From the trend point of view, the inflection point of Fantom’s TVL growth trend happened to be May 19, which is directly hit by the 519 event. According to the data, Fantom’s TVL history peaked at $676 million on May 18, and the current TVL data (June 10) is $332 million, a decline of 50.9%.
Comparing the TVL volatility dimension, it is obvious that the representatives of Layer2 track are more solid – Polygon shows a completely different trend from the other three major public chains, not only has it not been hit too much by the 519 event, but also maintains the trend of net capital inflow, continuing its strong performance in recent months.
Contrast Dimension 2: Performance of Head DeFi Projects
To determine whether an ecosystem is dynamic enough, the performance of leading DeFi projects must not be ignored.
Currently, both Polygon and the three public chains have initially formed their own DeFi landscape, and the position of the leading projects is becoming more and more solid, and their data performance is more stable compared to other projects in the ecosystem. Next, we’ll focus on the top DeFi projects in each ecosystem to see how their data performance differs.
With the explosion of the ecosystem in recent months, many well-known projects in the ethereum such as Aave, Curve, Sushiswap, 1inch, Opensea, Zapper, etc. have deployed their own versions of Polygon, but if we were to pick an absolute leader among these projects, Aave would be the best.
Unlike the other three ecologies, Aave is the only lending project among the four ecological leaders to be mentioned, so it is necessary to clarify the logic of its statistics. This is not a statistical error, but the data on the official website is the total amount of user deposits, while DeBank’s statistics is the balance after subtracting the total deposits from the total borrowings, so for the principle of unifying the data sources as much as possible, DeBank’s data is used here.
In terms of trend, similar to Polygon’s overall situation, Aave’s version of this chain also basically maintains a positive trend of capital inflow. The data shows that Aave currently has a total locked position of $3.56 billion, accounting for more than half of the TVL on the entire Polygon chain, with 25025 total users, 1003 24-hour users, and 142,581 24-hour contract interactions.
The leader of the Solana ecosystem, DeFi, is not hard to guess – Raydium. Raydium’s current lock-up is $515 million, which also represents more than half of the entire Solana ecosystem TVL, but is nearly decimated from its all-time high of $960 million on May 3.
In addition, Solana Daily also gave some specific data on Raydium yesterday.
Solana Daily’s chart also clearly shows how Raydium compares to other eco-head DEXs, including PancakeSwap.
The leading DeFi in the BSC ecosystem is undoubtedly the aforementioned PancakeSwap.
In terms of data details of PancakeSwap, there are some differences between the data provided by DeBank and the data given by Solana Daily in the graph, but considering that the time periods of the two statistics do not coincide, DeBank’s data is preferred.
The trend shows that since mid-May, there has been some decline in lock volume and trade volume within the PancakeSwap app. The data shows that PancakeSwap currently has a total lock volume of $7.78 billion, a 24-hour period, a transaction volume of $529 million, 950,000 transactions, 250,000 users, and 3.19 million contract interactions.
The leading DeFi project within the Fantom ecosystem, SpookySwap, may not be as well known, but like Raydium and PancakeSwap, it is also an AMM-based DEX.
It is worth mentioning that SpookySwap has a clear advantage over Sushiswap, which is already integrated into the Fantom ecosystem, in terms of data performance, which is to some extent a proof of SpookySwap’s strength.
In terms of trends, SpookySwap’s overall trend curve in terms of lock volume and trading volume is closer to that of PancakeSwap. The data shows that SpookySwap currently has a total lock volume of $2.06 billion, $7.27 million in transactions, 31,800 transactions, 1,525 users, and 175,000 contract interactions in 24 hours.
From the data performance of the leading DeFi of each ecology, PancakeSwap, as the oldest DEX in the largest ecological BSC outside of Ether, still has significantly better data performance than the other three projects for the time being.
Although Aave’s Polygon version has won a good amount of locked positions in a relatively short period of time, there is still a big difference in the direction of user activity compared to PancakeSwap, which is based on the main battlefield (BSC). In addition, while the Polygon version of Aave has seen significantly better growth in lock volume on the trend curve than PancakeSwap, which has seen some decline, the MATIC token liquidity incentive provided by Polygon for Aave will enter decay on June 14, which will be a major variable in whether the protocol can maintain its current level of data going forward. This will be a major variable in the future as to whether the protocol can maintain its current level of data.
Therefore, the public-chain track is currently slightly better represented in this dimension.
Comparison Dimension 3: On-chain Activity Trends
Looking beyond the application level, we can continue to observe the changes in the number of unique addresses on the chain, the number of daily transactions and other indicators, which can also roughly assess the recent development momentum of a certain ecosystem.
Similar to the previous section, the development team of Etherscan, the head browser of Etherscan, has now provided a unified standard browser service for Polygon, BSC and Fantom, so here we will choose Etherscan (the name of the network may change accordingly) as the first data source.
Looking at Polygon first, we will look at two specific metrics: the number of unique addresses and the number of daily transactions, over the last two months (April 9 – June 9).
PolygonScan charts show that the number of unique addresses on the Polygon network has basically maintained its growth trend, but after May 21, the growth rate of this indicator has slowed down to a certain extent, until after June 7, the growth rate again to pick up. April 9, the number of unique addresses on the Polygon network was 227265, June 9 data was 3319869, an increase of 1360.8%. On June 9, the number of unique addresses on the Polygon network was 227,265, compared to 33,198,609 on June 9, an increase of 1,360.8%.
The data curve for the number of daily transactions maintains almost the same slope, specifically, the number of daily transactions on the Polygon network was 246,909 on April 9 and 5966,384 on June 9, an overall increase of 2316.4% over the interval; in addition, the high point of the interval was 7365,885 on June 5. In addition, the high point of the range is 7365885 on June 5, and the decrease of June 9 data from the high point of the range is about 18.99%.
The last two months have clearly not been an explosive period for BSC.
The BSCScan chart clearly shows that after the explosion in February and March, the number of independent addresses of the BSC network has entered a stable growth phase, with the number of independent addresses of the BSC network being 64202561 on April 9 and 76998164 on June 9, an interval increase of 19.93%.
In terms of the number of daily transactions, BSC shows a completely different curve than Polygon. Specifically, on April 9, the number of daily transactions on the BSC network was 46,263,336, and on June 9, it was 44,044,475, with an overall negative growth rate of 4.8%; in addition, the high point of the range was 1,128,181 on May 14, and the decline from the high point of the range on June 9 was approximately The rate of decrease from the high point of the range was 60.95% on June 9.
Unlike Polygon and BSC, Fantom’s growth trend in the number of unique addresses has been relatively stable overall, and although there have been some short term stepwise fluctuations, they have not lasted long.
FTMScan data shows that the number of unique addresses on the Fantom network was 48,330 on April 9 and 127,801 on June 9, an increase of 164.4 percent over the interval.
In terms of the number of daily transactions, the daily number of transactions on the Fantom network was 12,278 on April 9, and 261,804 on June 9, representing an overall increase of 2032.3%; in addition, the high point of the range was 829,036 on May 29, and the decrease from the high point of the range on June 9 was about The decline in the June 9 data from the range high was about 68.4%.
Overall, Polygon, as a representative of the Layer2 track, performs significantly better than BSC and Fantom, the two major public chain tracks, in terms of the trend of on-chain activity.
However, objectively speaking, the growth status of on-chain data is largely affected by the stage of ecological development, and BSC, as a public chain project with a well-established ecosystem, has already experienced a round of rapid outbreak, so it is not fair to compare the current stable growth stage with the early outbreak stage of other emerging ecologies. However, even at the same early stage, Polygon’s data still outperforms Fantom’s. With a similar overall increase in the number of daily transactions, the former has a much faster growth rate in the number of unique addresses than the latter, so if we had to pick a winner in this dimension, we would still prefer Layer2.
Is the window of public chains closed?
In the above article, we have tried to make a data comparison between Layer2 and some representative projects in the public chain track through three sub-dimensions. Before we conclude, we would like to emphasize once again that the results presented in the comparison are only the individual trend differences of the sample, and do not fully represent the trend differences of the whole track. From these dimensions alone, in addition to the stage differences in ecological development, which can bring about very different trends in on-chain data, TVL fluctuations are largely influenced by the strength of the rebound of ecological native tokens (e.g. MATIC), and the performance of head DeFi projects can also vary depending on the length of the project and incentives.
However, even through this “peek-a-boo” attempt, we can generally capture the growing Layer2 wave represented by Polygon.
Looking back at the week that just ended, Arbitrum received a boost from Uniswap and Sushiswap just days after going live; zkSync’s zk Rollup version of EVM has reached a milestone and is now live on the zkEVM beta network Alpha; StareWare’s product manager Tom Brand also mentioned StarkWare’s newest version of EVM. Tom Brand, product manager of StareWare, also mentioned that StarkNet is expected to go live on the test network in the last few weeks and on the main network later this year; Optimism has not disclosed many updates for the time being, but it is getting closer to its scheduled launch date on the main network ……
Layer2 The momentum has been established, and Polygon’s individual rise may eventually turn into a collective explosion of the whole track, which will attract the long-standing outflow of value back to Ether, the public chain ecosystem with the strongest consensus and the largest scale.
Therefore, external public chains will definitely face the huge challenge brought by Layer2, and the competitive environment will be more stimulating. The public chains with relatively perfect ecological systems need to consider how to hold their strongholds first before talking about expansion; as for other public chains with slow development speed and unformed ecology, there may not be much time left.
Posted by:CoinYuppie，Reprinted with attribution to:https://coinyuppie.com/layer2-era-is-approaching-is-the-window-closed-for-new-public-chains/
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.