Try   HackMD

Multi-Chain Evaluation Framework

Criteria

Decentralization

  • Consensum mechanism
  • Number of active validators (past 14 days)
  • Validator share distribution (past 14 days, gini coefficient)
  • Token supply distribution (top 100 holders on Ethereum or on the chain itself, gini coefficient)

Network statistics

  • Uptime - TODO: Need accurate sources
  • Block time
  • Number of unique addresses
  • Daily transactions (30-day harmonic mean)
  • Gas price (30-day harmonic mean, gwei)
  • Age (since genesis)

Infrastructure

  • VM
  • Node services
  • Reliable data oracles
  • Number of existing protocols
  • Block explorer

Capital

  • Chain TVL
  • DEX liquidity (top 3)
  • Token price (USD, 30-day moving average at close)
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude (= daily_transactions / (gas_price * token_price))
  • On/off-ramps and bridges

Evaluations

Ethereum - Baseline

Updated: March 01, 2022

Decentralization

  • Consensum mechanism: PoW
  • Number of active validators: 67 [1]
  • Validator share distribution: 0.830 [1]
  • Token supply distribution: 0.600 [1]

Network statistics

  • Uptime: Highest
  • Block time: 13 seconds [1]
  • Number of unique addresses: 189M [1]
  • Daily transactions: 1,168,206 [1]
  • Gas price: 86 Gwei [1]
  • Age: 6 years and 7 months

Infrastructure

Capital

  • Chain TVL: $117.1B [1]
  • DEX liquidity: $25,466M
  • Token price: $2868.22 [1]
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude: 5
  • On/off-ramps and bridges: N/A

Rollups

Arbitrum

Updated: March 04, 2022

Image Not Showing Possible Reasons
  • The image file may be corrupted
  • The server hosting the image is unavailable
  • The image path is incorrect
  • The image format is not supported
Learn More →
Warning: Currently in mainnet beta which includes administrative controls.

Decentralization
Network statistics
  • Uptime: High
  • Block time: 1.3 seconds [1]
  • Number of unique addresses: 416K [1]
  • Daily transactions: 63,299 [1]
  • Gas price: 0.8 Gwei [1]
    Image Not Showing Possible Reasons
    • The image file may be corrupted
    • The server hosting the image is unavailable
    • The image path is incorrect
    • The image format is not supported
    Learn More →
    Missing historical data
  • Age: 9 months [1]
Infrastructure
  • VM: AVM
  • Node services:
    • Infura
    • Alchemy
  • Reliable data oracles:
    • Chainlink
  • Number of existing protocols: 64 [1]
  • Block explorer: Arbiscan
Capital
  • Chain TVL: 2.25B [1]
  • DEX liquidity: $942.27M
    • SushiSwap: $622.77M [1]
    • Curve: $241.39M [1]
    • Balancer: $78.11M [1]
  • Token price: $2868.22 [1]
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude: 28
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:
    • Arbitrum Bridge
      • Delay: ~10 minutes to deposit and ~7 days to withdraw
      • Supported tokens: many
    • Hop Exchange
      • Delay: ~10 minutes
      • Supported tokens: ETH, USDC, DAI, USDT

Optimism

Updated: March 04, 2022

Decentralization
Network statistics
  • Uptime: High
  • Block time: instant
  • Number of unique addresses: 296K [1]
  • Daily transactions: 31,786 [1]
  • Gas price: 0.001 Gwei L2 gas + unspecified L1 gas
  • Age: 3 months
Infrastructure
  • VM: OVM
  • Node services:
    • Infura
    • Alchemy
  • Reliable data oracles:
    • Chainlink
  • Number of existing protocols: 25 [1]
  • Block explorer: Etherscan Optimism
Capital
  • Chain TVL: 335.51M [1]
  • DEX liquidity:
    • Uniswap: $44.8M [1]
  • Token price: $2868.22 [1]
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude: undefined
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:
    • Optimism Gateway
      • Delay: ~10 minutes to deposit and ~14 days to withdraw
      • Supported tokens: 37 tokens
    • Hop Exchange
      • Delay: ~10 minutes
      • Supported tokens: ETH, USDC, DAI, USDT

Alt-L1s

Polygon

Updated: March 01, 2022

Decentralization
  • Consensum mechanism: dPoS
  • Number of active validators: 79 [1]
  • Validator share distribution: 0.798 [1]
  • Token supply distribution: 0.834 [1]
  • Age: 1 year and 9 months
Network statistics
  • Uptime: Highest
  • Block time: 2 seconds [1]
  • Number of unique addresses: 138M [1]
  • Daily transactions: 3,077,908 [1]
  • Gas price: 80 Gwei [1]
Infrastructure
Capital
  • Chain TVL: $4.2B [1]
  • DEX liquidity: $1,526M
  • Token price: $1.66 [1]
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude: 23,177
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:
    • Exchanges:
    • Bridges:
      • Polygon Bridge
        • Delay: ~4 hours
        • Supported tokens: many
      • Hop Exchange
        • Delay: ~10 minutes
        • Supported tokens: ETH, MATIC, USDC, DAI, USDT

Avalanche (C-Chain)

Updated: March 04, 2022

Decentralization
  • Consensum mechanism: Snowball Algorithm [1]
  • Number of active validators: 1241 [1]
  • Validator share distribution: unknown
    Image Not Showing Possible Reasons
    • The image file may be corrupted
    • The server hosting the image is unavailable
    • The image path is incorrect
    • The image format is not supported
    Learn More →
    Missing data
  • Token supply distribution: 0.167 [1]
Network statistics
  • Uptime: Highest
  • Block time: 2 seconds [1]
  • Number of unique addresses: 2M [1]
  • Daily transactions: 971,282 [1]
  • Gas price: 59 Gwei [1]
  • Age: 1 year and 5 months [1]
Infrastructure
Capital
  • Chain TVL: $11.22B [1]
  • DEX liquidity: $1,725M
  • Token price: $81.22 [1]
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude: 203
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:

Gnosis Chain (xDAI)

Updated: March 03, 2022

Decentralization
  • Consensum mechanism:
  • Number of active validators:
  • Validator share distribution:
  • Token supply distribution:
Network statistics
  • Uptime:
  • Block time:
  • Number of unique addresses:
  • Daily transactions:
  • Gas price:
  • Age: 3 years and 4 months [1]
Infrastructure
  • VM:
  • Node services:
  • Reliable data oracles:
    • Chainlink
  • Number of existing protocols: 26 [1]
  • Block explorer: Gnosis Chain Explorer
Capital
  • Chain TVL: $256M [1]
  • DEX liquidity: $140M
    • Curve: $112M
    • SushiSwap: $17M
    • HoneySwap: $11M
  • Token price: $1
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude:
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:

Cronos

Updated: March 02, 2022

Decentralization
  • Consensum mechanism:
  • Number of active validators:
  • Validator share distribution:
  • Token supply distribution:
Network statistics
  • Uptime:
  • Block time:
  • Number of unique addresses:
  • Daily transactions:
  • Gas price:
  • Age:
Infrastructure
  • VM:
  • Node services:
    • Alchemy
  • Reliable data oracles:
  • Number of existing protocols: 46 [1]
  • Block explorer:
Capital
  • Chain TVL: $2.37B [1]
  • DEX liquidity:
  • Token price:
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude:
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:

BNB Chain

Updated: March 03, 2022

Decentralization
  • Consensum mechanism:
  • Number of active validators:
  • Validator share distribution:
  • Token supply distribution:
Network statistics
  • Uptime:
  • Block time:
  • Number of unique addresses:
  • Daily transactions:
  • Gas price:
  • Age:
Infrastructure
  • VM:
  • Node services:
  • Reliable data oracles:
    • Chainlink
  • Number of existing protocols: 324 [1]
  • Block explorer:
Capital
  • Chain TVL: $12.41B [1]
  • DEX liquidity: $5,545M
    • PancakeSwap: $4,470M [1]
    • Ellipsis Finance: $615M [1]
    • MDEX: $460M [1]
  • Token price:
  • Transaction efficiency magnitude:
  • On/off-ramps and bridges:

Resources

Last changed by 
 
TylerEther
4
597

Read more

COMP Reward Adjustments v2

After many discussions with Getty, I'm pivoting my prior COMP Rewards Adjustments proposal. The objective of the COMP rewards program was initially to distribute the token to our users. The sad truth is that an overwhelming amount of the COMP rewards are being farmed and instantly sold off, making the rewards program ineffective in achieving the initial goal. I believe there’s a clear need to re-evaluate how best to distribute the token to our community. When a market first launches, we don’t see much activity until the market receives COMP rewards. There’s little incentive to deposit into it when there’s no borrowing demand (or rewards), and there’s no borrowing demand because there aren’t enough tokens to borrow to make the cost of the borrow transaction worth it. A market needs to have great enough incentives for depositors to provide enough liquidity to make the cost of borrowing worth it. The above statements I made in my prior proposal still hold. At the time of writing, I advocated for our users - who are also token holders - to continue receiving a share of the protocol. Decentralization of ownership matters. However, my perspective on the overall issue was slightly incorrect.

Apr 15, 2022
Payroll Protocol: Decentralized Protocol Payroll

Why: To pay contributors efficiently. Idea: A DAO sets a budget for [X role] payroll. Token delegates get a share of say equal to the proportion of tokens they hold. Each delegate provides [white-listed] addresses and corresponding weights. Results are aggregated and pay is distributed accordingly. User stories Protocol development payroll The gov board or multisig whitelists timmy.eth and tom.eth for the development role. The gov board sets a budget of $10M annually for development. a16z with 50% of the vote says 10% to timmy and 80% to tom, with 10% going to nobody. a16z's pay share distribution is $10M * 50% * 10% = $500K annualized for timmy and $10M * 50% * 80% = $4M annualized for tom.

Mar 30, 2022
Compound Market Listing Framework

Consideration points: Token Etherscan link Contract code verified and open-source? Team Who? Experience in their respective field

Mar 9, 2022
COMP Rewards Adjustments

Building off Getty's discussion of COMP distribution speeds, I think we should be more intentional about how COMP is distributed. The objective of the COMP rewards program was initially to distribute the token to our users. The sad truth is that an overwhelming amount of the COMP rewards are being farmed and instantly sold off, making the rewards program ineffective in achieving the initial goal. I believe there's a clear need to re-evaluate how best to distribute the token to our community. This is something that will evolve over time, so it doesn't mean we have to completely figure this out before changing the existing program. Rather than distributing massive amounts of tokens arbitrarily to markets, I propose changing the existing rewards program (as just one of our rewards programs) to utilize COMP rewards to: Strategically incentivize growth while maximizing profits (minimizing losses), and Maintain minimum market sizes When a market first launches, we don't see much activity until the market receives COMP rewards. There's little incentive to deposit into it when there's no borrowing demand (or rewards), and there's no borrowing demand because there aren't enough tokens to borrow to make the cost of the borrow transaction worth it.

Mar 6, 2022
Read more from TylerEther
Published on HackMD