Try Quests to earn cryptoArbitrum vs. Optimism: Efficiencies and Differences
In this dashboard, I will review the performance of the Arbitrum and Optimism network, transactions and user behavior, swaps in the early months of 2023, and we will review the technology of these two.
Layer 2 scaling solutions have become a critical area of development for Ethereum, the world's largest decentralized blockchain platform. These solutions are designed to increase the network's transaction throughput and reduce fees, making it more accessible and efficient for users. Two prominent Layer 2 scaling solutions that have gained significant attention and adoption are Optimism and Arbitrum.
Optimism is a Layer 2 scaling solution that utilizes Optimistic Rollups, which allows off-chain computation and settlement of transactions while still maintaining the security and decentralization of the Ethereum network. This allows for faster transaction times and lower fees, making it more accessible for users who were previously priced out of the network. Optimism has gained significant attention and adoption from decentralized applications (dApps) on Ethereum due to its compatibility with existing smart contracts and ease of use.
Arbitrum, on the other hand, is a Layer 2 scaling solution that utilizes a different approach known as Validium, which uses a separate network for transaction verification and settlement. This allows for greater scalability while still maintaining security and decentralization. Arbitrum has gained significant attention due to its compatibility with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM), which allows for easy integration with existing Ethereum dApps.
Overall, Layer 2 scaling solutions like Optimism and Arbitrum have the potential to significantly increase the usability and accessibility of Ethereum by reducing fees and increasing transaction throughput. As the Ethereum network continues to grow and evolve, these solutions are likely to play an increasingly important role in ensuring its continued success.
Analysis
The number of transactions in 2023 on the Arbitrum network is 47 million and on Optimism is 20 million, which is a ratio of 2.35.The daily chart shows that the number of transactions on the Optimism network is more than Arbiterum until the middle of January, but after that it has decreased significantly, and Arbiterum continuously increases until March 22 (1.4 million) and then has a decreasing trend.
The cumulative graph of the number of transactions shows that after the middle of January, Arbitrum is going through a good upward trend compared to optimism.
The cumulative graph of the number of transactions shows that after the middle of January, Arbitrum is going through a good upward trend compared to optimism.
The graph of the number of new daily users shows that in the first half of January, the number of new users of both networks is almost the same, and the number decreases after the first half of January. After that, the arbitrage trend is upward and the optimism goes through a uniform trend.
On February 22, 2023, the number of new Arbitrom users is 40.4k, which is the highest amount. On February 26, the number of users both reaches 18k and after that it is decreasing.
The cumulative graph of the number of new users shows that Arbitrom has grown very well after the second half of January and the optimism has been a slow process for new users.
The total number of Arbitrom network users in 2023 is equal to 1.27 million and the number of Optimism network users is equal to 837k.
From January 11 to 18, the active users of the Optimism network were more than the active users of Arbitrum. In other days, this number is more for Arbitrum.
Analysis
The average fee amount from the beginning of 2023 is 0.000061 for Arbitrom and 0.000141 for Optimism, which can be seen that the fee for Arbitrom network is much lower than Optimism network.The maximum fee for Arbitrum is 0.136 and for Optimism it is 0.078.
The average daily fee chart shows that in general the average fee of Arbitrum is lower than Optimism.
Analysis
The number of daily contracts shows that the arbitrage has more contracts on all days. Since the beginning of the year, the number of Arbitrum contracts has increased daily and reached 2k on March 3, 2023.But the number of optimism contracts has not increased and has almost a constant trend.
The daily TVL shows that its value is much higher for Arbiterum than for Optimism on all days.
The TVL value for both networks is increasing in 2023, but the trend is steeper for Arbiterum.
Analysis
The percentage of successful transactions in 2023 is 93.5% for Arbitrum and 94.5% for Optimism. On February 21, the percentage of successful transactions of Arbitrum reaches 79%, which is low, but it has performed well in the rest of the days.The average number of transactions per second since 2023 for Arbitrum is 8.43 and for Optimism is 3.64.
The daily chart shows that the number of transactions per second was higher for Optimism than Arbiterum until mid-January, but after that, it was much higher for Arbiterum and decreased for Optimism.
On February 22, 2023, the number of transactions per second for Arbitrum is the highest (16.58).
Analysis
The number of swaps since the beginning of 2023 for the Arbitrum network is equal to 42.9k and for Optimism it is equal to 22.9k.The daily chart shows that from the beginning of the year until the 12th of January, the number of swaps for Arbitrum is more than Optimism, and after that until February 14, they are almost equal.
Since February 14, Arbitrum has more number of swaps by a large margin, and on February 16, it reaches 4.84k.
The number of swappers in 2023 for Arbitrum is equal to 17.2k and for Optimism is 8.63k, and the daily chart is the same as the daily chart of the number of swaps.
Most active tokens on Arbitrum are USDC, USDT, DAI, and ETH. And on Optimism are USDC, OP, SUSD, and USDT.
The number of people who have done between 1 and 5 swaps make up more than 90% of the swappers for both second layer networks.
Arbitrum and Optimism are both popular second-layer scaling solutions for Ethereum, but they have different levels of usage in terms of number of transactions, new users, contracts, TVL, and fees.
In terms of the number of transactions, Arbitrum has a higher number than Optimism, and this trend has been increasing since the middle of January. Arbitrum also has more daily and cumulative new users compared to Optimism, indicating a higher rate of adoption. However, Optimism had a higher number of transactions and active users in the first half of January.
Arbitrum has also performed better in terms of the number of contracts, with a higher number on all days and a consistently increasing trend. In contrast, the number of contracts on Optimism has remained constant.
The TVL value for both networks is increasing in 2023, but the trend is steeper for Arbitrum. In addition, Arbitrum has a much lower average fee amount than Optimism, indicating that it may be a more cost-effective solution for users.
Arbitrum and Optimism have a similar percentage of successful transactions, but Arbitrum has a higher average number of transactions per second, indicating a higher level of efficiency.
Finally, the most active tokens on both networks are stablecoins, with USDC being the most active on both Arbitrum and Optimism.
It can be concluded that while both Arbitrum and Optimism are popular scaling solutions for Ethereum, Arbitrum has a higher level of adoption, more transactions and users, and more active contracts, while also offering lower fees and higher efficiency. However, Optimism still remains a viable option for users, with a strong user base and consistent usage.
One key difference between Arbitrum and Optimism is their approach to consensus. Arbitrum uses a rollup architecture, which means that it bundles multiple transactions into a single transaction and then submits the result to the Ethereum mainnet. In contrast, Optimism uses an optimistic rollup architecture, which means that it assumes that transactions are valid unless proven otherwise. This allows Optimism to process transactions more quickly but requires more complex dispute resolution mechanisms.
Another key difference is the programming language used to write smart contracts. Arbitrum uses Solidity, the same language as Ethereum, which makes it easier for developers to port their contracts to Arbitrum. Optimism, on the other hand, uses a custom language called "Solidity EVM," which is a subset of Solidity that is optimized for the optimistic rollup architecture.
Additionally, there are some differences in the user experience of using each platform. For example, Arbitrum requires users to deposit Ethereum onto the Arbitrum chain, while Optimism allows users to use their existing Ethereum wallets.
Both Arbitrum and Optimism are promising Layer 2 scaling solutions for Ethereum, but they have different strengths and weaknesses that make them suitable for different use cases.
About
Thanks for reading my dashboard, you can share your insight with me on my twitter :)Twitter: https://twitter.com/Elprognerd
Discord ID: Elprognerd#8324
The methodology of this analysis:
Transaction analysis: The number of transactions, the daily and cumulative transaction graphs, and the ratio of transactions between the Arbitrum and Optimism networks were analyzed. The trend of the number of transactions, the percentage of successful transactions, and the number of transactions per second for each network were studied.
User analysis: The number of new users, cumulative users, and active users were analyzed for each network. The trends and growth rate of the number of users were observed for each network.
Contract analysis: The number of daily contracts, cumulative contracts, and trend of the contracts for each network were studied.
TVL analysis: The daily TVL and trend of TVL for each network were analyzed.
Fee analysis: The average fee amount, maximum fee, and average daily fee chart for each network were analyzed.
Swap analysis: The number of swaps, the number of swappers, and the trend of swaps and swappers for each network were analyzed.
Token analysis: The most active tokens on each network were identified.
Swapper analysis: The percentage of swappers who have done between 1 and 5 swaps for both networks were analyzed.