Question

Compare user bridge volume on the Optimism Native Token Bridge vs. another Mainnet <-> Optimism Bridge of your choosing (e.g. Hop). Can we conclude if there are differences in the types of users or transactions using the native bridge vs. the non-native bridge?

Data Analysis

• Between May 30 and June 4, large volumes of various assets are bridged to Layer 2 through Optimism. USDC's share was the largest of the various assets.
• On May 30, about 53M USDC was bridged to Layer 2 through Optimism.
• One of the factors that increased the volume of bridged assets to layer2 during this period could be the beginning of the distribution and claiming of the native Optimism token.

Introduction

Rollups

A rollup is a type of layer-2 solution that has become a cornerstone of the Ethereum scaling roadmap. Each rollup provides an execution environment that can process transactions in a similar way to Ethereum itself but at a fraction of the cost. In short, rollups increase the throughput of Ethereum by moving computation and data storage off-chain while keeping some data per transaction on-chain.[1]

Optimism

Optimism is one of the layer 2 scaling solutions. It's powered by a technology called Optimistic rollups, which bundle large amounts of transaction data into digestible batches. Optimism is much cheaper to use than Ethereum, and it's increasingly becoming popular along with other layer 2s.[2]

Hop Protocol

Moving assets between rollups and the layer-1 network is slow and expensive, diminishing the savings users gain by using the rollup. The Hop protocol allows assets to be moved directly from rollup to rollup, providing cost savings and enabling cross-rollup composability of applications.[3]

Refrence

[1]. Vitalik Buterin. An incomplete guide to rollups. https://vitalik.ca/ general/2021/01/05/rollup.html, January 2020.

[2]. https://www.coindesk.com/learn/what-is-optimism/

[3]. Hop: Send Tokens Across Rollups/Chris Whinfrey/January 2021/https://hop.exchange/whitepaper.pdf

Methodology

• In this dashboard, we compare the volume of assets that are transferred to Layer 2 through the Optimism native token bridge and Hop bridge.
• The time frame provided in this dashboard is equal to: the last 60 days
• The following tables have been used to extract the data:

  • ethereum.core.ez_token_transfers

  • ethereum.core.ez_eth_transfers

• The contracts used in this dashboard are:
  • >> 0x99C9fc46f92E8a1c0deC1b1747d010903E884bE1 Optimism: Gateway
  • >> hop protocol: USDC bridge 0x3666f603Cc164936C1b87e207F36BEBa4AC5f18a
  • >> hop protocol: ethereum bridge 0xb8901acb165ed027e32754e0ffe830802919727f
  • >> hop protocol: dai bridge 0x3d4cc8a61c7528fd86c55cfe061a78dcba48edd1
  • >> hop protocol: usdt bridge 0x3e4a3a4796d16c0cd582c382691998f7c06420b6
  • >> hop protocol: matic bridge 0x22b1cbb8d98a01a3b71d034bb899775a76eb1cc2

Result

Note that the ETH volume is not considered in the chart below.

Excluding ETH, the USDC accounts for about 80% of the total volume of assets bridged to the layer 2.

• The volume of assets bridged to Layer 2 through Hop is far less than the native Optimism bridge.

The largest volume is related to USDC. (~64M $USD)

Now if we compare the volume of ETH bridged to layer two through Optimism and Hop, we find that:

Almost before mid-May, the daily volume of ETH bridged via Hop was more than the native bridge of Optimism, but after this date, the volume of ETH bridged to Layer 2 via Optimism increased dramatically.

The following data show that in the last 60 days the total volume of ETH transferred to Layer 2 via the Optimism native token bridge was greater than the Hop Bridge. The same is true for the average daily volume of ETH bridged to layer 2.