The Question
Compare the market share of Sushiswap and Uniswap on the following L2 chains.
Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism.
Methodology
In order to get the total interactions,users,value interacted and etc related to Uniswap and Sushiswap in mentioned chains, I have used core.fact_transactions table on each chain, joined it with dim.labels table and calculated my desired metrics .
All interactions with Sushiswap and Uniswap, including Swaps and Lping, have been checked at once.
each chain is explored in separated section, and at the end, a brief comparison made between Sushiswap on different chains as well as Uniswap.
It seems some data is missing in some cases for both of platforms.
Items provided on each section are :
- weekly/cumulative/total # interactions with each protocol
- weekly/cumulative/total # users on each protocol
- weekly/cumulative/total capital Value on each protocol
- weekly/cumulative/total Fees on each protocol
- weekly Fee per tx by protocol - weekly capital value per txs
- avg value per wallet - avg value per tx - avg fee per tx
- 30 and 7 days Capital value moving average
Introduction
The Uniswap protocol is a peer-to-peer1 system designed for exchanging cryptocurrencies (ERC-20 Tokens) on the Ethereum blockchain. The protocol is implemented as a set of persistent, non-upgradable smart contracts; designed to prioritize censorship resistance, security, self-custody, and to function without any trusted intermediaries who may selectively restrict access.
There are currently three versions of the Uniswap protocol. V1 and V2 are open source and licensed under GPL. V3 is open source with slight modifications, which are viewable here. Each version of Uniswap, once deployed, will function in perpetuity, with 100% uptime, provided the continued existence of the Ethereum blockchain.
Sushiswap
What is Sushiswap?
Sushi is a community-driven organization built to solve what might be called the “liquidity problem.” One could define this problem as the inability of disparate forms of liquidity to connect with markets in a decentralized way, and vice versa. While other solutions provide incrementally progressive advances toward solving the problem of liquidity, Sushi’s progress is intended to create a broader range of network effects. Rather than limiting itself to a single solution, Sushi intertwines many decentralized markets and instruments.
Thus far, the core products, which will be described in more detail here, include: a decentralized exchange, a decentralized lending market, yield instruments, an auction platform, an AMM framework and staking derivatives. Sushi’s products are configured in a way that allows the entire platform to maintain decentralized governance of $SUSHI token holders, while continuing to innovate on the collective foundations by design. Whereas major structural changes are voted on by the community, the day-to-day operations, rebalancing of pools and ratios, business strategy and overall development is ultimately decided on by our core team.
Conclusion
- On Polygon Network, the users and the number of transactions of Sushi have been more than Uni. But Uni has been able to involve more capital. Also, in terms of FEE per tx, sushi was about three times cheaper.
- In the Arbitrom network, in terms of users, the number of transactions, working capital, transaction fees and other indicators, both of them were almost at the same level, although Uni was slightly more than Sushes.
- In the Optimism network, Uniswap has a significant advantage over its competitor in terms of all the analyzed indicators. Also, the transaction at Uni was cheaper than at Sushi.
- Uniswap in different networks:
- In terms of the number of transactions, the Polygon network is in the first place with 2.2M transactions, Arbitrum is in the second place with 1.8M and Optimism is in the third place with 320k. Uniswap has seen a significant jump in the number of transactions on Arbitrum in recent weeks.
- Sushiswap in different networks:
- In terms of the number of transactions, the Polygon network is in the first place with 4.8M transactions, Arbitrum is in the second place with 1.2M and Optimism is in the third place with 13k. Sushniswap has seen a significant jump in the number of transactions on Arbitrum in recent weeks.
Findings - part 1 :
-
The number of transactions in the Polygon network for Sushi has been at a high level since the beginning of the chart, but for Uniswap, transactions have started to increase since the beginning of 2022. The total number of transactions recorded for Sushiswap was 4.8M and for Uniswap, 2.2M.
-
From August 2021 to April 2022, the number of Sushi users was ten times that of Uni. But in recent months, with the increase in the number of Uni users and the decrease of Sushi users, both have been at the same level between 7 and 10 thousand weekly users.
The total number of unique registrations for Sushi was 1.2 million and for Uni 203 thousand.
-
In terms of the amount of capital, Uni has been able to attract more capital by surpassing Sushi in recent months. The total capital attracted in the MATIC unit was 353M for Sushi and 391M for Uni.
-
In terms of fees as well as capital, Uni has overtaken Sushi in recent months. The total fee generated by Sushi was 86k and for Uni 90k in Matic unit.
-
As a result, Fee per Tx and Value per tx for Uni have been higher than Sushi in most weeks, especially in recent months.
-
Avg value per user : Sushi 680 Matic - Uni 5022 Matic
-
Avg value per tx : Sushi 72 Matic - Uni 177 Matic
-
Avg Fee per tx : Sushi 0.0176 Matic - Uni 0.041 Matic
Findings - part 2 :
-
The number of transactions in the Arbitrum network for Uni has been relatively more than Uniswap, transactions . The total number of transactions recorded for Sushiswap was 1.12M and for Uniswap, 1.84M.
-
In terms of users count, again, Uniswap has been alittle higher than Sushiswap.
The total number of unique registrations for Sushi was 364 k and for Uni 473k.
-
In terms of the amount of capital, Uni has been able to attract more capital by surpassing Sushi . The total capital attracted in the ETH was 221K for Sushi and 343k for Uni.
-
In terms of fees as well as capital, Uni has overtaken Sushi in recent months. The total fee generated by Sushi was 176 and for Uni 307 in ETH .
-
As a result, ETH Value per tx for Sushi have been higher than Uni in most weeks, especially in recent months.
-
Avg value per user : Sushi 1.3 ETH- Uni 1.6 ETH
-
Avg value per tx : Sushi 0.19 ETH- Uni 0.18 ETH
-
Avg FEE per user : Sushi 157 Micro ETH - Uni 166 Micro ETH
Findings - part 3 :
-
The number of transactions in the Optimism network for Uni has been at a high level since the beginning of the chart, but for Sushi , transactions has been very low compared to Uniswap. The total number of transactions recorded for Sushiswap was 13k and for Uniswap, 332k.
-
The users situsation is same as transactions.
The total number of unique registrations for Sushi was 6000 and for Uni 123 thousand.
-
In terms of the amount of capital, Uni has been able to attract more capital. The total capital attracted in the ETH was 2700 for Sushi and 346k for Uni.
-
avg fee per tx : Sushi .00180ETH - Uni 658 Micro ETH
-
Avg value per tx : Sushi 0.2 ETH- Uni 1.4 ETH
-
avg value per wallet : Sushi 0.58 ETH- Uni 5.8ETH