Introduction on GMX and GNS

GMX is a decentralized spot and perpetual exchange on Arbitrum and Avalanche chains that supports low swap fees and zero price impact trades. Trading is supported by a unique multi-asset pool that earns liquidity providers fees from market making, swap fees and leverage trading. Dynamic pricing is supported by Chainlink Oracles and an aggregate of prices from leading volume exchanges.

GMX Token:

GMX token is the GMX platform's utility and governance token, holding the token unlocks a variety of benefits and also Accrues 30% of the platform's generated fees.

Source : GMX Docs

Gains Network is a decentralized derivatives trading platform built first on the Polygon network and expanding to other decentralized networks. On gTrade, crypto derivative traders are allowed up to 150X leverage and up to 1000x for forex trades. The protocol revolves around the ecosystem's ERC20 utility token (GNS) and ERC721 utility token (NFTs). GNS and the NFTs are designed to be actively used within the platform (utility) and to allow ownership of the protocol through revenue capture & governance (soon). It includes GNS holders receiving platform fees through Single Sided Staking, burning of GNS using platform revenue, NFT holders getting reduced spread and boosted rewards, as well as NFT bots executing limit orders and liquidations.

Methodology

In this dashboard, we have analyzed the trading trend on GMX Protocol (on Arbitrum) and Gains Network (on Polygon)

In addition, there are analysis on the correlation of GNS and GMX tokens and their impact on the Arbitrum and Polygon chains and also the users behaviours with them.

For GMX Protocol, we are going to mainly use

1. arbitrum.core.fact_event_logs : to obtain GMX data
2. polygon.core.fact_event_logs : to obtain GNS data
3. ethereum.core.fact_hourly_token_prices : to calculate token prices

• Gains Network Trading Contract Address = '0xd8d177efc926a18ee455da6f5f6a6cfcee5f8f58','0x65187fec6ecc4774c1f632c7503466d5b4353db1' '0xf8a140db8b05bec52c7e86d0d40d72f8e54fe559'.
• GMX Protocol Positions Router Contract Address = '0x3d6ba331e3d9702c5e8a8d254e5d8a285f223aba','0xb87a436b93ffe9d75c5cfa7bacfff96430b09868'.
• GMX Token Contract Address on Arbitrum = `'0xfc5a1a6eb076a2c7ad06ed22c90d7e710e35ad0a’`
• GNX Token Contract Address on Polygon = ‘0xe5417af564e4bfda1c483642db72007871397896’

General Data

Trading Trend & Daily Stats

TOP 20 Traders

Correlation between trading platform & blockchain

According to the charts on the left, we can see that there is a certain level of correlation in terms of GMX trading activity (in volume and transaction) moving synchronous with the activity on Arbitrium chain.

• On 28th October 2022, there is a surge in GMX volume while the overall Arbitrium transactions and users are experiencing a rise as well.
• There is a pretty similar trend on 19 to 20th October as well, where the GMX volume rising and the Arbitrium users and transactions rises as well.
• While coming to end of October, a downfall of Arbitrium transactions and users is then observe in the decreasing trend in GMX volume.

While the GNS trading activity does not positively correlated with the activity data shown in Polygon chain. This might due to the volume of transactions and users on GNS is not significant enough to manipulate the overall activity on Polygon network.

• During 23rd October to 25th October 2022, Polygon transactions and users has experiencing a skyrocket scenario, while on GNS the the trading transactions is falling.
• The same situation can be observed in volume metric as well.
• However, there is something interesting that when Polygon experiencing a downfall in users and transactions, GNS trading activity will follow the trend.

The charts above shows the TOP 20 traders in overall among both platforms.

• There is only 3 traders from Gains platform if we evaluate from Volume (USD) perspective
• While there is 7 Gains traders if we evaluate from the transactions perspective.
• This scenario has proven that the conclusion I made in previous section, that Gains trader are more likely to trade in smaller size but in higher frequency.
• GMX traders have dominated the section as well with 96.5% and 84.8% respectively contributed to volume ad transactions metrics.

Transactions :

🥇 : 0xf53ad4999769c358f7be`c7deefbe3c656d94feea -- GNS

🥈 : 0xb09c48582db808c8043d0eb982b9610d79d9c0e1 -- GMX

🥉 : 0x812e168a932bed88c7de5a6efa97b19b1ab03070 -- GMX

Volume :

🥇 : 0x57790b0b998ba2c9dfe55e73300ffc1d3e457169 -- GMX

🥈 : 0x77f6821146cce5993282d940eef472c4b09d7537

🥉 : 0x812e168a932bed88c7de5a6efa97b19b1ab03070 -- GMX

Trading Trend

There is huge clusters of traders at low trading frequency and small trading size.

However, there is distinctive trend between the traders in GMX and GNS.

GMX traders tend to trade in lower frequency but higher trading size.

GNS traders tend to trade in higher frequency but lower trading size.

• In daily stats, GMX has 80% of traders comparing to GNS.
• While the daily trading volume and daily trading transactions has range between 70% ~ 80% for GMX.
• There is no obvious trend showing that GNS is catching up with GMX in the last 30 days.

I have evaluated the general stats on both trading platforms

• Volume (USD based)
• Transactions
• Users/Traders

In all metrics measuring above, GMX has dominant in every single measurement. There are 90% of market share in terms of traders between both platforms comparison.

GMX with over 1.2 Billion USD trading volume, 40K++ traders and 500k trading transactions.

GNS only have over 200 Million USD trading volume, 4k++ traders and less than 200k trading transactions.

Blockchain Comparison

Summary

• GMX is the champion as a trading platform.

• It has more volume, users, new users coming in and trading transactions.

• However, GNS traders still register little growth although is not significant to GMX.

• The traders behavior in both platforms are distinct.

• GMX traders : large trade size, less trading frequency; GNS : small trading size, high trading frequency

• Arbitrium has performing well as comparing to other blockchain lately.

• It might indicated that GMX has made the right move to involve in the chain.

• While Polygon has huge decline in the market share as comparing to the other blockchains.

  \

Appendix

Author : 𝐑α𝔪αʰαʳ#4167

Source of Data : Flipside Crypto

Inspired by : Ali3N Submission

Arbitrum and Polygon (MATIC) are both exist for Ethereum scaling solutions.

Currently, there are more than 19,000 dApps built on the Polygon blockchain, with the most popular ones being QuickSwap, Decentralized games, Dfyn Network, Pegaxy, and Sorbet Finance. At the same time, Polygon has seen a significant decrease in the total value locked. At the beginning of 2022, the platform had around $5 billion in TVL whereas in May 2022 it was estimated at about $2,50 billion, meaning that the platform lost more than $2 billion. This decrease is generally explained by the fact that Polygon’s dApps fell to new lows. For instance, Aave has fallen by more than 31% while Curve has lost more than 30% of its TVL.

As for the Arbitrum solution, it was introduced to the market in 2021 and now has more than 250 live projects, with the most popular categories being swapping and lending. Some of their interesting projects include Curve, Cream Finance, and Uniswap.

• The primary difference between Arbitrum and Polygon is the security mechanism. Arbitrum is secured by the Ethereum base layer and does not have its own token. Polygon is secured by its own Proof of Stake consensus mechanism, where stakers lock up the MATIC token to get a reward for validating transactions.
• Transaction fees on Arbitrum are slightly higher than Polygon, although the fees on both networks are significantly cheaper than Ethereum base layer fees.
• In terms of decentralization, you can make a good argument that Arbitrum is more decentralized since it’s secured by Ethereum’s widely distributed network of miners (or stakers, once Ethereum staking goes live). Polygon is secured by MATIC staking, which is a smaller pool of capital versus the miners who are securing Ethereum. Polygon’s main advantage is fast withdrawals. Unlike Arbitrum where withdrawals can take two weeks, withdrawals on Polygon using the Proof of Stake bridge take just three hours.

• In Year 2021, Polygon has most of the market share in terms of DEX in Sushiswap.

• However coming to May 2022, things changed. Arbitrium started to grab more market share and eventually surpass Polygon.

• Ever since then, Polygon has loss most of the market share and down to only 20%.

• While Arbitrium has grabbed more than 70% market share in DEX.

  \

Why choose DEX to evaluate as a strength of a blockchain?

• DEX as the token exchange can purely illustrate the demands of the users interacting with the blockchain. Users who going to involve in new projects or taking profits from a projects will usually exchange their token in the sense of obtaining project-related tokens to participate in certain projects, while exchange for stablecoins or popular coins to take profit and store the value.

First Time Users

We have also evaluated the new users first trying interact with both GMX and GNS platforms.

• A huge spike for the first time users to GMX platform during the end of JUNE 2022.
• There are more than 5k new users flowing into GMX platform daily.
• While on daily basis there is only hundreds of new users coming to the platform.
• GNS has only little inflow of new users trying out the platform.
• On daily, there is only less than 50 new users joining the platform.
• On cumulative charts, we able to see that the new user growth on GMX is growing exponentially.
• While on the other side, GNS is rather flat in terms of new users.