Let's explore movement of delegation on Cosmos.

\n

When delegators un-stake from one validator and move to another, is there any pattern to where they re-stake? Are users more likely to re-delegate after their validator votes in a way they disagree with? Do they re-align their stake with validators whose values reflect their own?

\n

How do validator votes change over the course of a proposal? Share any interesting voting statistics you find.

Examine any voting propositions here (example: Prop 82) as a use case to explore these questions.

\n

What is Cosmo?

The Cosmos ecosystem is a decentralised network of independent blockchains powered by the ATOM cryptocurrency. Cosmos seeks to solve existing problems in the blockchain industry by building an ecosystem of blockchains connected through an Interblockchain Communication protocol. Tendermint, a core contributor to the Cosmos network, is instrumental to Cosmos’ progress.

A brief history of Cosmos

Cosmos was introduced through the publication of its white paper written by Tendermint co-founders Jae Kwon and Ethan Buchman and published in 2016. Its native token ATOMwas initially offered through two private sales in January 2017 and a public sale in April 2017. Kwon, who is recognised as the project’s principal architect, stepped down as CEO in 2020 and was replaced by Peng Zhong. Cosmos then launched the inter-blockchain communications (IBC) protocol, the platform’s standard for blockchain interoperability, in April 2021.

How Cosmos works

The Cosmos network is composed of zones, or independent, parallel blockchains. Each zone is powered by classical Byzantine fault-tolerant (BFT) consensus protocols like Tendermint. Cosmos uses a proof of stake (PoS) consensus algorithm to secure its work of connecting different blockchains. This translates to a higher likelihood of rewards distribution and transaction verification to validator nodes with higher amounts of ATOM staked.

What is Cosmos used for?

Aside from staking in Cosmos validators, ATOM is also used to pay fees within the network. These fees are proportional to the corresponding computational consumption of a transaction, similar to how gas fees work on Ethereum.

Add Text Here

Methodology

In this article, our goal is to investigate the status of redelegating and delegating authority regarding Proposal No. 82 on the Cosmos network.

In this review, we have analyzed the following: the total number of redelegations, redelegators and revalidators,

weekly changes in redelegations,

comparison of redelegations for all proposals

top10 destination and origin validators with the most redeligation based on the number and volume of redelegation,

top 10 paths for redelegation

The voting status of validators based on the amount of changes and types of changes Top 10 validators with the most changes and its type

Number of redeligations based on redeligations validators origin and destination

changes redeligations daily before and after the proposal

What is delegate in staking?

What is stake delegation? Delegation is the process by which ada holders delegate the stake associated with their ada to a stake pool. It allows ada holders that do not have the skills or desire to run a node to participate in the network and be rewarded in proportion to the amount of stake delegated.

In the first part, you can see the general information about redelegation, the total number of redelegation transactions(147.7k) and redelegators(73.3k), Origin(298) and destination(293) validators,

the total volume of redelegation based on ATOM(62.6M ) and its average and median .

You can see the weekly delegation over time. As you can see, on March 28th, the number of redelegations and redeligators reached its maximum value, and the volume of redelegations reached its maximum value on Nov 7th, which is 17.2 M.

In a comparison between source and destination validators, we can see that the number of source validators was higher, which shows that more people were willing to change their validator.

After registering proposal #82, you can see how the number of redelegations has been over time. This chart can be used for other proposals as well.

In a comparison between the number of redelegations for different proposals, we can see that proposal number 64 is the most redelegated, followed by proposal 65 with 6.4% redelegation, and proposal 82 with 3.46% is in 13th place.

Add Text Here

If we want to take a deeper look at the validators, we have shown the top 10 validators that are the source with the highest number of redelegations in this diagram. The Binance staking source validator is in the first place(10.2 M ) and the coinbase custody validator is in the second place based on volume

we have shown the top 10 validators that are the destination with the highest number of redelegations in this diagram. The 28 imperator validator is in the first place(10 k ) and the SG-1 validator is in the second place based on redeligates count. The kraken validator is in the first place (9.02 M ) and the Coinbase custody (9M) validator is in the second place based on volume.

You can also see the top 10 path of redelegations based on the number of delegations

binance staking → SG-1

SG-1 → imperator

are the first and second path.

top 10 path of redelegations based on the volume of delegations

kraken → kraken(9M)

coinbase custody → coinbase custody(8.9M)

are the first and second path.

The activity of the top 10 validators that are the origin and destination based on the redelegation of authority is shown on a weekly basis based on the volume and number of redeligations.

Add Text Here

If we want to take a look at the voting status of the validators, you can see in this graph that most of the validators did not change their vote and most of them voted only 1 time.

The highest percentage of validators' votes changed from yes to no, followed by yes to abstention and then no to yes.

The top ten validators who changed their vote more than others can be seen below.

Add Text Here

In this section, we have shown how similar people's vote was with the vote of origin and destination validators. The biggest difference was in the vote of people with destination validators.

You can also see that after the implementation of Proposal 82 on NOV 6-9, the number of delegations increased and people wanted to change their validator. After that, there was a downward trend and it increased again on November 13.

Conclusion

• total number of redelegation transactions(147.7k) and redelegators (73.3k), Origin(298) and destination(293) validators,

the total volume of redelegation based on ATOM(62.6M )

• on March 28th, the number of redelegations and redeligators reached its maximum value, and the volume of redelegations reached its maximum value on Nov 7th, which is 17.2 M.

In a comparison between source and destination validators, we can see that the number of source validators was higher, which shows that more people were willing to change their validator.

• In a comparison between the number of redelegations for different proposals, we can see that proposal number 64 is the most redelegated, followed by proposal 65 with 6.4% redelegation, and proposal 82 with 3.46% is in 13th place.

• Binance staking source validator is in the first place(10.2 M ) and the coinbase custody validator is in the second place based on volume

• The 28 imperator destination validator is in the first place(10 k ) and the SG-1 validator is in the second place based on redeligates count. The kraken validator is in the first place (9.02 M ) and the Coinbase custody (9M) validator is in the second place based on volume.

• top 10 path of redelegations based on the number of delegations

  binance staking → SG-1

  SG-1 → imperator are the first and second path.

  top 10 path of redelegations based on the volume of delegations

  kraken → kraken(9M) ….coinbase custody → coinbase custody(8.9M) are the first and second path.

• most of the validators did not change their vote and most of them voted only 1 time.

The highest percentage of validators' votes changed from yes to no, followed by yes to abstention and then no to yes.

• to konw how similar people's vote was with the vote of origin and destination validators. The biggest difference was in the vote of people with destination validators.

You can also see that after the implementation of Proposal 82 on NOV 6-9, the number of delegations increased and people wanted to change their validator.