What is Flow? Flow is a fast, decentralized, and developer-friendly blockchain, designed as the foundation for a new generation of games, apps, and the digital assets that power them. It is based on a unique, multi-role architecture, and designed to scale without sharding, allowing for massive improvements in speed and throughput while preserving a developer-friendly, ACID-compliant environment.

what is EVM blockchain? all blockchains that use Ethereum Virtual machine are EVM blockchain. with using EVM blockchain can power from all smart contract that written for Ethereum with small change and tweaks

> image created by me with figma and jokerman font

Distribution of Average Time between two Transaction in Flow vs EVMs

Goals:

In this article I want to compare flow blockchain with other EVM compatible blockchain to calculate how long take between two transaction from one user. main question that I want to answer is :

1. How does Flow compare to other L1s in terms of user retention?
2. Is a user who made a transaction previously likely to make another transaction a week or a month later?

In this article, the number of unique wallets are compare in Flow Vs other EVM blockchain at first. Then we tried to find the average time different between two transactions of a user on Flow Vs other EVM blockchains. At the end you can see the distribution of average time between two transaction.

Methodology:

There is some notice in query that maybe help to better understanding these are :

• with LAG function we can previous TX time so I created I view that hold TX time , previous TX time , sender of TX and different time between two TX.
• next I remove rows that previous and current TX have same time. this work remove time of first TX. because in first TX we don’t have previous TX so LAG function put time of this TX as default and this only happens in first TX.

warning : We decide to compare Flow blockchain Vs Ethereum, Avalanche, Polygon, and Optimism in this dashboard.

Conclusion

this part maybe different from other conclusion. I think reviewing time between TX A and B without seeing whole blockchain maybe have wrong result. I think this gap come from combination of Blockchain Dapps and TX Fee and Number of User .for example blockchains Flow and Polygon (although time duration in different) but with same user and cheap gas fee and same amount of user have same result.

anther points is about Ethereum blockchain. with more than 106 M users that average TX gap time is more less than one week has done incredible job.

In addition we could say Ethereum and Flow blockchains are used in NFT more than other activities and NFT users on them are more loyal than other users. Exactly the opposite of optimism that isn't used for NFT.

Average Time Between Two TX in Flow vs EVMs

in last part i calculate average time between two TX from user of each blockchain but in this part i want to calculate this for each in All blockchains and show distribution of this gap in timeframe month and week.

There are some notice that I want to see in this part:

• Ethereum : for more than 106 M addresses, average time gap between each transaction is less than 1 week
• Flow : Only 40% of address doing TX with gap less than 1 week and rest of addresses has TX with gap more than a week
• Avalanche : More than 85% of user in this period repeat TX with gap less than 1 week
• Polygon : More than 55% of Polygon users come back and made another transactions in less than 1 hour.
• Optimism : Around 50% of Polygon users come back and made another transactions in less than 1 hour.

Introduction

Number of unique user

As we expected the total number of unique addresses on Ethereum is much more than other blockchains. Ethereum is the oldest and most popular chain and this is normal.

The monthly number of unique addresses is increasing over time on all chains. Because one of the most important goals of each blockchain is ==attracting new users== and since the blockchains that I chose for comparison are among the best so means they tried their best to achieve this goal.

we should consider that only Flow and Ethereum has about full support and other blockchain has limited support.

with current status of data Polygon has best Average time and Avalanche, Optimism follow Polygon respectively. worst gap between TX is for Ethereum. and this was predictable for many reason. some of them are :

1. ==older blockchain== and some users may make TX after years while other blockchains may have less than 2,3 years old.
2. ==higher gas fee.== this effect is from two sides. first is harder for normal users to make transactions because costs lot’s of money. two remove bots from the blockchain from doing fake TX

from number of unique Address Ethereum by far has the largest amount of address (user) .second place goes to Polygon and Flow take third sit.

Average Time Between Two buying NFT in Flow vs EVMs

When comparing NFT activity with other activity on Flow and Ethereum blockchains, we see retention time decreased for NFT activity.

• Ethereum:
  • retention time for all activity: 230 hour
  • retention time for NFT activity: 76.3 hour
• Flow:
  • retention time for all activity: 76 hour
  • retention time for NFT activity: 45.7 hour

This decreased in retention time shows us ==both of these blockchains are used in NFT more than other activities and NFT users on them are more loyal than other users.==

but the story changed on Optimism.

• Optimism:
  • retention time for all activity: 23.7 hour
  • retention time for NFT activity: 91.8 hour

This result means ==Optimism not used for NFT activity.==