Introduction

What is the story behind FTX & Alameda Collapse?

What is Osmosis?

==The news was Striking! FTX one of the biggest Crypto central exchanges is insolvent!==

What was going on really?

simply put, FTX was helping Alameda Research, essentially a hedge fund market making company, to build billions of capitals upon false claim of having enough assets to put as collateral.

How did they do that?

FTX has a token called FTT, which has few formal use cases like discount in fees. Alameda own a large portion of FTT as one of the VCs for their investment. The problem with FTT is that its price doesn’t represent its value and the ability to be liquidated is much lower than what expected.

In other words, you can have millions of FTT which on the chart has price of let’s say 20$; But you can’t sell all your FTTs with that price because no one is buying. FTX and Alameda worked together behind the scene to keep the price up to a certain level, and as a result Alameda could falsely claim that it has millions of capital to borrow against.

The rest of the story is more familiar to you as it involves the bank run on FTX and incidents involving CZ and binance and latest bloody days of crypto market.

==The new face of Cosmos IBC==

Osmosis is an AMM Structured blockchain build on Cosmos SDK. This means to interact with this the network you basically are interacting with a DEX DApp (Decentralized exchange application). Being the biggest DEX on cosmos, Osmosis is growing everyday with its simple UI and multi optional UX provision.

The ability to initiate custom pools is one of the winning cards of Osmosis which attracts many liquidity providers. Osmosis also is the magical portal between many cosmos chains and powers the true force of IBC goals. Apart from swapping tokens, and providing liquidity, you can transfer your tokens between cosmos chains.

Osmosis Main Application

Methodology

How are we going to achieve that?

What are we looking for in this analysis?

This week has highlighted the need for transparency & decentralization in crypto markets. Let's see how users have reacted to this wild week in Web3. Analyzing growth in Osmosis Volumes & User Count this week, we’ll see:

• Have behaviors changed?
• Has more money flowed into Osmosis this week compared to the past few weeks/months?
• Can we identify where is this money coming from? Centralized Exchanges?
• What are the top sender and receiver wallets?
• How has the trading activity changed? Have wallets moved more into stables?
• What about balance type of active Wallets? Are they more liquid or more staked?
• Do we see a notable change in liquidity providing actions?

• I am using Flipside Crypto Database and Application to render this analysis. Flipside covers Osmosis blockchain information for free which can be queried to find various useful and interesting data which inform your financial decisions.
• When it comes to transfers, Osmosis supports and covers 3 kind of transfers including IBC_Transfer_IN, IBC_Transfer_OUT, and Osmosis transfers. First two type refers to inflow and outflow of capital between various cosmos chains while last one refers to transferring any asset inside Osmosis Chain.
• To showcase a better comparison of the possible effects, I am using a 60 days period.
• Balance Type includes 3 categories of Liquid, Staked, and Locked and only covers wallets that had staked or locked tokens before.
• Swap Count chart only includes pools with more than 50 daily swaps

Data & Analysis

First two charts shows the transferred amount of Inflow, Outflow and Osmosis transactions, plus the daily number of unique senders and receivers of those assets.

Before Nov 9th, net capital flow was positive meaning that Inflow capital surpassed Outflow capital.

Only on Nov 10th, Outflow capital surpassed Inflow stream and after that, despite the obvious decrease in all volumes, Inflow capital was more than Outflow.

Only Osmosis inside Transfers shows a huge spike which may be due to sending in and out of Centralized exchanges.

As you can see number of unique senders and receivers didn’t change significantly on Nov 9th. which indicated that Osmosis users have a high daily engagement with the network.

But when it comes to Number of transactions for each category, you can see that Osmosis transfer type has way lower count than other two, despite having more volume than them.

This effectively indicates the whale activity of Osmosis holders or liquidity providers.

Unfortunately, Osmosis tables doesn’t provide enough data to identify address ownership of certain wallets. While we were very interested to the information of whether or not popular destination and origins of transfers belong to centralized exchanges, we have no

On-Chain path to know about this.

Even Cosmos explorers like Mintscan does not provide such information.

But it is interesting that Top 3 Addresses on both charts, Meaning addresses which sent and received the most funds are the same.

Regarding the balance type of assets in wallets, we can see that before Nov 9th, Liquid assets (Meaning assets that are not staked or locked in any kind) were at the highest level of past 60 days, and this number decreased significantly influenced by the incident. Unfortunately, database has no record for staked or locked balances during this period.

Regarding LP actions, We can see that number of providing actions has decreased ever since, while exiting pools has increased mildly.

Regarding the trading activity, you can see than there is a significant increase in both amount and number of swap transactions.

Also judging from top Popular assets we can say that swapping to Stablecoins is not a repeating behavior and users are using the opportunity to swap into their favorite assets.

Key Takeaways:

• Atom, Osmo and EVMOS are the most popular assets to swap from and to in past 60 days.
• Both volume and number of swaps increased significantly during incident.
• There were more selling than buying during FTX incident.
• Liquidity providing actions has decreased and exiting pools has increased after the incident.
• Liquid balance of wallets has decreased after the incident.
• Top 3 Addresses which sent and received the most funds are the same.
• Top Total Transferred Assets: ATOM, OSMO, EVMOS
• Top Inflow Transferred Assets: ATOM, EVMOS, CRO
• Top Outflow Transferred Assets: ATOM, EVMOS, CRO
• Top Osmosis Native Transferred Assets: OSMO, ATOM, CRO
• Before Nov 9th, net capital flow was positive meaning that Inflow capital surpassed Outflow capital.
• Only on Nov 10th, Outflow capital surpassed Inflow stream and after that, despite the obvious decrease in all volumes, Inflow capital was more than Outflow.