Gains Network vs GMX

    Introduction

    • In this Analysis, You will read about two popular platforms on Arbitrum and Polygon. GMX on Arbitrum and GNS on Polygon.
    • GNS (native to polygon, announced will be launching on Arbitrum soon). Both platform native tokens (GMX - GNS) have seen meteoric price growth during a bear market. Since June GNS has gone from $0.68 to $3.68 and GMX has gone from $13.70 to $41.56.
    • I analyzed both platforms and looked at the Trading volume on these platforms. We want to know Has one platform absorbed more volume than the other?

    Analyzed By Hess - Reading Time Almost 10 Min.

    Transactions and Users

    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...

    New and Active Users

    • Overall, GMX had more new users in comparison to the GNS platform. But when we look at Active users, the Numbers are different.

      Who is an Active User? In the last 6 months, Users who had more than 5 transactions I called as an active user.

    • GMX had 4.8K active users and GNS had 2.1K, active users. As you can see, GMX had more new users over time but their active users

    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...

    Average 7/30/60 Days Volume Moving

    • The average 7/30/60 days volume moving shows that GMX had a huge difference with GNS plaform.
    • The average volume on GMX was 2x higher than GNS. Over time, The average weekly volume on GMX was higher than GNS. Only in three or four weeks, GNS had a higher average volume. Based on Max Volume traded on both platforms, The higher volume went through GMX.

    Volume

    • The main question of this analysis is about war trading platforms. If we call a war between two of these platforms, I can say GMX won the war overall. But if We examine it week by week, I can say that both platforms won. Between April and May 2022, The higher went through the GNS platform. After that for almost 4 months, The higher volume went through the GMX platform. Again, After September, The volume on both platforms was similar. Overall, The total volume of GMX was 376M US dollars and the total volume of GNS was 181M US dollars.
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...

    Share of USDC

    • let’s examine the USDC shares on these platforms. Based on transactions, 70% of transactions were on GNS and 30% were on GMX. Over time, The daily share of USDC increased on GMX and reached 30-60% recently.
    • But based on volume, 60% of the volume went through GMX and 40% went through GNS. Almost in the last 180 days, The volume share on GMX was higher than GNS.

    Users Breakdown

    • The large group of users on GMX had only one transaction and traded between 1-10 US dollars. But the large group of GNS users had more than 5 transactions and traded between 1000-5000 US dollars.
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    • I examined volume and transactions based on traded volume. More transactions were between 1-10 US dollars and more volume on GMX was between 100-1M US dollars and more volume on GNS was between 10-100K. GMX had 43M US dollars in transactions above 1M.

    Method

    GMX

    • We don’t have an exact Swap table on Arbitrum tables. So I made a custom swap table for GMX. But How?

    • I had a trade transaction on GMX.

    • Then I looked up the transaction on Arbiscan. I found all swaps have interacted with this contract address 0xabbc5f99639c9b6bcb58544ddf04efa6802f4064. I read GMX documents and found this is GMX Router on Arbitrum.

    • I used the Fact event table and put this address as the contract address with swap event name.

    • From the Event_inputs column I extracted the below data:

      EVENT_INPUTS:inputToken as token_in, EVENT_INPUTS:inputValue as amount_in, EVENT_INPUTS:outputToken as token_out, EVENT_INPUTS:outputValue as amount_out

    • I mentioned that we don’t have a swap table on Arbitrum tables. Also, We don’t have token labels, Prices and decimals on Arbitrum. I found that GMX supports some tokens. I found their addresses and decimals. Then, I hard-coded those tokens. Then Joined my custom swap table. Now I have their symbols. I joined to Ethereum Hourly price table and extracted their Prices over time

    GNS

    • I used Polygon Fact table. I found out each transactions sent to these addresses :

      '0xf8a140db8b05bec52c7e86d0d40d72f8e54fe559', '0xd8d177efc926a18ee455da6f5f6a6cfcee5f8f58' ,'0x65187fec6ecc4774c1f632c7503466d5b4353db1')

    • So I put these addresses as origin_to_address and extracted all trades. Because trades are DAI/USDC, I didn’t need price because they are Stabecoins.

    A Summary of The Most Important Findings

    • In the last 6 months, Nearly 168K Unique users transferred GMX tokens in 646K transactions while only 16.5K unique users transferred GNS tokens in 227K transactions.
    • GMX platform had 63K new users and GNS had 3.7K unique users. Also, GMX active users were 4.8K and GNS active users are 2K.
    • Between May and August 2022, the GNS platform had more transactions in comparison to GMX but after August share of transactions on GMX increased by up to 80%.
    • Almost the trading volume on GMX was 2x higher than GNS. GMX's total volume in USD is 376M and GNS's total volume is 181M US dollars.
    • The average weekly volume of GMS is 2K US dollars and the average weekly volume of GNS is 1.2K US dollars. In this parameter, GMX had a 2x higher average than GNS.
    • The average 7/30/60 days moving volume on GMX had a huge difference from the GNS platform.
    • The large group of GMX users had only one transaction and traded between 1-10 US dollars.
    • The large group of GNS users had more than 5 transactions and traded between 1K-5K US dollars.
    • Based on transactions, most transactions were 1-10$ and based on volume, most volumes were between 10K-100K US dollars. There were more than 43K transactions with a volume above 1M US dollars on GMX!
    • Based on transactions, The share of USDC on GNS is up to 70% but based on the volume the share of USDC on GMX is 60% and GNS 40%.
    db_img

    Full Analysis

    db_img
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...

    GMX Vs. GNS Token

    • Let’s examine how many users transferred GMX and GNS tokens. Based on transactions, Until August 2022, The total number of transactions of transfer GMX and GNS were similar to each other but after that, The total number of transactions of GMX increased significantly and increased its difference with GNS transactions. The total number of GMX transfer transactions is 646K and the total number of GNS transfer transactions is 227K. The highest number of GNS and GMX transfer transactions happened on October 24.
    • Based on these two platforms, GMX had 54.7% of transactions and GNS had 45.3% of transactions. Between April and June 2022, The weekly share of transactions on GMX increased but still in those times, the weekly share of GNS was up to 63%. For a short time in July, The share of GMX increased up to 91% in comparison to GNS but quickly dropped by 50%. After August 2022, The weekly share of GMX took GNS places and had up to 65% of transactions and GNS decreased to 34%.

    Conclusion

    • It is true that there is a war between the two platforms. Some weeks, The higher volume went through GMX and some weeks the higher volume went through GNS. In fact, The total volume on GMX was 2x higher than GNS but recently, Their volume was similar. Based on GMX token and platform stats, It seems there is a good potential for GNS to support the Arbitrum chain. They want to increase their Shares over GMX.

    THANK YOU FOR READING!

    ALL CODES AND CONTENTS WERE WRITTEN BY HESS.

    :bird: Twitter: @hessaminanloo

    :flying_disc: Discord: hess#0890

    :calendar: Analyze Date: 2022/NOV/06