Terra Validators by Deliagtion and Voting Activitty

Analysis:

The results of the Eclipse Score Dashboard offer a comprehensive and in-depth view of the voting performance of Terra validators. By dividing the percentage of votes attended by the validator by the percentage of total votes in the validation time period, and then dividing that result by the percentage of total delegation received by the validator, the Eclipse Score provides a balanced measurement of a validator's voting effectiveness.

It is interesting to note that the validators with the highest Eclipse Scores have less than 0.015% of the total delegation on Terra but still participate in over 40% of the votes. This suggests that a validator's level of participation in voting activities is not directly tied to the amount of delegation they receive. This information is valuable for delegators who are looking for effective representatives, as it suggests that it is possible for smaller validators to still be highly engaged in voting activities and effectively representing their delegators.

Additionally, the fact that nearly all of the Terra validators have been active for the entire life of the Terra 2 chain highlights the overall commitment and responsibility of the validators to fulfill their role as representatives. This is an important factor for delegators to consider when evaluating validators, as it suggests that the vast majority of validators on the Terra network are dedicated to performing their duties effectively.

In conclusion, the Eclipse Score provides valuable insights into the voting performance of validators on the Terra network. By considering multiple metrics, including the level of delegation received, the proportion of votes attended, and the length of time that a validator has been active, it offers a comprehensive view of a validator's effectiveness as a representative. This information is valuable for delegators who are looking to make informed decisions about where to delegate their assets and support the best representatives on the Terra network.

Top 5 validators by Eclipse Score

Introduction

Welcome to the Eclipse Score Dashboard, where you can monitor and rank validators in terms of their voting effectiveness. Our Eclipse Score is a simple, easy-to-use metric that reflects the performance of validators in representing their delegators. The score is based on at least three key metrics, including the percentage of votes attended, the percentage of total votes, and the amount of LUNA delegated. In this dashboard, you'll find a table that displays all validators and their corresponding Eclipse Scores, as well as a bubble chart that visualizes the relationship between LUNA Delegated and Votes Attended. By analyzing the top 5 best and top 5 worst validators according to the Eclipse Score, you can easily identify the most effective and least effective validators, allowing you to make informed decisions about where to delegate your assets. We hope that the Eclipse Score Dashboard provides valuable insights into the voting performance of validators and helps you find the best representatives for your delegation needs.

Eclipse Score Definition:

The Eclipse Score is a composite metric that reflects the effectiveness of validators in representing their delegators via voting. It is calculated by dividing the percentage of votes attended by the validator, by the percentage of total votes in the validation time period, and then dividing the result by the percentage of total delegation received by the validator.

The vote_percent is the proportion of total votes that the validator has participated in. The validation_time_period_percent represents the percentage of total voting opportunities that the validator has had during the specified time period. Finally, delegation_percent represents the proportion of total delegation received by the validator compared to other validators in the network.

The Eclipse Score provides a comprehensive view of a validator's voting performance by considering both the amount of delegation received and the participation in voting activities. A high Eclipse Score indicates that the validator is effectively representing their delegators, while a low Eclipse Score suggests that the validator is not fulfilling their responsibilities as a representative.

The following are some of the key observations for the given validators:

1. Allnodes.com: It is a reliable non-custodial validator run by the industry leader Allnodes. It has 4.67% voting power and is currently active. The operator has a commission rate of 0% and it will increase to 5% after Feb 1, 2023.
2. KuCoin: It has a 0% voting power and is currently jailed. The operator has a commission rate of 10%. The rewards pool for this validator is 6,899.507716 Luna.
3. Forbole: It has a 0.46% voting power and is currently active. The operator has a commission rate of 0%. The rewards pool for this validator is 41,946.098980 Luna.
4. Mosaic: It has a 1.65% voting power and is currently active. The operator has a commission rate of 8%. The rewards pool for this validator is 272,437.911608 Luna.
5. TheNFTProject: It has a 1.26% voting power and is currently active. The operator has a commission rate of 100%. The rewards pool for this validator is 79,055.605914 Luna.

Based on these details, we can conclude that all the validators have a rewards pool in Luna, with TheNFTProject having the highest rewards pool. The commission rates for the validators vary, with KuCoin and Mosaic having the highest commission rates. The voting power for the validators also varies, with Allnodes.com having the highest voting power.

Bottom 5 Terra validators by Eclipse Score

Analysis:

The validators listed (Uranus, Zeus Staking, Chaos Protocol, Noderunners, and Top Shelf) have low eclipse scores, which can be a reflection of a number of different factors. Uranus has a small voting power of 0.33%, a relatively high commission rate of 5%, and a self-delegation rate of 0.00%, which may contribute to its low score.Zeus Staking has a voting power of 0% and is currently jailed, which can greatly impact its score. Chaos Protocol has a relatively small voting power of 0.41% and a high commission rate of 10%. Noderunners has a small voting power of 0.32% and a relatively high commission rate of 10%. Top Shelf has a relatively small voting power of 0.61% and a commission rate of 10%. It's important to note that a low eclipse score does not necessarily indicate a lack of security or reliability for these validators. Other factors such as their uptime, infrastructure, and community reputation can also impact their overall performance. Delegators should perform their own due diligence and consider multiple factors before delegating their stake to a validator.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Eclipse Score Dashboard provides a comprehensive and in-depth view of the voting performance of Terra validators. The Eclipse Score metric reflects the effectiveness of validators in representing their delegators by considering multiple metrics such as the level of delegation received, proportion of votes attended, and the length of time a validator has been active. The results highlight that smaller validators can still be highly engaged in voting activities and effectively representing their delegators, while nearly all Terra validators have been active for the entire life of the Terra 2 chain, showing their overall commitment and responsibility. The results of the analysis of the validators listed (Allnodes.com, KuCoin, Forbole, Mosaic, and TheNFTProject) also showed that the rewards pool, commission rate, and voting power for the validators vary. Overall, the Eclipse Score Dashboard provides valuable insights for delegators to make informed decisions about where to delegate their assets and support the best representatives on the Terra network.