QUESTION:

Let's explore movement of delegation on Cosmos.

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.

METHODOLOGY:

The cosmos.core.fact_msg_attributes table was extensively used to get the proposal id after which the proposal stats were calculated

Note: While some of the stats might have been referenced from Al3N, there have been some changes made to this dashboard with the option of ‘proposal selection’ from the top of the page

SUMMARY:

In this dashboard we would be looking into the following charts:

• Redelegates Count

• Delegators Count

• Source Validator Count

• Destination Validator Count

• Total Redelegate Amount

• Minimum Redelegate Amount

• Maximum Redelegate Amount

• Median Redelegate Amount

• Average Redelegate Amount

• Redelegate vs Delegator Count over time

• Source vs Destination Count over time

• Total vs Average Redelegate

• Maximum Redelegate Amount

• Cumulative Delegator Count

• Cumulative Redelegates Volume

• Top 10 source validators with most redelegations by transaction count

• Top 10 source validators with most redeleagtions by transaction volume

• Top 10 destination validators with most redeleagtions by transaction count

• Top 10 destination validators with most redeleagtions by transaction volume

• Equal Votes vs Unequal Votes by Redelegations

• Equal Votes vs Unequal Votes by Redelegators

• Equal Votes vs Unequal Votes by Volume

• Redelegation Change Daily Volume During/Before/After the proposal

• Redelegation Change Daily User Count During/Before/After the proposal

• Redelegation Change Daily Transactions During/Before/After the proposal

• Conclusions

INTRODUCTION:

The Cosmos ecosystem is partially known for its Proof-of-stake. In a Proof-of-Stake network, just as in a Proof-of-Work network, the blockchain is simultaneously maintained on a diverse and geographically distributed network of disparate computers or servers called "nodes." Validators, like staking facilities, are special nodes responsible for providing infrastructure as well as validating new blocks and adding them to the blockchain. Therefore, together with other validators, they ensure the security of the blockchain by controlling its accuracy, establishing its validity and guaranteeing its availability.

People who cannot or do not want to operate validator nodes can participate in the betting process as delegators. In fact, validators are not chosen based on their self-delegated stake, but based on their total stake, which is the sum of their self-delegated stake and the stake delegated to them. This is an important property, as it makes delegates a safeguard against validators who exhibit bad behavior. If a validator misbehaves, his delegators will move their Atoms away from him, thus reducing his participation. Finally, if a validator's participation falls below the 125 addresses with the highest participation, he will leave the set of validators.

Delegates share the income of their validators, but they also share the risks. In terms of income, validators and delegates differ in that validators can apply a commission on the income that goes to their delegate before it is distributed. This fee is known in advance by the delegators and can only vary based on predefined restrictions (see next section). In terms of risk, delegate Atoms can be trimmed if their validator misbehaves. For more information, see the section Risks.

To become delegators, Atom holders must submit a "delegation transaction" in which they specify how many Atoms they wish to link and to which validator. A list of validator candidates will appear in Cosmos Hub browsers. Later, if a delegate wishes to unbind part or all of their share, they must submit an "unbind transaction". Thereafter, the delegate will have to wait 3 weeks to retrieve their Atoms. Delegates can also submit a "Rebond Transaction" to switch from one validator to another, without having to go through the 3-week waiting period.

CONCLUSIONS:

• 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?

• Yes, the users tend to realign as was observed from the ‘equal-unequal votes’ charts as the number of redelegators are less but the amount by volume seems to outweigh it

• When delegators un-stake from one validator and move to another, is there any pattern to where they re-stake?

• We do see a reshuffling going on in the Cosmos ecosystem space where validators are moving away from the top ‘brands’ like Binance to lesser popular validators

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

• For proposal #82, which had the most validator changes there were as many as 4 voting changes that were observed and based on that we find that redelegations also took place to agree with the validators

• Source validators > Destination Validators implies some validators could have been jailed which led to users redelegating

• About 60M in $ATOM tokens has been redelegated this year

• In a single transaction as high as 9M tokens have been redelegated

• There are as many as 150k delegators half of which have moved their delegations atleast once

• Most of the redelegations took place from validators like SG-1, stake.fish, Binance Staking and Citadel.One to mention a few

• Most of the redelegations took place to validators like Imperator.co,SG-1, stake.fish, Swiss Staking and Citadel.One to mention a few

• We observe a reshuffling among validators more than a permanent switch when the redelegations are viewed by transactions

• Also, there seems to be a reshuffling such that users prefer the unpopular ones more (by brand) as users are moving from the likes of Binance staking

• By volume, Binance Staking has taken away the most volume and the major inflows have been to Coinbase and Kraken

• This further shows a shift from the popular CEX based staking option to a lesser popular option (They’re popular but not as much as Binance)

• There have been significant vote changing activity as can be seen from the charts above.

• It can be said that in the above proposal as validators made a lot of movement there was a lot of shift in the volume causing huge spikes in redelegations as well

EXPLANATION & INSIGHTS:

• Source validators > Destination Validators implies some validators could have been jailed which led to users redelegating

• About 60M in $ATOM tokens has been redelegated this year

• In a single transaction as high as 9M tokens have been redelegated

• There are as many as 150k delegators half of which have moved their delegations atleast once

  \

EXPLANATION & INSIGHTS:

• There have been significant vote changing activity as can be seen from the charts above.
• It can be said that in the above proposal as validators made a lot of movement there was a lot of shift in the volume causing huge spikes in redelegations as well

GENERAL AND WEEKLY STATS:

REDELEGATIONS? FROM WHERE TO WHERE?

VALIDATOR VOTING CHANGE BEHAVIOUR

PROPOSAL BASED REDELEGATION NUMBER:

EXPLANATION & INSIGHTS:

• Most of the redelegations took place from validators like SG-1, stake.fish, Binance Staking and Citadel.One to mention a few
• Most of the redelegations took place to validators like Imperator.co,SG-1, stake.fish, Swiss Staking and Citadel.One to mention a few
• We observe a reshuffling among validators more than a permanent switch when the redelegations are viewed by transactions
• Also, there seems to be a reshuffling such that users prefer the unpopular ones more (by brand) as users are moving from the likes of Binance staking
• By volume, Binance Staking has taken away the most volume and the major inflows have been to Coinbase and Kraken
• This further shows a shift from the popular CEX based staking option to a lesser popular option (They’re popular but not as much as Binance)

EXPLANATION & INSIGHTS:

If the vote option of ReDelegator is equal to the vote option of related validator, it is labeled as “Equal Votes”. else, it is labeled as Unequal Votes. Equal Votes are defined when both Redelegator & Validator vote YES or both vote NO (No with Veto and NO are assumed as vote NO in this case). Unequal votes are defined when Redelegator votes YES and validator votes NO or NO WITH VETO or vice-versa. So, I have excluded the vote option ‘ABSTAIN’ from these results because i think there is no EQUAL or Non-Equal vote option for that

• Most changes have been made recently in infamous proposals like that of proposal 82 Otherwise most of the validators have remained constant on their decision most of the times
• About 5% of the total participation or less have been the number of such occurrences by validators
• By equal and unequal votes, most of them redelegators vote equal by count and actions but it’s opposite by volume