Comparing data from the past three months between Optimism and Arbitrum: Which one is the more popular L2?
Comparing L2 popularity: Optimism vs. Arbitrum in the past 3 months.
Compare the performance of Optimism and Arbitrum over the past three months in terms of coverage, retention, and revenue. Written by Popescu Razvan.
The debate between optimistic rollups has never stopped, so let’s compare the performance of Optimism and Arbitrum over the past three months in terms of coverage, retention, and revenue to see which one is better.
The “coverage, retention, and revenue” framework focuses on the metrics that any blockchain ecosystem cares about. All blockchains should focus on three things: expanding their user base (coverage), retaining their user base (retention), and profiting from their user base (revenue).
First, let’s look at the coverage of Optimism. The average daily transaction volume is 254,566, while the average daily active address count is 72,734, processing 3.23 transactions per second. The coverage looks “good,” but it doesn’t mean much without comparison.
- Exploring the Evolution of the Web3 Community – Messari
- Why is it said that further strength in risk assets does not necess...
- Uniswap Evolution: Opportunities and Impact of V4
Next, let’s look at the coverage of Arbitrum. The average daily transaction volume is 1,230,979, while the average daily active address count is 236,396, processing 11.73 transactions per second. Hmm, Arbitrum seems more active.
Interestingly, even though Arbitrum looks 4-5 times busier, the ratio between Arbitrum’s average transactions per day divided by active addresses, 5.20, and Optimism’s 3.5, is not far apart.
Next, let’s look at Optimism’s retention. Retention seems to be slowly declining (possibly due to the bear market). The number of “user” active days per week is also a great metric.
Now let’s look at Arbitrum’s retention. Retention seems to be declining at a faster rate (possibly due to airdrops). The number of “user” active days per week is also lower.
Finally, let’s analyze Optimism’s revenue. The total trading volume of the Optimism DEX is $1 billion, gas consumption is $42,729, and gas fees are $0.01. Optimism focuses on public goods, so there are few airdrop speculation activities related to trading volume. The gas fees paid by each active address look good.
Let’s take a look at Arbitrum again. Arbitrum has about $52 billion in DEX trading volume, $303,311,801 in gas consumption, and an average gas fee of $2-4. The gas fees paid by each active address look a bit strange and suddenly drop.
In conclusion, my observation is that both Optimistic Rollups look very healthy and vibrant. They have different goals and cannot be compared solely on objective metrics, especially since Arbitrum recently did an airdrop. A more proper analysis may need to be conducted when the next bull market begins. They both have good traditions and embrace the DAO culture and Web3 sponsorship programs.
Don’t forget that Optimism is built on supporting public goods. This is a sustainable ecosystem funding experiment driven by protocol revenue. Arbitrum seems to be more focused on decentralization, as it is the first EVM rollup to achieve the first stage of decentralization.