You know what's really important when it comes to crypto?

Keeping it safe and secure.

And that's where multisig wallets come in.

Think of multisig wallets like a safe deposit box with multiple keys. Just like how you need multiple people to open the box, you need multiple people to approve transactions from a multisig wallet.

Here's the thing, with a traditional crypto wallet, you only have one key. But with multisig, you need multiple keys. So it's much harder for hackers to steal your funds.

It's like an extra layer of security.

Want to know another cool thing about multisig wallets?

They can be used for shared accounts or team accounts. So instead of relying on one person to control the funds, multiple people need to approve transactions.

This can help prevent fraud and mismanagement.

In a nutshell, a multisig wallet is like a safe deposit box with multiple keys. It adds an extra layer of security to your crypto funds and can be useful for shared accounts or team accounts. You should definitely consider using one for your next crypto investment.

If you find this tweet interesting, kindly retweet the first tweet.

Intro to Multisig wallets

Hype surrounds the upcoming JUP airdrop, with one question on everyone's lips: Can it 10x?

Paper hands itch to sell, diamond hands grip tight - will we witness moonrise or dustbowl?

@weremeow bets big on a 10x, but is it realistic? A thread.

The airdrop is just the opening act.
Beyond the "hold or fold" drama, a deeper question emerges: what will shape JUP's long-term destiny?

I believe the true test lies in crafting a well-oiled incentive machine that drives desired actions and fuels sustainable growth.

To this end, I built a dashboard that helps @JupiterExchange understand its users better than ever.

It unlocks the on-chain patterns of the average user - what they trade, how they trade, and what makes them stick. It even groups users into categories based on their behavior.

With these insights, Jupiter could do something extraordinary: reward users with JUP tokens in a way that makes everyone happy.

My analysis revealed a highly engaged community. Daily, 6-14% of users stuck around, demonstrating their love for Jupiter.

And oh, the growth!

In December, the community reached a whopping 750,000 MAU, a six-fold increase. January remains strong with 595,000 MAU.

What fueled this growth?

$SOL's bullish run attracted new users.

Additionally, a frenzy of interest in memecoins like $BONK and $WIF boosted Jupiter's appeal.

As Jupiter thrives, its traders become heroes of different tales. Some love stablecoin liquidity, trading pairs like SOL/USDC. Others, the "degens," venture into memecoins, especially BONK/SOL.

Each trader deserves incentives tailored to their unique preferences.

My dashboard and report discuss the right incentives for each persona.

See dashboard here: https://flipsidecrypto.xyz/bintuparis/jupiter-dex-user-analysis-for-targeted-token-incentives-jupiter-dex-user-analysis-for-targeted-token-incentives-fY_Fde

See report here: https://open.substack.com/pub/bin2parisx/p/tailoring-jupiters-token-rewards

@PineAnalytics @SuperteamEarn @SuperteamNG

The Hype and Future of JUP: Can it 10x?

Web3 in Nigeria is a joke.

But I must say, it is not a very funny one.

They say crypto awareness is at an all-time high, but where's the proof?

We've got nothing to show for it!

What's blocking us?  A 📜

Nobody seems to know.

Nigerians are going all-in on Web3, embracing it like never before.

Crypto trading is booming, and as at April 2022, over 33 million Nigerian adults were into it.

That's some serious crypto fever!

We've got communities like @web3bridge churning out blockchain developers left and right.

Nigerians are contributing in global DAOs, claiming bounties and grants – you name it.

Heck, we've got airdrop hunters, token-holders, and yield farmers out here hustling!

But wait, with all this hustle and bustle, we still can show forth any tangible product that will onboard millions of Nigerians?

Are we stuck in some Web3 trance?

One day a Web3 company in Nigeria is closing down, and the next day, we're throwing Twitter Space parties for crypto influencers who "rug" their followers.

Can it get any crazier than this?

Sure, buying a car with crypto won't lead to prison time, but trading crypto directly from our banks? Not so much to write home about!

Does it matter? Considering we've all become accustomed to taking the P2P route for on-ramps and off-ramps.

What's the deal?

Where are we missing it?

We are missing👇:

⭐ Collaboration
⭐ Proper financial education
⭐ Flexible crypto policies and regulation
⭐ In-depth events
⭐ Innovative solutions

It's like we've got a never-ending list of blockers.

And let's not get started on our crab in the bucket mentality.

We laugh at other builders when they fail, like it's the end of the world. We keep building in isolation.

Interestingly, web3 has brought about DAOs, decentralized communities that encourage inclusivity and participatory governance.

It helps for builders to embrace these tenets for progress.

But oh boy, the scams and rug pulls!

They're everywhere, tearing us apart.
People want fast money, not realizing they're funding someone else's get-rich-quick scheme.

Not so surprised as quick money was the dream sold to many web3 newbies.

It's even mind-boggling that there are no punishment for these ruggers!

Left and right, we find Web3 events.

But they're mostly beginner-focused.

What about builder-focused events?

The ecosystem needs more in-depth conversations around mass adoption, protocol engineering, shipping products, growth, and not just 'what is DeFi'.

And let's talk about regulations – they're like the annoying roommate that won't leave.

Stiff regulations hamper innovations. When creators make one step forward, regulations pull them steps backward

Hence, the need for more Web3 builders in charge of creating policies.

You also know what else I think?

We don't need just DeFi swaps or Metaverse games. We need products that'll stand the test of time and solve African's unique needs.

Innovative solutions like:

Identity management, Web3 SuperApp for small businesses, cross-border remittances – and more like these.

So there you have it, the wild, wacky world of Web3 in Nigeria.

We've got the energy, the hustle, and the dreams.

Let's channel that into building something incredible together! 🚀

This thread was written for a bounty put out by @SuperteamNG

Web3 Adoption and Challenges in Nigeria

Lending is risky.

In DeFi, the risks are anything but conventional. 

Volatility of collateral tokens is one such risk.

Let's analyze @compoundfinance to understand more.

@Increment_HQ 

Hypothesis: Higher volatility of collateral tokens negatively impacts lending protocol performance. We'll focus on ETH, a volatile collateral on Compound.  2/

Analyzing a period of sharp ETH price fall (Nov 10, 2021 - Jan 25, 2022) and surrounding months for reach, retention, and revenue metrics. 

Lending protocols are network-based products. Hence the need to use the RRR model.  3/ 

Reach - Comparing depositors (who provide tokens) and borrowers (who take loans) helps understand supply and demand.

Slightly more depositors than borrowers suggesting excess supply.    4/ 

Excess supply indicates a healthy protocol, but lack of borrowers may impact depositors' revenue and overall profitability. 

So, balancing supply and demand is key. 

Let's take a further look at other metrics on supply and demand 5/

Aa sharp decline in the borrows per borrowers ratio around week 43 to 47 when ETH fell from $4k+ to $2k region. This decline suggests that borrowers are taking on more debt, either by increasing their loan amounts or by a decrease in the number of borrowers in the protocol.

6/ 

Looking at the count of borrowers chart and the borrowing volume, we see that borrowing volume has increased with no changes in number of borrowers indicating an increased loan amount.

What does this mean?

7/ 

It means concentration of debt &amp; risks leading to reduced diversification &amp; potential impact on profitability. 

Concentration of debt increases risk of defaults, leading to liquidations. Liquidation occurs when collateral value falls below a threshold.  8/

Gradual and fast increase in liquidation events was noticed in analyzed period. 

Week 49, there was a significant increase in the liquidation volume and count. 

Even though liquidations mitigate default risk it can impact borrowers and protocol stability.  9/ 

Flash loans don't require collateral but need to be repaid in the same transaction.

Funnel count analysis reveals fewer flash loan users within a day after depositing and borrowing. 10/ 

For retention, TVL (Total Value Locked) inflow and outflow are important. TVL inflow helps measure user interactions better than TVL alone. TVL may be impacted by rise in token prices.

There was a sharp increase in net change during certain weeks, indicating user engagement. 11/ 

The steep decline in the LDR preceding the fast increase may suggest that there is a decrease in loan demand. However the subsequent rapid increase indicates a reversal of this trend and potentially a higher level of risk exposure. 

12/ 

Retention - Userbase distribution reveals Compound shares a small user overlap with Aave, Venus, and Geist. Indicates competition and user preferences within the lending space. 13/ 

Increase in average deposit volume during the last three weeks of 2022. 

Outstanding debt net change (refers to the total amount of active debt.) indicates no significant increase over time, indicating low risk for the protocol. 14/ 

Finally we look at the transaction volume. In week 49, we see more lower withdrawals and deposits, but increased liquidations and repay. Seeing the increased liquidations reveals price volatility. 15/ 

Price volatility is evident, but balanced by repay volume, indicating less risk for the protocol. 

Managing the risks of volatility of collateral assets, concentration of debt, user engagement, and retention is crucial for lending protocols.  16/

Overall, the analysis suggests that the volatility of the collateral asset ripples on the concentration of debt, the engagement of users, and the retention of users which can all have a negative impact on the performance of a lending protocol. 17/

Therefore, it is important for lending protocols to manage these risks carefully in order to protect their depositors and borrowers. 18/

Analysis of Compound Finance

Today, I'll be analysing what makes one NFT marketplace successful over another. 

This analysis will compare @decentraland to @opensea using @Increment_HQ.

Hypothesis: The diversity and quality of NFT offerings contribute to the success of a marketplace

Decentraland and Opensea are both NFT ecosystems that are available on the Ethereum and Polygon chain. So, we'll make our comparison on both chains.

First, I'll consider the overall NFT traction on the Ethereum and Polygon chains.  To measure NFT traction on Ethereum &amp; Polygon chains, let's look at the active NFT collections. 

They represent ongoing engagement, market demand, user adoption, and ecosystem growth.

The active collections represent the NFT projects with consistent user interaction, such as sales, bids, trades, or interactions.

📈 Ethereum leads with the most NFT collections, while Polygon shows promising growth with a quarter of Ethereum's count. 

Over the past 3 months, Ethereum saw active collections ranging from 4K to 7K weekly. A marketplace operating on both ecosystems can tap into vast opportunities, target different audiences, and stay competitive in the dynamic NFT landscape.

Because our focus is on Decentraland, we take a look at the weekly trading volume by chain and active traders by chain. 

We compared the different chains to understand which chain contributed the most to the growth of this multi-chain NFT ecosystem.

Active traders and weekly volume are key metrics for gauging reach in trading markets. Active traders represent the number of individuals actively participating in trades, while weekly volume reflects the total value of trades conducted within a week.

Ethereum dominates trading volume, while Polygon faces challenges attracting active traders. The marketplace has also seen a decline in active traders, dropping from 240k to 100k in the past 3 weeks. Despite maintaining a range of 700M to 400M, trading volume shows a decline. 

Surprisingly, when we measure the weekly NFT count by chain, Polygon takes over decentraland. It has been so for the past 27 weeks of this year. Why is this so? 

Well, we could correlate it to the notion that gas fees are cheaper on Polygon than Ethereum. https://l2fees.info

Now, we delve into comparing Opensea to Decentraland. 

You may wonder, why compare decentraland to Opensea when they have different business models?

Well, if they operate in the same industry (NFTs), they are your competitors. 

Competing for customers, resources, and market share, it's vital to understand and monitor other NFT platforms.

Also, we noticed that most of decentraland's userbase buyers and sellers are being shared majorly with Opensea, then blur and x2y2 taking a tiny cut. 

Unlike for the buyers user base distribution, most sellers would sell more on Opensea than they would on decentraland. 

An extra talking point would be how Blur came into the picture in February, competing with Opensea for  decentraland's users. 

The spike could be attributed to the blur token launch and airdrop distribution which  happened on February 14th.

https://twitter.com/blur_io/status/1616125798951571456?t=PRGArb_FVDZDpQ-VNm8J7g&s=19

We would compare the number of unique NFT collections, collections bought per buyer, and collection sold per seller on both dApps. These metrics unveil the diversity of NFT offerings, buyer behavior, and seller activity.

Analyzing them helps understand market saturation, user engagement, and the dynamics of NFT transactions. 

Opensea had more unique NFT collections than decentraland. However, buyer and seller behavior were almost the same.

Both marketplace had buyer and sellers buying and selling 2 collections weekly respectively. 

However, there were constant spikes for decentraland buyers and sellers. Sometimes going as high as 4 collections. 

Further on the reach, let's talk about Variety of the top collections on both marketplaces. Assessing the variety of collections, I examined the contribution of each project to the ecosystem's sales.

By analyzing the sales generated by different projects throughout the year, I gained insights into the diversity and impact of each project. This metric provides a sense of the variety within the ecosystem, highlighting the range of artistic styles, themes, and creators.

💥 In Decentraland, 90% of top collections (by sales) are dominated by Decentraland LAND and Estate. On the other hand, Opensea showcases more diversity, with 6 collections receiving 2-4% of total sales and 7 projects contributing 1-2%. 

This demonstrates that around 30% of sales are driven from 10-15 projects, highlighting a broader range of contributors and less reliance on a few projects. 

In terms of retention, I use metrics like days active per user, stickiness ratio and Month-on-month cohort retention. These metrics were chosen to understand user activity, retention, and long-term engagement with the platform.

Days active per user measures engagement, stickiness ratio gauges loyalty. Users on both markets are active 1 day/week. Stickiness ratio showed initial promise but declined rapidly. Both products lack stickiness, so improving user retention is key. 

Month-on-month cohort retention measures user return rates over time. Opensea has a larger cohort size, but decentraland retains more users overall. However, both platforms face challenges in retaining cohorts over extended periods. 

Now let's explore the relationship between the diversity of NFT collections to other success indicators (revenue) such as sales volume, 30-day moving average of average sales, monthly growth size and volume per trader.

📈 Weekly Volume per Trader &amp; Monthly Growth:

Decentraland lags behind Opensea with 3x less volume per trader.

Monthly average growth indicates Decentraland struggling to stay above 0, except for mid-May to early June. 

💰 Daily Sales Volume:

Decentraland struggles with low sales compared to Opensea. Daily sales range from $100 to $5000 for Decentraland, while Opensea reaches millions of dollars. 

📊 Moving Average of 30-day Sales:

Both Decentraland and Opensea show similar average sales trends. However, Decentraland has numerous days with no average sales recorded. 

@Increment_HQ @Covalent_HQ Opensea's success in the NFT market can be attributed to their focus on trending collections. 

They strategically align with the broader NFT trends, leveraging marketing efforts to gain attention and drive sales.

@Increment_HQ @Covalent_HQ On the other hand, Decentraland has faced challenges in generating sales beyond its major NFTs like Estate and LAND. 

To overcome this, they recently launched Decentraland Studios, fostering innovation and creativity. 
https://decentraland.org/blog/community-projects/decentraland-studios-a-verified-registry-of-creators-in-the-metaverse

@Increment_HQ @Covalent_HQ To further enhance sales and reach, Decentraland should consider collaborating with influential NFT artists, brands, and influencers. By partnering with renowned NFT projects, they can tap into their existing fan base and expand their reach to new audiences.

@Increment_HQ @Covalent_HQ Additionally, @decentraland can explore a broader range of #NFT projects to increase the diversity of collections available on their platform. 

By offering a wider selection of NFTs, they can attract a more diverse group of buyers and cater to various tastes and preferences.

Decentraland Vs OpenSea

Could @PancakeSwap beat @Uniswap in liquidity wars? Especially now that it is now on ETH.

With the right incentive, any web3 brand can generate extraordinary results. 

Let's dive into the average user profile, intriguing findings, and a strategic reward allocation plan! 🧵 

@Increment_HQ has tasked me with creating a strategy to allocate $100,000 in mining rewards to @PancakeSwap users to increase engagement. 

Hypothesis: Mining rewards should be designed to encourage users to trade more, try new trading pairs, and provide liquidity.  1/

My first goal will be to profile the average user on @PancakeSwap based on their on-chain behaviour.

Average user👤 profile on the DEX:
💼 6 trades/day 🔄
🔄 2 trading pairs/day
📅 Active 1 day/week
🔁 Uses 1 aggregator    2/ 

🆕 New users mostly buy, few buy/sell and fewer buy/sell/buy
💰 Avg. trade size: $829.53
💹 Weekly trade volume: $4,000-$8,000
🔄 Top pairs: USDT/WBNB, WBNB/BUSD
👥 Majority of new users trade USDT/WBNB     3/ 

About @PancakeSwap 

More liquidity is added than removed on the dex, contributing to increased liquidity on the platform. 

Regardless, liquidity is predominantly added by a single active address, while liquidity removal is carried out by approximately 5 to 11 addresses.🤔  4/ 

The average number of daily trades per trader on PancakeSwap hovers around 5, which is slightly lower than @Uniswap's range of 6 to 17 trades.

Compared to Uniswap on Ethereum, PancakeSwap accumulates 4 times less net liquidity over time. 5/ 

However, occasional spikes occur, making it surpass @Uniswap. In week 9, Pancakeswap had 120x net liquidity than Uniswap😮, and 10x and 13x more net liquidity on Week 15 and  17 respectively. 

What could be the cause of these momentary sharp spikes? 6/ 

Also, trade activity on CAKE pairs is relatively low. However, the CAKE/WBNB trading pair has surprisingly seen higher 📈 volume per trader in the past 9 weeks. 

What could have caused this increase?   7/ 

The pair's volume per trader could have risen for the following reasons:

🔥 0.25% Boosted Earnings
💰 APR raised from 34.16% to 58.14%
💪 178x Multiplier
💲 $8,228,859 in staked liquidity

As seen on https://pancakeswap.finance/farms 8/

🔍 Onchain data shows #PancakeSwap as a top choice for traders in the $1000-$10000 trade range, dominating the BSc ecosystem. 

However, integration with the broader DeFi landscape remains limited, with only a small fraction of trades coming from aggregators.  9/ 

Now, let me reveal my strategic allocation plans for this DeX users'. 

1️⃣ Allocate 30% ($30,000) to users who add liquidity consistently while also offering tiered rewards based on duration and amount provided. 10/

2️⃣ Increase rewards by 20% for trades involving less popular pairs, especially $CAKE pairs. This incentivizes liquidity and trading activity in those pairs.  11/

3️⃣ Allocate 20% ($20,000) to users trading above $1000 to encourage larger trades💼. 

4️⃣ Another 20% will go into a reward structure that increases over time or at specific milestones, similar to @coingecko's candy reward structure 🍬💎.    12/

5️⃣ Finally, 10% will go to users who transact through partner aggregators. This will foster better  ecosystem integration.

✨ By thoughtfully allocating rewards, we can optimize liquidity, boost trading activity, and foster long-term engagement on this Dex.  13/

Confusing terms:
Liquidity: Funds or assets on an exchange
Net Liquidity: Liquidity added - liquidity removed
Trading Pair: Assets traded against each other
Trade size: Amount traded in one transaction
Trade volume: Amount traded over time   14/

DEX: Decentralized exchanges 
Aggregrator: A platform that compares prices across DEXes to get you the best deal. Ex: @1inch 15/

Pancake User Profile (Analysis)

Isn't it fascinating how a promise of incentive can dramatically alter behaviours?

Even for web3 users.

With the right incentive at the right time, web3 brands can generate extraordinary results.

Let me prove this! 🧵

🔍 With the help of @Increment_HQ, I analyzed @Arbitrum and @optimismFND networks to test a hypothesis:

Hypothesis: The speculations of airdrop led to a spike in growth for the Arbitrum network and caused extraordinary results even after the airdrop.

Let's dive into the metrics: Reach, Retention, and Revenue.  📊

For reach, I'll measure weekly transactions, unique active addresses, and average transactions per active address. These metrics gauge user engagement, adoption, and transaction volume.

🔸 Reach: Weekly transaction count, unique active addresses, and average transactions per active address were measured.

Arbitrum and Optimism were neck and neck initially, but Arbitrum gained momentum. In the airdrop month, Arbitrum had 5x more users and maintained its lead. 

Arbitrum consistently had slightly more transactions per active address compared to Optimism, with similar movement patterns.

Both experienced a sharp decline a month before their respective token drops. 📈 

Arbitrum's user growth 📈  were driven by token airdrop speculation. But sustainability should be a key concern.

Stickiness ratio (SR) and Month on Month (MoM) Retention are crucial metrics for retention evaluation.

These metrics measure the percentage of users who remain active in a network after a specific period and they provide insights into long-term user retention. MoM focuses on the retention rate on a monthly basis while SR compares the daily active users to the monthly active users.

🔸 Retention: Despite Arbitrum's faster growth, both platforms had similar retention rates. 

This indicates comparable user experience and network effects.

It also indicates that @optimismFND should focus on improving user acquisition strategies to compete. 👥 

Now, let's look at how the promise of incentives could play a role in the revenue generated for a network. 

We'll measure the native token transfers, ERC-20 token transfers, and gas fees generated.

Native Token Transfers: transfers with chain's native tokens ($OP, $ARB) 💸 

ERC-20 token transfers: transfers with Ethereum-based tokens 🔄 

These metrics + gas fees provide insights into network's economic activity.

Token transfers after Arbitrum's airdrop soared! 🚀 
🔹5x more native token transfers than Optimism
🔹Arbitrum dominated ERC-20 token transfers with 90x more transfers in May

🔹Surprisingly, Optimism peaked in March, having 3x Arbitrum's ERC-20 token transfers 

Memes and events fueled the frenzy! 🌟 

🔹May 2023 meme season spiked ERC-20 token transfers on Arbitrum, as there were free-to-claim token for ARB airdrop participants.

🔹Base launch on Optimism's superchain brought airdrop rumors which caused a surge for Optimism in March.

Also, the Optimism swapping quests on Base wallet in early March may have caused this unusual spike.

https://twitter.com/optimismFND/status/1633879556594466835?t=JmlSmyp_5GAGtDn9mrEy3w&s=19

For gas fees, Optimism managed to accrue $233k, which is tiny compared to the $5 million Abritrum received. 

🚀 Key Takeaways: 

1️⃣ Incentives attract users and create excitement. 
2️⃣ Optimism should enhance user acquisition strategies to compete. 
3️⃣ Memes, airdrops, and events drive token transfers and user activity. 
4️⃣ User acquisition directly impacts revenue in web3 platforms.

Incentives and Web3 Growth

Arbitrum is the biggest L2 network on ETH, taking the most market share.

Despite the numbers it is doing, is $ARB a good token to hold?

Let's look at $ARB's Tokenomics. 

Arbitrum utilizes optimistic rollups, a two-step process to addresses coordination problem. It enables off-chain transaction processing and subsequent verification on the Ethereum mainnet while maintaining the system's integrity.

Even though Arbitrum facilitates faster transaction processing on the Ethereum network, $ARB functions primarily as a governance token rather than a transactional token. 

This distinction limits its direct utility and demand drivers.

Additionally, the Arbitrum protocol can operate without a token, making it challenging to create substantial demand for the tokens.

Also, $Arb doesn't directly accrue value for the protocol itself since ETH is used to incentivizes validators. 

However, token holders can leverage their voting rights and participate in decision-making processes that contribute to the greater good of the DAO.

Few months ago, $ARB was distributed to users and DAOs. 

Who doesn't love free tokens? We all do. Well, not so fast.

While rewarding active participation is cool, it doesn't always guarantee ongoing value creation.

Also, was Arbitrum really open about their distribution?

40M was allocated to an external financial actor and 10M was converted to fiat for supposed "operational costs". 

https://twitter.com/arbitrum/status/1642567580748595202?t=1Pj1yeJ5eoHKhiP3NIpjrw&s=19

This allocation caused a momentarily sell pressure, affecting the token price and liquidity.

Despite that move, it is agreeable that rewarding projects and DAO on the ecosystem would foster value creation.

Not many are aware that Arbitrum implemented a four-year vesting period with monthly unlocks, mitigating potential sell-offs from team members and investors. 

A great move!

However, apart from that token-vesting for teams, the remaining token distribution seems aggressive.

Considering the current lack of strong demand drivers, the token's price could decrease, leading to potential inflationary effects.

Hence, a proper supply management is essential.

Finally, Arbitrum's proposed reward mechanism for DAOs, funded by real revenue generated from L1 and L2 fees, appears to be sustainable. This structure aligns incentives for continued DAO participation.
https://twitter.com/arbitrum/status/1656090360119017472?t=u3QV3nlbIz3fh2CaqcH19g&s=19

In a nutshell, while $Arb brings potential value accrual and sustainable rewards, we need to watch out for token supply, inflation risks, and transparent decision-making.

Last week, I learnt about the 7 principles of tokenomics with @token_research

I used the knowledge gathered from the class to analyse $Arb token.

If you like this analysis, kindly retweet the first tweet.

$ARB Token Analysis

I did a simple analysis into the Aave protocol.

It was a @MetricsDAO challenge but I could not submit on time.

Here are some of the insights I uncovered. 👇👇👇

📊 Aave Token Supply and Withdrawal Insights 📊

1/4 💡 The balance between token supply and withdrawals on the Aave protocol remains relatively stable, indicating a robust lending and borrowing environment. 

Fluctuations may occur, but overall, a healthy equilibrium exists. 

2/4  📅 Seasonal variations in transaction volumes are evident. 

Months like November and March experienced higher activity, reflecting increased user engagement and market participation.  

January and February, however, witnessed a temporary decline in transaction volumes. 

3/4 📉 April and May stood out as months of reduced token supply and withdrawals on the Aave protocol.  

This indicates a period of decreased user activity and overall market participation. Further analysis is needed to understand the underlying causes. #AaveAnalysis #DeFiTrends 

4/4 🚀 Monitoring supply and withdrawal trends is crucial for Aave's success. 

By understanding user behavior patterns, market dynamics, and seasonal fluctuations, Aave can optimize its platform, enhance user experiences, and foster a vibrant decentralized finance ecosystem.

Here's a link to the dashboard on @flipsidecrypto 

https://flipsidecrypto.xyz/0x29A43CEC74995a9D3B2B1dAD20a09DAeb28853b7/aave-tokens-movement-on-aave-protocol-KLlccJ 

I intend to repeat the analysis on @DuneAnalytics to compare the results.

Analysis on Aave Protocol

Picture this: you're working as a crypto ghostwriter, cranking out articles and content left and right, thinking the gravy train will never run out. But guess what? The work suddenly dries up. Yeah, it stopped coming in, my fren.   🧵

And you know what makes matters worse? Most of the extra cash you had lying around got diverted into crypto tokens as an investment. You thought you were being all savvy and stuff, but now your portfolio is looking redder than a tomato.

Well, that's what happened to me.

And I learnt a lesson.

You know, when they say, "don't put all your eggs in one basket," the first thing that comes to mind is diversifying your crypto assets. Or better yet, diversifying your crypto and non-crypto investments.

But here's the thing that many people don't realize: working and investing in crypto can be pretty risky. Especially in this bear market we're in right now, where job security feels like a distant dream and your assets are taking a serious hit.

The truth is, there's just not as much money floating around in the crypto ecosystem at the moment. 

It's a volatile world out there, and having a safety net or a backup plan in other areas is crucial.