
🥪 MEV Monitor: Solana Sandwich Attacks
Table of ContentsIntroductiontl;drThe Financial Impact: Quantifying the Drain & Costs 3.1 Overall Scale of Value Extraction 3.2 Attacker Economics: Costs vs. Profitability 3.3 User Costs: Direct Losses and Transaction Fees 3.4 Temporal Impact Trends 3.5 Summary of Financial ImplicationsWho & How: The Attacker Landscape & Strategies 4.1 The Dual Challenge: Attribution & Ecosystem Complexity 4.2 Attacker Economics as a Behavioral Proxy 4.3 Diverse Execution Methods & Infrastructure Insights 4.4...
Uniswap v3 Gas ⛽️
When using a smart contract blockchain, users have to pay a fee to miners/validators so they include their transaction into the next block to get executed. The fee is called gas and how much of it you need to pay depends on the complexity of the transaction. But while the amount of gas needed for a contract remains constant over time, the price of gas does not, being subject to market forces of supply and demand. *While there is more to say on the subject of gas, Etherscan says it better. In ...
Who's onboarding Solana users?
I think we all have a feeling that Solana keeps on growing as an ecosystem and users continue to join the blockchain. But how are users actually getting onboarded? And how many of them stick around? In this report we will look at three categories users can interact with and follow their retention rates over the course of 6 weeks. These categories are:ProgramsNFTsTokensA quick note on new users: we’re considering an address to be new if it did not make any transaction in the respective categor...

🥪 MEV Monitor: Solana Sandwich Attacks
Table of ContentsIntroductiontl;drThe Financial Impact: Quantifying the Drain & Costs 3.1 Overall Scale of Value Extraction 3.2 Attacker Economics: Costs vs. Profitability 3.3 User Costs: Direct Losses and Transaction Fees 3.4 Temporal Impact Trends 3.5 Summary of Financial ImplicationsWho & How: The Attacker Landscape & Strategies 4.1 The Dual Challenge: Attribution & Ecosystem Complexity 4.2 Attacker Economics as a Behavioral Proxy 4.3 Diverse Execution Methods & Infrastructure Insights 4.4...
Uniswap v3 Gas ⛽️
When using a smart contract blockchain, users have to pay a fee to miners/validators so they include their transaction into the next block to get executed. The fee is called gas and how much of it you need to pay depends on the complexity of the transaction. But while the amount of gas needed for a contract remains constant over time, the price of gas does not, being subject to market forces of supply and demand. *While there is more to say on the subject of gas, Etherscan says it better. In ...
Who's onboarding Solana users?
I think we all have a feeling that Solana keeps on growing as an ecosystem and users continue to join the blockchain. But how are users actually getting onboarded? And how many of them stick around? In this report we will look at three categories users can interact with and follow their retention rates over the course of 6 weeks. These categories are:ProgramsNFTsTokensA quick note on new users: we’re considering an address to be new if it did not make any transaction in the respective categor...

Subscribe to fknmarqu

Subscribe to fknmarqu
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Axelar, the secure cross-chain communication network, launched its own utility token $AXL which in its native form can be swapped on Osmosis. In this report we will have a closer look at the $AXL/$OSMO pool ID 812 to track the liquidity provided since launch, and track the swaps baing made with the token.
https://app.flipsidecrypto.com/dashboard/axl-axelar-osmosis-pool-activity-OSokPQ
☝️ The dashboard can be updated on-demand by pressing the refresh button 🔄 in the top right corner of the page.
Shortly after the creation of the pool we can see activity starting to pick up. During the first hour we can see 8 actions being made in the pool, adding a net amount of 1.29M $AXL and 560k $OSMO. Over the following hours the asset volumes are considerably lower but there are a lot more actions being made, pointing to smaller liquidity providers starting to join the pool.
Although volumes decrease significantly, they never cross into a negative zone, meaning that liquidity continues to flow into the pool.

This is being confirmed when we look at all the actions being made with each asset of the pool and there have only been a couple of withdrawals made over the last 24 hours.

As another layer to the activity and volumes we’ve seen previously, we can now look at the amount of LP tokens minted by each provider for the assets they provided. Almost 90% of all the liquidity comes from just one address out of the 200 that have joined the pool so far, with all others having only thin slices at most.

Osmosis enables users to swap assets that don’t have a pool of their own, so this section will include swaps that might interact with other pools before completion and is not limited to just $AXL/$OSMO swaps.
Just as in the case of pool actions, we can see the most trading activity closely after the creation of the pool. With the volumes and activity winding down in a similar way to pool actions, we can assume some of the swaps were made in order to obtain the $AXL needed to become a liquidity provider.

Not only volumes dropped, but so did the size of each individual swap. The downward trend is likely to continue in the short term as the launch hype cools off, but as with any newly launched asset, it is also very sensible to news and that can boost overall activity, volume and size.
There is no particular preference for a trade size, but we can see most of the amounts swapped in are worth under $100, with the swaps counts quickly decreasing at greater values. The token being traded in does not correlate with volume or frequency over the observed time frame.

Most of the volume is being made by trading $OSMO for $AXL as we might expect. There are many other tokens being swapped to/from $AXL from the #812 pool, but the only other one making significant volumes is $ATOM. The full list of assets being swapped can be further explored in the live dashboard.

The Osmosis pool quickly became active and had much of its current liquidity deposited in the first hours after its creation. Over the following hours we could see more but smaller providers joining in and swapping activity following along on a similar curve.
Since launch, over 1.74M $AXL and 0.81M $OSMO were added to the Osmosis pool. However, much of it belongs to just one provider while all other addresses share a little over 10% of the total liquidity.
Although current activity is significantly lower than what the early hours were signaling towards, liquidity is not yet leaving the pool and there have only been a couple of withdrawals in the last 24 hours.
So far, the total swapping volume of the pool sits at $1.3M. Taking advantage of the Osmosis capabilities, traders are not limited to swapping just the assets of the pool. While there have been many tokens swapped for/to $AXL, the main counterpart remains $OSMO, but we can also see significant volumes being made with $ATOM.
Axelar, the secure cross-chain communication network, launched its own utility token $AXL which in its native form can be swapped on Osmosis. In this report we will have a closer look at the $AXL/$OSMO pool ID 812 to track the liquidity provided since launch, and track the swaps baing made with the token.
https://app.flipsidecrypto.com/dashboard/axl-axelar-osmosis-pool-activity-OSokPQ
☝️ The dashboard can be updated on-demand by pressing the refresh button 🔄 in the top right corner of the page.
Shortly after the creation of the pool we can see activity starting to pick up. During the first hour we can see 8 actions being made in the pool, adding a net amount of 1.29M $AXL and 560k $OSMO. Over the following hours the asset volumes are considerably lower but there are a lot more actions being made, pointing to smaller liquidity providers starting to join the pool.
Although volumes decrease significantly, they never cross into a negative zone, meaning that liquidity continues to flow into the pool.

This is being confirmed when we look at all the actions being made with each asset of the pool and there have only been a couple of withdrawals made over the last 24 hours.

As another layer to the activity and volumes we’ve seen previously, we can now look at the amount of LP tokens minted by each provider for the assets they provided. Almost 90% of all the liquidity comes from just one address out of the 200 that have joined the pool so far, with all others having only thin slices at most.

Osmosis enables users to swap assets that don’t have a pool of their own, so this section will include swaps that might interact with other pools before completion and is not limited to just $AXL/$OSMO swaps.
Just as in the case of pool actions, we can see the most trading activity closely after the creation of the pool. With the volumes and activity winding down in a similar way to pool actions, we can assume some of the swaps were made in order to obtain the $AXL needed to become a liquidity provider.

Not only volumes dropped, but so did the size of each individual swap. The downward trend is likely to continue in the short term as the launch hype cools off, but as with any newly launched asset, it is also very sensible to news and that can boost overall activity, volume and size.
There is no particular preference for a trade size, but we can see most of the amounts swapped in are worth under $100, with the swaps counts quickly decreasing at greater values. The token being traded in does not correlate with volume or frequency over the observed time frame.

Most of the volume is being made by trading $OSMO for $AXL as we might expect. There are many other tokens being swapped to/from $AXL from the #812 pool, but the only other one making significant volumes is $ATOM. The full list of assets being swapped can be further explored in the live dashboard.

The Osmosis pool quickly became active and had much of its current liquidity deposited in the first hours after its creation. Over the following hours we could see more but smaller providers joining in and swapping activity following along on a similar curve.
Since launch, over 1.74M $AXL and 0.81M $OSMO were added to the Osmosis pool. However, much of it belongs to just one provider while all other addresses share a little over 10% of the total liquidity.
Although current activity is significantly lower than what the early hours were signaling towards, liquidity is not yet leaving the pool and there have only been a couple of withdrawals in the last 24 hours.
So far, the total swapping volume of the pool sits at $1.3M. Taking advantage of the Osmosis capabilities, traders are not limited to swapping just the assets of the pool. While there have been many tokens swapped for/to $AXL, the main counterpart remains $OSMO, but we can also see significant volumes being made with $ATOM.
No activity yet