The crypto bull run is gaining momentum, with all eyes on Bitcoin. However, memecoins are stealing attention, boosting the Solana ecosystem. Memecoins are popular for onboarding new users, as they promise quick or life-changing gains. The thrill of trading them feels like a casino rush, driving their appeal.
Traditionally, bull runs start with money flowing into Bitcoin, then large-cap altcoins, small caps, and finally memecoins and NFTs. This time, it’s different. The run began with Bitcoin, followed by a mix of last cycle’s large caps (Algorand, XRP, Cardano) and memecoins.
While the Base ecosystem seemed ready to lead the memecoin mania, Solana overtook it with the success of PumpFun.
Many crypto “influencers” are even speculating that a utility coin-driven bull run might not materialize this cycle, casting doubt on Ethereum’s potential for significant gains. As we know, smart money often accumulates undervalued or less visible coins with strong narratives and high success potential. Whenever a coin is being shilled on twitter or Youtube, it’s very important to do an extensive research and assess if it’s too late to get in.
Comparing Ethereum and Solana
Let’s compare Ethereum and Solana ecosystems to understand wether Ethereum is underperforming:
As of 20 november 2024
Price
FDV
Volume (24h)
Circulating supply
TVL
Latest revenu
Highest revenu
Transactions
Ethereum
3100$
373b
28b
120M
59b
Around 3M per day
Around 203M per day (2022)
Around 1M per day
Solana
234$
111b
6.9b
474M
8b
Around 5M per day
Around 5.5M per day (2024)
Around 51M per day
We can see that Solana has approximately four times more tokens in circulation than Ethereum. If Solana had four times fewer tokens in circulation to match Ethereum’s supply, its price could be closer to $1,000 (474/120×234=924$). When considering the supply factor, we can see that Ethereum is around 3 times more expensive than Solana (3100 vs 924).
Let’s see if Ethereum’s performance justifies being 3 times more expensive than Solana.
Performance comparison
If we compare the total value locked, we can see that it is 7 times higher on Ethereum than on Solana. This suggests that Ethereum is viewed as a more trusted chain, where institutions prefer to park assets with fewer transactions but larger amounts. The total value locked will increase rapidly as Ethereum gains in value.
The number of transactions on Solana is currently 51 times higher than Ethereum, however the revenue is only around 2 times higher (As of 20 november 2024 – with all the memecoin mania). While this cements Solana as a leader in transaction throughput, we can view this differently as it takes much more effort on Solana to produce the same revenue. We are also not taking into account all the bundled transactions that are validated on Ethereum through the different Layer2 solutions.
Another factor to consider is that Ethereum set a record revenue of $203 million in a single day in 2022, according to DeFiLlama. While this level of revenue may not be repeated anytime soon—especially with the Dencun upgrade and fee adjustments—it sets a significant milestone for Ethereum’s potential compared to Solana.
Memecoin mania
The memecoin mania will likely shift to other blockchains, particularly Ethereum L2s, as they attract fresh users with lower fees and faster transactions. However, this hype will probably fade toward the end of the bull run. Solana will face significant competition for memecoins in the short term and will need to pivot to new narratives, such as AI, to maintain its performance edge. While it’s likely that the memecoin craze will end with many investors losing money and realizing they were shilled on, the overall hype will eventually subside. This gives a direct strategic advantage to Ethereum.
Both Ethereum and Solana are strong projects that are likely to perform well during the bull run. However, it’s important to understand that the capital flowing into crypto can’t chase all projects at once. Money will rotate between different projects, selecting winners and losers, and shifting narratives multiple times along the way. Investors will aim to profit from the highs and lows of each rotation, ultimately exiting when the bull market begins to fade.
This is why it’s crucial not to fall for narratives or become emotionally attached to a project. Conducting your own research is essential to understand why certain narratives are being pushed and fed to you daily, often obscuring other potential opportunities.
Real World Assets are physical assets, like real estate, commodities, shares, and artwork, that are represented digitally on a blockchain. By converting these assets into digital tokens, investors can buy, sell, and trade smaller portions. This makes previously exclusive asset classes more accessible. This model of fractional ownership broadens access to high-value assets, enabling individuals to invest in items that would typically necessitate significant capital, which in turn enhances investment opportunities.
Tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) offer several significant benefits, such as enhanced liquidity, increased efficiency, and improved transparency. Traditional assets often suffer from illiquidity, making cash conversion challenging. However, tokenization allows these assets to be traded on digital platforms, facilitating quicker and more accessible transactions. The use of blockchain technology provides clear record-keeping and automates processes with smart contracts. It reduces the dependence on intermediaries, cuts costs, and fosters trust. Furthermore, RWAs create new opportunities for diversifying portfolios, giving investors options to allocate risk beyond conventional stocks and bonds.
Despite these benefits, RWAs come with challenges, including regulatory hurdles, valuation difficulties, and security concerns. Different jurisdictions regulate tokenized assets in various ways, creating compliance complexity, and accurately pricing RWAs remains tricky due to their real-world dependencies. Nonetheless, RWAs have the potential to reshape finance, merging traditional and digital markets, increasing global market access, and providing blockchain with practical, real-world applications that could revolutionize investment practices.
We will look at 3 different projects in the space.
Ondo finance
Ondo Finance is a DeFi platform that bridges traditional finance with blockchain by offering tokenized versions of real-world assets, such as U.S. Treasury bills and corporate bonds. This allows investors to access stable, yield-generating financial products within the crypto ecosystem, providing lower-risk, fixed-income opportunities compared to typical DeFi products. By tokenizing these assets and managing them with smart contracts, Ondo enhances accessibility, transparency, and efficiency for both retail and institutional investors, aiming to create a compliant, stable link between conventional finance and decentralized markets.
Ondo is deployed on several blockchain such as Mantle and Ethereum. The treasury bills native tokens (USDY and OUSG) can be bridged from one chain to another and used in DEFI to earn an additional yield.
Mantra
While Ondo’s goal is to tokenize real world assets into tokens, Mantra offers a layer1 solution customized for RWAs. Its goal is to simplify the adherence to regulatory requirements. Mantra is built using the Cosmos sdk and offers ready made modules that developers can build on or leverage such as a compliance ID which offers a single solution for all Mantra Apps for KYC solutions.
Mantra integrated Ondo‘s USDY token and offers it as a genesis asset throughout the blockchain.
Anzen
Anzen Finance specialize in real-world lending, focusing on integrating real-world assets (RWAs) into the DeFi ecosystem. Its goal is to provide stable, yield-generating opportunities. By connecting blockchain-based lending with traditional financial instruments, like loans backed by U.S. Treasury bills or other secure assets, Anzen aims to offer a safer, more predictable alternative to typical crypto-based lending platforms. Any user can provide liquidity to Anzen which will be used to power real world secured loans. Anzen partnered with Ondo by backing part of its reserve with tokenized security deposits backed by Ondo’s token.
Anzen offer a stable coin USDz on several chains (Ethereum, Arbitrum, base, etc…) that is backed by real loans and other financial assets. USDz can be staked to earn around 15% yield. Anzen also offers different strategic vaults and earn additionnal yields by locking your coins for a period of time.
Anzen has presently an airdrop opportunity. All you have to do is hold USDz to start accumulating points. You can buy it directly from Anzen or swap into it on any dex like jumper. If you use your USDz in DEFI on platforms like Aerodrome or Ionic, you can earn a multiplier on your liquidity.
Do not forget to do an extensive research before diving in, because holding USDz comes with risks. USDz can unpeg from real USD if any of the underlying loans has some default. Using USDz on DEFI platforms adds another layer of smart contract risk, impermanent loss, etc…
In 2024, numerous liquid restaking protocols emerged within the Ethereum ecosystem, allowing users to leverage their staked Ethereum as capital to support new proof of stake networks. There is now a growing interest in exploring methods to stake bitcoin as well. A lot of techniques are being developed to make the idle bitcoin “liquid” without having to alienate them in complex financial assets.
We will go over the latest projects in the bitcoin ecosystem. We’ll explore the latest advancements in this field and assess their benefits, drawbacks and risks.
Wrapped BTC
Bitcoin’s lack of smart contract support led to the initial idea of encapsulating Bitcoin in another token on Ethereum. This token maintains a 1:1 peg to Bitcoin’s value. It is tradable across various decentralized exchanges and can be utilized in Ethereum’s decentralized finance ecosystem. Users have the option to redeem the token for BTC at any time.
Custodial projects like cbBTC function similarly to USDT or USDC. Wrapped Bitcoin is held in custody by entities such as Coinbase. These companies are responsible for issuing and burning the wrapped tokens. They ensure that the amount of wrapped Bitcoin on chains like Ethereum corresponds 1:1 to the Bitcoin held in reserve. This model relies on on-chain proof of reserves for transparency, confirming the existence of the underlying Bitcoin.
WBTC is one of the first and largest examples. It has a market cap of around $10 billion, compared to cbBTC’s $0.5 billion market cap. However, custodial wrapped Bitcoin introduces certain risks. It includes smart contract vulnerabilities, potential insolvency of the custodial entity, and the risk of de-pegging if reserves become insufficient.
As blockchain is often synonymous to decentralization, new technologies have emerged to decentralize the storage of the wrapped Bitcoin. In the context of wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC), there have been attempts to decentralize the storage and issuance process. Newer technologies and protocols are emerging to address this centralization, aiming for more decentralized control over the Bitcoin collateral used in wrapped tokens.
Decentralized wrapped BTC
tBTC: A decentralized protocol where Bitcoin is locked in a trustless manner, using multiple signers to manage Bitcoin collateral without a centralized custodian.
renBTC: It allows users to mint wrapped Bitcoin on Ethereum through a decentralized network of nodes.
These systems aim to remove the reliance on a single centralized custodian by distributing the responsibility of managing Bitcoin reserves. However, decentralization in this space is still evolving and is not as widespread as centralized models like WBTC. Therefore, while decentralization efforts exist, custodial wrapped Bitcoin still dominates the space.
Babylon
Babylon allows users to stake their bitcoin to secure other chains while keeping them on bitcoin’s chain under their full custody. However, they have to provide a slashing guarantee. Whenever a malicious activity occurs, a slashing can be triggered. Babylon uses Bitcoin in self-custodial vaults for staking, and slashing penalties apply when misbehavior like double-signing occurs. If you double-sign, the network can extract your private key via Extractable One-Time Signatures (OTS), proving the violation and triggering a slashing event. Babylon likely does not penalize validators for simply going offline, as its focus is on preventing provable malicious behavior.
It is important to note that the private key exposed is the key of the validator (finality provider). It is only possible to expose the key when the validator tries to double spend by signing the same block twice at the same height. A regular user will usually delegate the validation process to a finality provider and not himself. This exposes him to slashing only, without exposing his private key and compromising his other assets. The finality provider has to be vigilant about the assets present in its account and refrain from using the same keys for validating many POS. So users can reduce their risk by not signing blocks for securing any PoS.
Risks
Since Bitcoin does support smart contracts, the design of Babylon is limited to cryptography and Bitcoin’s timestamping and scripting language. This limitation increases the risks of malfunctions and reduces the flexibility of the protocol, which uses drastic techniques such as private key exposure to ensure slashing guarantees.
Babylon is in its beginnings and the risks are real. Even if you are planning on delegating your votes, make sure to use a newly created wallet with the amount of Bitcoin you’re ready to stake and that no other BRC20 tokens are present.
Here’s a good article that explains how Babylon works. We can view Babylon as a native staked protocol for Bitcoin.
Lombard LST
You may have heard of protocols like Lombard and solvBTC, which offer Liquid Staked Bitcoin (LSBTC) solutions. These protocols issue their own liquid staking tokens, such as LBTC (from Lombard), representing Bitcoin staked via the Babylon protocol. The key benefit of holding an liquid staked Bitcoin like LBTC is that it allows users to continue earning staking rewards without locking up their Bitcoin. This token can be used in decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms to generate additional yield or swapped for other assets.
When you deposit Bitcoin into a protocol like Lombard, it stakes that Bitcoin through Babylon. In return, you receive a proof of deposit. This proof is then used to mint the LBTC token on the Ethereum network via a smart contract. However, while LBTC offers flexibility and yield opportunities, it carries certain risks. Users are still subject to the same slashing risks associated with Babylon’s staking mechanism. Additionally, there are smart contract risks involved in issuing and burning LBTC on Ethereum. as well as potential de-pegging risks.
These additional risks highlight the need for careful consideration when engaging with liquid staking protocols.
SolvBTC LST
SolvBTC is similar to Lombard with the main difference that it has a Staking Abstraction Layer that is designed to support different staking protocols such as Babylon, CoreDAO, Ethena etc… This makes it more robust since it does not depend on a single protocol like Babylon, but it adds a complexity. SolvBTC is also available on many L2s and different chains such as BNB and Avax.
Bitcoin LRT & DEFI
New protocols and DeFi platforms are evolving to offer users the ability to re-stake liquid staked Bitcoin (LSBTC). This enables them to secure additional blockchain networks while earning even more rewards. This process, called liquid restaking, allows the LSBTC—tokens like LBTC or solvBTC—to be staked again on other chains or DeFi platforms. By doing this, users can simultaneously participate in securing multiple protocols and earn additional yield from each network.
For example, a user might stake their LSBTC in a DeFi protocol that offers additional rewards for providing liquidity or securing another layer of blockchain infrastructure. This could include cross-chain staking, where a single LSBTC can help validate transactions on Ethereum, Cosmos, etc. The restaked LSBTC creates a compounding effect where users are not only benefiting from the underlying Bitcoin’s yield but also from the staking rewards and incentives provided by the additional protocols. Some platforms even provide a liquid version of the restaked token that can be further used in DEFI compounding the yield.
However, with re-staking comes the potential for additional risks, including cross-chain security vulnerabilities, increased exposure to slashing, and liquidity risks, as multiple chains rely on the same staked asset for security.For example, we can restake them in symbiotic, karak or ether.fi to earn a further yield.
Ether.fi
An example of liquid staking and restaking is eBTC offered by EtherFi, which integrates with Lombard and Babylon for Bitcoin staking. Through partnerships like Symbiotic, EtherFi allows users to restake eBTC for additional rewards while still earning staking yields. The eBTC token remains liquid and can be utilized in DeFi protocols, offering flexibility while combining both staking and restaking opportunities.
Other restaking platforms include Swell’s swbtc, eigenlayer and karak.
pStake
pSTAKE is focused on liquid staking for Bitcoin, where users can stake BTC and receive a liquid staked token (such as yBTC) in return. This allows them to earn rewards via Babylon’s security-sharing protocol while keeping liquidity. It enables users to utilize their staked Bitcoin in decentralized finance (DeFi) without locking it up fully, providing yield opportunities while securing PoS chains
Fractal
Fractal Bitcoin is a Bitcoin sidechain aimed at improving Bitcoin’s scalability while retaining its core proof-of-work (PoW) consensus. It introduces Cadence Mining, a mechanism that alternates between independent block mining and merged mining with Bitcoin to enhance security and efficiency. Fractal also supports BRC-20 tokens, enabling token creation and trading, similar to Ethereum’s ERC-20 standard. Additionally, it re-enables the OP_CAT opcode, providing limited smart contract capabilities. The network focuses on faster transactions and reduced fees.
Bitcoin Layer2
Bitcoin Layer 2 solutions, such as the Lightning Network, Stacks, and Liquid Network, aim to enhance Bitcoin’s scalability, speed, and functionality. They enable faster and cheaper transactions by moving processes off-chain while still benefiting from Bitcoin’s security. These solutions also allow for new use cases, like smart contracts and decentralized finance (DeFi), making Bitcoin more versatile.
Some of the newer Bitcoin L2s are B2, CoreDAO, CoreDAO, BOB, merlin, fuel.
Bitcoin native bridges
A key development in Bitcoin’s cross-chain space is the introduction of decentralized native Bitcoin bridges. Symbiosis recently launched a decentralized bridge that allows users to transfer and swap Bitcoin between different blockchains. Unlike traditional wrapped Bitcoin solutions, Symbiosis’ bridge uses native Bitcoin rather than tokenized representations. This provides a more seamless and decentralized process for users to move Bitcoin across ecosystems.
The bridge leverages smart contracts and a non-custodial architecture, enhancing security while maintaining decentralization. It also supports low-cost swaps and bridging for small amounts of Bitcoin. This addresses challenges like high fees and slow transaction times. This native bridge can also integrate with protocols that restake Bitcoin for additional yield, making it a versatile tool for decentralized finance.
Other bridges in the ecosystem provide similar services, with varying degrees of decentralization. For instance, projects like ThorChain have long offered decentralized swapping for Bitcoin, but Symbiosis distinguishes itself by supporting a broader range of chains and focusing on the native asset rather than wrapped tokens. These innovations mark a significant shift towards making Bitcoin more compatible with DeFi and other blockchain applications.
Ethereum restaking technologies are becoming increasingly complex and confusing. Since it’s one of the trending narratives, let’s break it down to understand the differences between the layers and compare the technologies.
Ethereum Native Staking
The first layer is Ethereum native staking. To become a staking validator, you need 32 ETH, a dedicated computer and a strong internet connection. Unlike Proof of Work mining (bitcoin), The hardware does not have to be powerful. The security is guaranteed by the staked 32 ETH. The validator will run specific software and be penalized for downtimes and malicious behavior.
Pooled Staking
If you don’t have 32 ETH, you have the option to delegate your ETH to a trusted validator. The validator will distribute the rewards and retain a commission. Typically, you will need to manually claim your rewards. Your tokens still belong to you since they are locked in a smart contract, and only you can initiate the withdrawal. However, you will need to trust the validator on multiple levels:
You need to trust that the validator’s smart contract is free of bugs and has undergone audits.
You must ensure that the validator will not experience downtime, as your ETH is also at risk of being slashed.
It’s important to note that it usually takes a few days for your tokens to be available after unlocking them.
Liquid Staking (LST)
Liquid staking is an advanced form of pooled staking. Instead of your tokens being locked, they are sent to a common pool within the smart contract. You receive a liquid version of ETH (LST token, for example, eeth), representing your share in the pool. You can unstake at any time by sending your LST back to the smart contract and receiving your original ETH in return. There is a short unlocking period, but if you don’t want to wait, you can swap your LST for ETH on a DEX. The main advantage is that your tokens, although staked, remain liquid. You can reuse them in DEFI.
A commission of the rewards is kept by the protocol, and the rest is sent to the common pool. This means you don’t have to claim your reward and pay network fees; the rewards accrue directly in the value of your LST. Over time, the value of 1 LST becomes greater than 1 ETH. Most LSTs are available on layer 2 networks, which helps you save on network fees.
Mantle Eth: They have a new campaign going on in 3 days!
Restaking (LRT):
Restaking involves reusing the Ethereum validator infrastructure and resources to simultaneously secure new networks. Validators use custom software to secure multiple networks, earning additional yield using the same hardware and power. New decentralized blockchains seeking a stable and secure network for their proof of stake needs can utilize this service for a modest fee, as opposed to establishing their own network of validators from scratch. So we can view restaking as a shared security layer.
By restaking your ETH, you receive a token in return (Liquid restaked token – LRT) and earn additional yield from the new protocols in addition to your native Ethereum restaking. Most LST providers automatically restake your initial staked ETH, allowing you to benefit from restaking advantages. LST providers may collaborate with various restaking providers to optimize your yields.
Top LRT platforms:
EigenLayer Eigenlayer is the first restaking protocol. For now, it only supports the Ethereum mainnet and allows you to restake ETH, most established LSTs as well as its governance token EIGEN.
Symbiotic: Symbiotic is a direct competitor to Eigenlayer. It accepts different tokens as a collateral and offers networks seeking security the choice of different vaults, each vault having its own security strategy. Mellow finance partnered with Lido to create vaults on symbiotic to compete directly with Eigenlayer. If you want to participage in Symbiotic airdrop, you can check Ether.fi’s super symbiotic vault.
Karak is an emerging competitor with strong backing. It supports many chains including Layer2s and a full basket of tokens. You can use the following referal codes (absd6, Egi8A, XNC6A, PXmRT)
Mitosis
Mitosis is neither an LST nor an LRT. This may be confusing because when you deposit your LST (Etherfi eETH), you receive miweETH in return (Mitosis LST). However, Mitosis will not use your LST for restaking (security layer) purposes. Instead, Mitosis functions as a liquidity layer (Ecosystem-owned liquidity). It acts as a vault and seeks out opportunities in DEFI to maximize profits. With substantial liquidity, it can access custom deals that regular users cannot. Additionally, users can participate in governance to vote on future proposals for strategies.
Zircuit
We will talk briefly about Zircuit since it might be confused as and LRT. Zircuit in fact is a Layer2 solution (AI based) and when you restake your LST with Zircuit, it’s for the purpose of securint the Zircuit network.
Risks
Projects are evolving rapidly, with new concepts emerging daily. Protocols are teaming up to stay ahead of the curve and all this might be confusing for the average user. It’s important to consider the risks associated with each project before getting involved. The risk is very real – at the end of the day, you are giving up your ETH for some LST which is nothing but an ERC20 “pegged” to ETH based mostly on trust. While you can unstake and receive your original ETH back, there’s a possibility of a smart contract bug locking your deposit or the value of LST decreasing on the secondary market for various reasons. So if you use your LST in DEFI you might be at risk of liquidation. A lot can go wrong, so conducting thorough research is crucial.
So you missed ZKsync’s airdrop although you made sure to check all the boxes. You bridged from Ethereum’s main net, kept a minimum balance of .005 ETH, interacted with many protocols. You ensured to use paymaster, paid some network fees and got nothing. Without getting too technical, the main criteria for ZKSync was Time Weighted Average Balance. In short what mattered the most is how much you bridged and how long you kept it there. Sounds easy, but who would have guessed! Bridging an extra 100$ and keeping it a a liquidity pool could have made all the difference. Most farmers are discouraged and want to quit crypto farming altogether. This is one of the risks of farming, we put a lot of effort and money with no guarantees in return. Each project is free to choose how to manage its airdrop and we must be ready for everything.
Our option is to find the next project which might have a better distribution and is more promising. Let’s have a look at the upcoming opportunities that are in line.
Zksync ecosystem
Before removing your liquidity from zksync, double check if you have some points in in the ecosystem’s dapps. It might be worth continuing to farm these projects as some of them like Syncswap promised to distribute part (or all) of their ZK token allocation back to their communities.
Zyfi has an active campaign where you can earn points by doing basic activities, like swapping using paymaster and. You can also earn points by interacting with different protocols. It’s easy to track your progress, however there’s no leaderboard so it’s hard to estimate how you’re doing compared to others. Make sure not to push a lot of “spam” transactions and do your own research before using such protocols, the risks are not negligible.
You can also check KZ. KZ is a meme coin that rewards all farmers of zksync that did not qualify for the airdrop. While it’s hard to assess its future value, you can at least see if you qualify for some points already. It is also backed by major players.
Scroll & Linea
Scroll and Linea both have active campaigns that are competing directly with each others. Their goal is to attract the most liquidity to their ecosystem. On Linea, you can earn liquidity experience points LXPL by depositing selected assets on specific platforms. It’s not clear how the LXPL compares with LXP, the basic experience points that you were able to earn in linea park. You can track your progress and compare your metrics with others on a dashboard provided by Openblock. As of today, you can still farm Linea. However, you should be aware that LXPL points will decrease as the campaign advances and it will end when the TVL reaches 3b.
Scroll has a similar program where you earn “sessions” if you provide specific assets. You can track your sessions here. For now, you can earn sessions just by holding assets. Later on, you can earn sessions by providing liquidity and it will be retroactive. It’s important to note that you do not earn sessions anymore for transactions fees, so pushing transactions will not earn you points.
While both projects are comparable to zksync, make sure it’s not too late before jumping in.
Taiko
Taiko’s initial airdrop was somewhat similar to Zksync. A lot of farmers were excluded although they made sure to transact on all the test nets (there were many!) and participated in Galxe quests. However, only the top 300k wallets received an airdrop.
At first, Taiko dismissed the Galxe quests as being simply for educational purposes. However for season 2, they decided to give users retroactive points retroactively for previous Galxe quests. Season 2 is much more structured that season 1 where you had to use many Testnets, never sure how many transactions you should push. In season 2 you can track your points, check the leaderboard and claim your Galxe points.
If you decide to remove your assets from Zksync to Taiko, you can optimize each transaction to qualify for many airdrops at the same time. By using a combination of 0xastra and orbitrer.finance, you can earn points on 0xastra, orbitrer, taiko and KZ depending on the route.
0xastra is a new GameFi experience powered by Orbitrer. You can earn points and complete quests interactively by bridging assets. If you ever used orbitrer, you can claim points on 0xastra retroactively, so it’s a good idea to check them out.
As usual, always do an extensive research before using any projects.
Syscoin is presented as a modular multi role layer “related” to Bitcoin. There’s a lot going on, a lot of modules and a lot of acronyms around Syscoin. Let’s break it down and understand exactly how is it related to Bitcoin, how it compares to other projects and what potential does it have.
What is Syscoin
Syscoin started as a fork of bitcoin, which is a proof of work blockchain. Over the years it has successfully picked many new concepts from the blockchain industry and integrated them to Syscoin in a consistent design. Syscoin has kept its code closely up to date with bitcoin core making sure to integrate new upgrade (ex: taproot). However the difference in the code is non-negligent and the upgrades may not be seamless.
Technologies
Besides sharing the initial code base, the other major relation is that Syscoin is merge mined with bitcoin. Merge mining is a technique that allows miners to efficiently use their computational power to mine multiple cryptocurrencies simultaneously. It enhances the security of auxiliary chains and provides additional rewards to miners without requiring extra resources. It is equivalent to restaking in the Ethereum ecosystem although much different. Merge mining leverages computational power, whereas restaking involves the allocation and reallocation of staked tokens. Syscoin shares the security and difficulty from Bitcoin miners on the Bitcoin network. Syscoin plans to use BTC difficulty to create in a decentralized way a difficulty-based re-staking concept.
We do not view Syscoin as a complete Bitcoin Layer2 yet as data is not exchanged between the blockchains. However, with the new BTC Eigenbridge, it may become possible to transfer assets from and to bitcoin.
While Syscoin is primarily a Layer 1 blockchain with its own base protocol, it incorporates several Layer 2 technologies and features to enhance scalability, speed, and interoperability.
By trying to combine too many concept, Syscoin is evolving into a general purpose blockchain that tries to solve many challenges at the same time. While this offers a lot of options, it can be very confusing and hard to market. We will go over these concepts.
Concepts
Syscoin offers many solutions across several layers. Solutions include micropayments, smart contracts, value bridging, data layer and more. Let’s review them and compare them with other projects.
UTXO chain
the UTXO chain forms the core Layer 1 blockchain, leveraging the same principles as Bitcoin for secure and efficient transaction processing. Syscoin allows for the creation of Syscoin Platform Tokens (SPTs) directly on its blockchain. These tokens can represent various assets and are managed using the UTXO model. Besides SPTs, Syscoin supports ordinals with the Taproot support.
NEVM chain
The NEVM (Network-Enhanced Virtual Machine) chain is a layer-2 solution on top of the UTXOchain. It introduces Ethereum-compatible smart contracts and decentralized applications (dApps) to the Syscoin platform, enabling developers to build and deploy sophisticated blockchain applications with programmable logic. Assets created on the UTXO chain, such as Syscoin Platform Tokens (SPTs), can interact with smart contracts deployed on the NEVM chain. This integration allows for diverse asset management and advanced use cases that combine the strengths of both chains.
The bridge allows assets created on UTXO to be bridged to the NEVM chain
Z-DAG
Zero Confirmation Directed Acyclic Graph technology in Syscoin is implemented as a Layer 2 solution on top of Syscoin’s Layer 1 blockchain. This structure allows Z-DAG to enhance the performance of Syscoin by enabling high-speed, low-latency transactions while still benefiting from the security and finality provided by the Layer 1. Z-DAG is primarily built on top of Syscoin’s UTXO model, where it enhances transaction processing speed and scalability. While it directly operates on the UTXO layer, the improved transaction efficiency also benefits the NEVM layer, indirectly supporting the performance of smart contracts and dApps on Syscoin. This integrated approach allows Syscoin to offer a robust and scalable blockchain platform that leverages both UTXO and NEVM models. Other projects such as Hedera HashGraph and Kaspa use Z-DAG technology, however, instead of using it as a layer2 solution, it is directly integrated in their core consensus mechanism.
Data layer
The data layer allows users to store arbitrary data on the blockchain, enabling a wide range of applications beyond simple token transfers and asset management. The Syscoin Platform Data layer is implemented on top of the UTXO chain, leveraging the security and immutability of the underlying blockchain. It can also be utilized in conjunction with the NEVM (Network-Enhanced Virtual Machine) layer. Smart contracts deployed on the NEVM chain can interact with data stored on the UTXO chain.
Rollux
Rollux is and OP Stack that serve as layer-2 scaling solutions in the Syscoin ecosystem, positioned between the UTXO and NEVM layers. By aggregating transactions off-chain and submitting aggregated transactions to the UTXO chain, rollups enhance scalability, reduce fees, and improve the efficiency of smart contract execution within the Syscoin network. It is important to note that Syscoin’s rollux offer both Optimistic rollups and zk-rollups approaches. Assets can be transferred between rollux and NEVM through a bridge.
How does Syscoin compare to Stacks
Syscoin and Stacks are blockchain platforms that enhance the capabilities of Bitcoin and Ethereum in unique ways. Syscoin leverages Bitcoin’s security through merge mining while incorporating Ethereum-compatible smart contracts and Layer 2 solutions like Z-DAG and zk-Rollups for scalability and fast transactions. It also features a bridge for interoperability with Ethereum. In contrast, Stacks operates as a Layer 1 blockchain that anchors its transactions to Bitcoin, using a unique consensus mechanism called Proof of Transfer (PoX). Stacks integrates directly with Bitcoin to provide smart contract functionality and rewards STX holders with Bitcoin through its stacking mechanism. Both platforms aim to combine the security of Bitcoin with advanced blockchain functionalities but employ different approaches to achieve their goals.
Stacks has gained more rapid and widespread adoption, particularly due to its innovative approach of leveraging Bitcoin’s security and introducing smart contracts. However, Syscoin’s longer history and solid integration with both Bitcoin and Ethereum ecosystems also make it a notable player. The choice between the two often depends on the specific needs and interests of the developers and users involved.
In terms of numbers, as of the time of writing, Stacks has a fully diluted market cap of 4.1b compared to 0.13b for Syscoin. Stacks has a TVL of 127M compared to almost no TVL on Syscoin. Overall, Stacks appears to have more widespread adoption and usage in terms of both protocol and third-party applications.
Overall, Syscoin is a promising technology, but it has yet to be battle-tested and seems to be more focused on improving its technology than growing its ecosystem.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
