Artemis

Congrats to Celo Foundation and Isha Varshney as our Protocol Highlight of the Month! Read more to learn about Celo’s story, exciting dApps on Celo, and what led to the run-up in Celo’s stablecoin volume.

gm, our September Ship Log is here! 🚀 🪙 Brand new Stablecoins dashboard 📝 New Comprehensive Stablecoin Report 🇸🇬 Artemis in Singapore for Token 2049 Read more here: https://lnkd.in/d9uYtGYf

If you don't know your history, you don't know your crypto. Historically, information technology has evolved in multi-decade cycles of expansion, consolidation, and decentralization. The cycles have played out in repeatable patterns over the last 60-70 years. This is happening today — but it can be difficult to see amidst the “crypto casino” running alongside the fundamental innovation brought forth by public blockchains — the new open standard. With history as our guide, public blockchains and crypto can be viewed as the latest expression of the open-source technology movement — which began decades ago. 1950s: The transistor — a new open standard — collapsed the production cost of electronics by replacing expensive vacuum tubes with smaller, cheaper, and more reliable switches. As barriers to entry dropped, entrepreneurs rushed in. Computer hardware began to proliferate. The industry eventually consolidated around IBM and mainframe systems. 1970s: The microprocessor — a new open standard — collapsed the production cost of computer hardware by replacing inefficient CPU systems with a general-purpose processor that was easy to mass produce. Entrepreneurs rushed in, and a new era in computer hardware was born, creating economies of scale. 1990s: Cheaper computers attracted more users, creating the demand for software services. The market consolidated around Microsoft and the Windows Operating System. 2000s: The introduction of new open standards for computer software (HTTP, Linux, etc.) in the 90s eventually challenged Microsoft’s incumbent position. With open standards for both computer hardware and software now in place, we saw exponential growth via the democratization of information and an epic boom/bust period in the late 90s/early 2000s as the internet emerged. 2010s: As economic value creation moved away from the software layer, data networks became the next monetization opportunity. Firms such as Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, etc. are today’s incumbents controlling a vast majority of economic activity on the internet via closed and proprietary data networks. 2020s: Public blockchains — a new open standard — introduce credibly neutral shared databases & accounting ledgers. Similar to the efficiencies brought forth by open standards for hardware and software, public blockchains are collapsing the production costs of data/compute networks and verifiable trust. In doing so, they introduce the concept of digital property rights and universal accounting systems. ---- As with past open standards, lower costs remove barriers to entry — and create a frenzy of economic activity. In summary, the cycles tend to cover three distinct stages: 1. Decentralization (creation and universal acceptance of a new open standard). 2. Expansion (due to lack of barriers to entry & new business models). 3. Consolidation (due to consumer preferences & network effects) Data: YTD DePIN Fees powered by Artemis

I believe stablecoins could go down as one of the most important innovations of the 21st century. 10 reasons why the US gov’t should be supporting stablecoin innovation. 1. Stablecoins are backed by US Treasuries — making them less risky than bank deposits backed by a basket of non-transparent bank loans and assets. 2. Stablecoins transact globally, peer-to-peer, and at lower costs than credit cards, ACH, and wires. Savings can be passed back to consumers who will likely recycle the savings into other parts of the economy. 3. The instant settlement of stablecoins means that we can increase the velocity of money without the use of debt. This is a big idea and one hard to appreciate given the current paradigm. 4. Stablecoins disrupt banking and payments monopolies — reducing concentration risk while allowing innovation to thrive and the “little guy” to compete. 5. Stablecoins level the playing field in emerging markets. The rock-star engineer in India can now easily receive payment in dollars, swap to local currencies as needed for spending, and recycle their wealth back into the local economy (rather than moving to NYC or another American city). This is a win/win for the US and emerging markets with rich pools of labor. 6. Stablecoins can improve existing payroll services to allow employees and contractors to be paid faster than 1x/week or 2x/month. Yield-bearing stablecoins will blur the lines between checking and savings accounts. 7. Stablecoins offer the banks a highly scalable new line of revenue. What’s stopping Bank of America from exporting its brand/trust to emerging markets? Remember, there is insatiable demand for dollars abroad and roughly $130 trillion of currency globally. About $30 trillion is in US dollars today. The delta is the addressable market for stablecoin issuers and banks. 8. Stablecoins are increasing the network effect of the dollar worldwide. 9. Stablecoins are buyers of US debt at a precise moment when marginal buyers are disappearing (e.g. China). Issuers are currently the 16th largest holders of US treasuries (and growing). 10. Stablecoins are banking the unbanked in emerging economies. It’s hard to find a reason why policymakers would not be embracing this technology, other than “let's move slow, be thoughtful, and not break anything.” What do you think? Will we see legislation on stablecoins next year? Data: Total Monthly Peer-to-Peer Volume (avg. $600b/month in '24) powered by Artemis

Starting to see some chatter about SUI being the Solana of this cycle. Here's a quick breakdown of what the numbers say using data from Artemis, comparing Solana in Q2-21 to SUI this quarter. ---- A few takeaways: 1. Both networks were processing a high volume of transactions early on, with Solana significantly outpacing SUI. 2. Despite high transaction counts, SUI has low fees today — similar to Solana in Q2-21. It's an indication that the throughput is strong, but the urgency of user transactions is not quite there. 3. SUI's DeFi ecosystem is farther along today than Solana's was in Q2-21. 4. Both networks have strong developer ecosystems, but Solana's was much larger at a similar stage of development when compared to SUI. 5. SUI is more fairly priced from a Fully Diluted Price/Fee perspective (calculated by annualizing the past 30 days of fees), though both look quite overvalued using that metric. 6. SUI appears to be more fairly priced from a % of ETH FDV perspective. --- P.S. We use Q2-21 for Solana as the network was at a similar stage of development that SUI is today, with the caveat that SUI had a head start via Diem and the markets were in full bull during Q2-21 for Solana. Not perfectly apples to apples but as always the data via Artemis lights the path. --- If you found the analysis helpful, you can join 7,500 + readers of The DeFi Report report research in the first comment below 👇

gm, it's Feature Friday ☀️ Dashboard Builder's "Make a Copy" Are you looking to make a copy of a dashboard that you found useful and want to customize it? Click on the "Make a Copy" button to save a version and edit it however you want! Give it a try with our newest Stablecoin Dashboard: https://lnkd.in/guHcAZ7X

Celestia recently surpassed Ethereum in Data Availability market share and its most important KPI (Data Posted) has grown 2,559% over the last 6 months. More interestingly, over half of the data being posted to Celestia today is coming from Eclipse, an Ethereum rollup running the *Solana Virtual Machine* — making it easy for users and developers to interact with both Ethereum and Solana. ---- Celestia's goal is to make blockchains more scalable, flexible, and developer-friendly. In many ways, you can think of their solution for blockchain developers in the same way that you can think about Amazon Web Services — which made it easier and cheaper to spin up a website and store data while not sacrificing on UX. Celestia is betting on the blockchain ecosystem developing as a *network of networks,* similar to the internet. If they are correct about this (it looks like they are), they could become one of the most important infrastructure projects as a universal data availability layer for multiple networks. Pay attention to Celestia Labs Data: powered by Artemis P.S. if you want to keep up with our latest research at The DeFi Report we recently shared a deep dive on stablecoins with Martin Carrica of Mountain Protocol and have a number of exciting data-driven deep dives in the hopper (link in the comments to access our research & sign up)

Circle (USDC) circulating supply is currently down 39% from its peak in March of '22. A few thoughts on why this is the case (and why Circle might want to consider shifting strategy). 1. You'll notice Circle's supply drops off sharply in March of '23. This was due to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, a partner of Circle (where 8% of their reserves were held). When SVB went down, USDC de-pegged, holders were spooked, and many transferred out of USDC (and have not returned). [I'd be remiss not to mention how ironic is it that a US bank caused systemic issues with a crypto company] 2. USDC is primarily used in the US due to its relationship with Coinbase and US-based exchanges. In the US, interest rates rose over 500 basis points since March of '22 and holders of USDC can easily access Treasuries or Money Market Accounts. ---- So what's the cure for this? How can Circle grow get USDC supply back to all-time highs? In my opinion, they need to focus on emerging markets — where people cannot easily access dollars, US Treasuries, and Money Market accounts. And where local currencies are often unstable and highly inflationary vs the dollar. There's a massive market here and it's currently being dominated by Tether.io ---- If I were USDC, I'd hire teams to go build out markets in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, etc. Sort of like how Uber built out the US first, and then went to Canada, Europe, Asia, Latin America, etc. Circle owns the US market — but they are going to have to contend with US banks entering the space in the near future. There's not much of a moat there. The moat is going to be achieved in emerging markets. Meanwhile, Circle just opened its headquarters in Manhattan. What do you think? Share your thoughts below 👇 Data: powered by Artemis