What's Wrong with Crypto Data (And How To Fix It) | Roundup

Blockchain revenue does not exist. Revenue to who? Is it the validators? Is it the non-stakers? Is it the staked token holders? Is it the other infrastructure providers in the space? Blockchains are networks, they are not businesses. And so you cannot say like revenue because it's very unclear who you're referring to.

Today's episode is sponsored by Geodnet. They're a leading DePIN protocol that's providing critical location and spatial intelligence services needed for AI-driven robots and drones. Discover how the network's native token, GEOD, is powering the next wave of the robotics revolution by hitting the link in the description of today's episode. Today's episode is brought to you by Unichain, an upcoming Layer 2 that's purpose-built for the next generation of DeFi applications. With up to 95% lower fees than Ethereum and 250-millisecond block times coming soon after launch, Unichain is designing the future of cross-chain liquidity. Stay ahead of the launch by visiting unichain.org and giving Unichain a follow on X. Hey everyone, Jason here. There's a reason why Ledger is trusted to secure more than 20% of the world's crypto assets today. Check out their newest devices, the Ledger Stax and the Ledger Flex, featuring the world's first secure touchscreens. Take your security seriously. Hit the link in the show notes of today's episode to check out their latest devices. Trust me, you won't regret it.

All right, everyone, welcome back to Empire. We've got a new face, new and improved face over Santiago. I think we could— we've got Dan Smith is the head of data at Blockworks. You might know him from the— used to be the co-host with Mert at the Lightspeed podcast and perpetual shitposter on Twitter. So, yeah, Dan, welcome to the show, man.

Thank you. Thank you. Pleasure to be here. Yeah, don't forget the grassroots origin story of 0xResearch with Sam Martin back in the day.

Yes, of course.

Wow.

So you've been through 2 podcasts.

I know. Yeah, they just, they just shoved me in all these corners, man. Come on.

And then shoved me out.

They're shoving me behind the— locking me in the data closet now.

Yeah, exactly.

Exactly.

This is like a kind of closet vibe with the brick behind you.

Yeah. Who knows what's on the other side of this room?

Yeah, exactly. Exactly. We just got off the Blockworks all hands. What'd you think?

It's exciting, man. 2025 is going to be a big year, not only for the industry, but super bullish Blockworks, obviously. I think we've got a great wedge in the market.

Indeed. All right. So brought on Dan because Dan has just been relentlessly posting about why the data in the industry sucks. And I actually just had a couple of questions for him about that. But before we did, there was some interesting news announcements this week. So the first one was MoonPay acquired a company called Helio and Chainalysis acquired a company called Altera. I think it is Altera, Israeli company. Both of them were about $150 million. So I think it was $100— one was $150 million. One was $175 million, and they were both related to payments. So I just thought that was interesting. Two acquisitions, one week, both around, you know, between $150-175 million, both in the payments space. I don't know if you have any thoughts on this, but—

Yeah, it's interesting to see some consolidation there. I feel like we've long talked about the idea of M&A in crypto, especially at the protocol level. I think mostly because the logistics of that seem like sound like a nightmare, and it would just be fun to see more of it. Uh, but this one's interesting. I like to— that you pointed out that they're both in the payment space as well. That feels like the layup for crypto. Uh, the question is the execution on that side is tough. I think you, at least in the West and specifically the US, you have like— you really got to displace giants in that space, right? I pay people with Venmo pretty religiously. I mean, Apple Pay is, uh, at least they're like Apple Pay for the credit cards and whatnot in the Apple Wallet, I think did a very good job of being a, uh, like breaking up how I paid for things and changing that, that pattern for me and that flow. But as far as like sending a friend $20, I don't know, I love crypto, but it's going to take a lot for me to send, you know, 20 USDC to somebody over just like a quick Venmo. And my user flow is so programmed there. And a lot of the team at Blockworks is pretty global, especially in Europe as well. And it sounds like Revolut is kind of that app for them in some regard as well. So It's just like this trained user pattern that we have right now. And the question is, if you're building in the payment space, like, what are you going to do to force a change there?

Yeah, I think what might end up happening is it won't be user-driven, it'll be actually business-driven, which is you ever go into like a grocery store, kind of like a side market, like not a big corporation. They'll be like, oh, you know, everything's 5% off if you use cash here or like 2% off if you use cash. I think you could start to see that with stablecoins actually. Where it's like maybe everything's 1% off if you use stablecoins. I don't know, from a, from a user perspective, I've noticed I, I started to like, you know, you used to put money, move money from a bank account into like a Coinbase or Gemini or something or whatever the platforms everyone's onboarding onto these days are, I guess probably Coinbase. And you would just put it into USDC and then you would put it into a coin and then if you sell it, you would move it, swap it back into USDC, and then move it back into your bank account. Now I just kind of let it sit in USDC because you get— so I mean, is Coinbase a bank account? I don't know.

It's interesting. And like, you know, even for me personally, you get some crypto wins, you want to take some risk off the table. Like, what do you do with that capital? Um, the Coinbase and USDC is like a very compelling option for me, but I don't know. And then I always try to think, all right, like 99.9% of my worth is in crypto. Like, let's maybe put some dollars in a high-yield savings account, but it never happens.

Are you 100% in crypto right now?

Um, well, I recently got— semi-recently got married, and so that, that diversified. That was like my long-term—

a forced diversification.

Yes. And she was like all in cash and super safe and conservative, so honestly it was like the perfect barbell strategy.

That's great. Marriage, best diversification strategy.

Exactly.

I also wonder if these acquisitions, how much of them were in equity, because the acquiring companies MoonPay and Chainalysis So MoonPay raised $555 million in, I think, the top, like the, the absolute peak top, which was like rough.

I think it was roughly Q4 2021.

They raised it at a $3.4 billion valuation and then Chainalysis raised in 2022 at an $8.5 billion valuation. So they got a bunch of nicely priced equity to start buying things with. So I'd be curious to see how much of this was cash versus equity.

Do you— do either of those have a token?

No.

Okay.

No, no, straight up equity company.

Well, one of them has a token.

Well, one of the companies that got acquired has a token, which is Helio.

Um, okay, right.

So I don't know what actually happened. Yeah, it's a good—

is it Helios?

No, no, no, Helio.

Hmm.

Look up like Helio ICO. Maybe I'm wrong. Helio ICO. I thought Helio didn't ICO.

Maybe not, because I mean, that's the interesting question, right? Like we always talk about the push and pull between the labs equity and the public token. I think Uniswap always gets talked about here. And the question is like what I mean, legally token holders aren't required have no claim on anything, but morally there's definitely a discussion to be had. And it'll be very curious going into the— you know, Trump gets sworn in, in what, 4 days now? And there's a whole lot of chatter about what exactly that's going to look like in terms of regulation change and whatnot. And you'd have to think that there's going to be some standard, right? These are permissionless networks. There will always be nonsense on-chain. But I kind of— how I— I don't know if this is even a great way of thinking about it right now. My base case is there will be, you know, two sides of this where some things do get standardized and reported and like, you know, the stamp of approval, if you will. And those things will have to play by a certain subset of rules. And it'll likely be for the betterment of investors and token holders in the space. But again, these are permissionless networks. There will always be the pump funds of the world, if you will.

Yeah. Yeah.

Wow.

Big breaking news out of Trump actually right now. Trump's America. FDA authorizes the marketing of Zyn pouches, approves 20 new Zyn nicotine pouches. This is— I know that's the wrong— that's the wrong Trump news. Now, the— that is big breaking.

The other—

I mean, speaking of Trump, the other thing that was happening this week before we get into too much data conversation is this Trump US token reserve. You see this?

I did. Yes. The Ripple Army rejoice.

What is this? I'm trying to pull up the— what do we think of it? I'm trying to pull up the news.

I think like broadly the idea was, you know, we've got this idea of a Bitcoin strategic reserve. How do we bet on American businesses that stuck with crypto basically, and like who launched their token, who's founded in the US, um, and can we, you know, build up a reserve of those assets? I think it starts to get pretty ridiculous pretty quickly in this category. Like, okay, I think you can make the logical reasoning why the Bitcoin Strategic Reserve makes sense. Um, I think you can also push back and say, this is ridiculous, what are we doing? But like, all right, it's there, right? It's this way to transport wealth through time. The whole point is that it achieves that, and it's like ultimately gets bought up by nation states is sort of the point. So, okay, I got— I at least get there, but like, I don't know, if you start buying up like SOL and XRP and, you know, HBAR and other like, you know, relatively American built and founded companies.

It's like, oh, you're throwing, you're throwing Hedera in there. All right.

I'm pretty sure it's US-based and that's like, right. I don't know. That's, that's where we end up. Is it not? Don't, I hope I wasn't wrong on that, but definitely.

Yeah. The, the idea of an American first strategic reserve that would prioritize digital coins founded in the US, like Solana, USDC, and Ripple. Why they would put USDC into reserve that I do not know.

That HBAR is up 20% today. So I'm assuming that it is indeed American-made.

Well, okay. So I don't think this will happen. But one idea that I have that I brought up on a— I think it was last week's roundup that I really do think will happen is so, so I really do think a strategic Bitcoin reserve will happen. Like, I'm pretty, pretty strong conviction that that will happen. And I think that Trump will say that he's buying American-made Bitcoin. I think he's going to say, for the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, we don't want this Bitcoin that's been tainted. It's been mined in China. You know, we want, we want American-made, grass-fed, Iowa, Iowa corn-fed, you know, Bitcoins.

Texas Bitcoins. All the adjectives that you see on like a carton of chicken eggs. Organic, free-range, grass-fed.

Yeah, that's probably not grass-fed. Iowa corn. We want some Iowa corn You know, Texas-made Bitcoins. That's, that's my prediction for what's going to happen.

Is this just the evolution of— you remember when, God, this is probably like 3 years ago, 2 years ago, where everyone was trying to buy like green Bitcoin or that was mined sustainably? Yeah, it's like the evolution of that idea, which is kind of interesting. I actually think we mentioned Chainalysis earlier. I think they were the ones playing like a key role in saying, yep, okay, this was, you know, ethically mined Bitcoin.

All right, let's, let's, let's talk about Coinbase Morpho, because that was what I thought was the last interesting piece of news this week. So Coinbase announced Coinbase is offering Bitcoin-backed loans through Morpho. Basically, I'll just share what I remember from the news story. But CoinDesk— or excuse me, Coinbase— like the history of kind of like leverage on Coinbase is, you know, I remember in 2017 buying Bitcoin on credit cards on Coinbase. And then 2021, I don't know if you ever did this, but you could, if you had Bitcoin on the platform, you could take out loans against your Bitcoin. But I think they were like, that was basically just off-chain loans, right? They would just like, you know, lend out against your Bitcoin to other counterparts. Now what they announced is that using Morpho, which is like an Aave competitor for people who don't know, Morpho deployed on Base and you can now lend against your, borrow against your Bitcoin. Lend out your Bitcoin on Morpho, um, via Coinbase, which is pretty damn cool. Like, I think it's pretty cool that the CeFi exchange, the CeFi platform is now moving more and more and more on-chain. Um, I don't know, I, I like this piece of news. This was cool.

Yeah, I think it's really cool. I agree. Uh, I also think it's a huge win for Morpho. They were kind of a later entrant into the lending space. I mean, they, they've been around for a while, but, uh, I think they've even like shifted their product a bit. But point being that Aave is largely the giant here, and Morpho won this deal. Um, it's very interesting because they've kind of built a system designed specifically for this, where they can have specific vaults for— that give control over the vault to the risk curator. So I'm— I don't know what the details are here, but I imagine Coinbase is very willing to do this because, you know, they can bring in risk people that manage this vault. So we've seen like Gauntlet, we've seen Stakehouse, and some of these other more risk manager-focused providers do the same thing, obviously at a different scale because they don't have the US's largest centralized exchange at the helm. But it'd be very interesting. So I think that's one angle here that I find intriguing. And the other is it really shows you the interplay between Coinbase's product suite now, right? They have Base. It's, you know, the second most popular chain by activity and, you know, pretty much every activity metric today. And, um, They launched CBTC on there not that long ago. Base is already doing like about $1 billion of weekly DEX volume on CBTC. It looks like sex DEX arbitrage. So they've got market makers onboarded. Even, even just the presence of this asset onboards market makers. I don't know if they're doing anything specifically. So yeah, it's just been fascinating to watch how you create this new asset, you plug it into your on-chain economy on Base, and you immediately start catalyzing growth around this asset. So to me, that's like really the unlock here is that was always, you know, an idea, a theory like, hey, you know, imagine we have this chain and that chain has a vibrant economy on it and then we throw products at it and then just eat it up. That is exactly what's happening here. So yeah, I think it's a huge win for Coinbase, huge win for Morpho as well.

Yeah. Okay. Let me ask you this. So there's like 100 million Coinbase users. So you'll be able to take— I'm guessing most of them have Bitcoin. They can take their Bitcoin That, um, from, okay, for actually from a data perspective, maybe we can segue this into the data because I was thinking about, you've got Bitcoin on Coinbase, then that goes on to Morpho, which is on Base, which is on Ethereum, right? So the value capture question is interesting. And like how you track the data is interesting because you've essentially got what was Bitcoin, but then ETH, Ethereum, the L1 is going to get TVL from this, maybe depending on how you track it. And then there's gas fees for like base or the L1. I don't know, how do you— I'm very curious how you think about, uh, who wins in this equation and like how to look at that data.

Yeah, good question. So I think Bitcoin's got a pretty big win with an asterisk here. So Bitcoin's money, they want it to be everywhere. This is a great way to get it everywhere. The asterisk being centralized custody of the asset. In true Bitcoiner fashion, you really want to own your own keys in all of this. So that does kind of take one degree of security, or what adds one extra security assumption, right? I have to trust Coinbase to now hold this CBBTC. For me personally, like, that's fine. I'm intrigued by this. And, you know, you mentioned an interesting point around the value accrual side of this. So No, CBBTC TVL on base does not count for Ethereum. That is, these are individual chains. And if you wanted to make some like economic analysis of like the ecosystem of L2s on Ethereum and compare that to something of say Celestia or another settlement layer or another DA provider and say, hey, like, you know, these guys all have ecosystems of chains built on them. Like, how do you compare the economies across that? Okay, that's a reasonable comparison. But to say like, all right, Ethereum decided it's going to like go this L2 route. So we're going to add all of the metrics together and then go compare that to other individual chains. Like, it doesn't make a ton of sense. And the reason being is the value accrual piece of this is very, very blurry when you start doing this. So, you know, a user spends $1 on Ethereum or $1 transaction fee on Base. It's much lower than that, but that's an easy number. So we'll use a dollar. Ethereum gets about like 1 to 2 cents of that. And so from the direct value accrual standpoint, it is, you know, 1 to 2 cents on the dollar. And from a more like monetary aspect of a value accrual position, it's like, okay, well, how are these things going to accrue value? It's the, you know, the use of the asset on-chain and the use of the asset as a form of money and the use of the asset as a store of value. So I did think it was pretty interesting that Coinbase is doing CBTC first, because if there was like a ton of demand for ETH to be a store of value, you would think that they would do ETH first. I'm sure that ETH will come, but I did think it was fascinating that Bitcoin was first.

Before going too deep down the rabbit hole, I do want to just— so you've been pushing this thing called REV, right? Maybe I would just love to hear your view on like what is broken with data in the industry today? Because a lot of great data providers, right? We like, you know, everyone knows Dune and there's Token Terminal and there's Artemis and there's, you know, probably dozens of different data providers. Like, what is broken with crypto data today? And then like, how did you start thinking about this thing of, you know, called REV as the solution to it?

Good question. So there are a ton of great data providers in this space. That is something we're blessed with. And the reason being is blockchains are giant open APIs. There's a bunch of data sitting in there and it's— easy is definitely a stretch, but it's very possible to go in and pull all this data out and then run analysis on it. And because of how easy it is, it's super public, right? And so teams like Dune and Flipside have built very great public tools that are relatively easy to access. And basically everything's doable with SQL, and SQL is a very easy programming language, relatively speaking. So there is a ton of data out there. The hard part, and I think the challenge that we're seeing today is taking that data and turning it into some sort of like actionable insight or getting like a critical understanding of what this data means. Uh, so specifically everybody, you know, these are tokens, token prices go up, everybody wants to talk about like fundamental valuation because, you know, what should these things be worth? How can I make a price target? That is ultimately what everyone's kind of chasing after. Um, and so I got obsessed with the data side because the idea of value capture has been totally backwards in, in this industry for quite some time. And I think we've actually seen some like shifting in that. So, REV is basically a standardized metric to track blockchain value accrual from user activity. So strictly looking at, you know, the question being like, what are users paying to use my product? That's, that is like the simplest way to think about this number. And historically, what we've seen is sort of like two different, different approaches to value accrual for a blockchain. The first one being, you know, the total value accrual, often called revenue, is the transaction fees paid on the chain. That is fairly directionally correct. The missing gap there is some of the largest chains today have out-of-protocol tipping mechanisms to say, go directly to the validator, say, hey, you're the leader right now, you're proposing this block, here's a dollar, put my transaction in the block. And that is identical to transaction fees. There is no difference. The validator is running a set of code that opens up that second transaction lane to receive that out-of-protocol tip. Um, it in many ways that is functionally identical to priority fees, where you're basically saying the same thing, you're just using in-protocol rails or the original transaction submission pipeline. So REV takes a differing approach because it is saying, hey, we're looking at all user-paid value to, to process transaction execution. That is what we want to capture. So it's taking transaction fees and just adding the second piece in. Um, so really what's wrong with that approach is you're just missing a very important piece of the puzzle, especially on some of these larger, more active chains today. The second approach that is wrong is, is more wrong. It's saying, okay, of all the transaction fees, the only piece of revenue is burned transaction fees. This is harder to reason about, uh, as why it's a logical approach.

Um, this is an approach that other data providers are taking, or this is more like protocols will self-report their own, like I put quotes around this word, revenue, or who— when you say like this is an approach, what do you mean by that?

Yeah. So if you like open up DeFi Llama, go to their revenues tab, they do a fantastic job of being this open source repository for people to submit their chain or application revenues to. The way that they track revenue is burn transaction fees. I'm not throwing shade at DeFi Llama at all. Token Terminal does this. Artemis does this as well. If you basically go to any data provider and say, show me blockchain revenue for any chain, like, that's what it'll show you. Um, and again, the issues are you're— when you say revenue, like, you're generally referring to a top line. And so my point is, like, blockchain revenue does not exist. Revenue to who? Is it the validators? Is it the non-stakers? Is it the staked token holders? Is it the other infrastructure providers in the space? Um, the point being, blockchains are networks, they are not businesses. And so you cannot say like revenue because it's very unclear who you're referring to. So when you say burn transaction fees are revenue, you're ignoring all of the other participants in the space, all the other stakeholders in the network, right? Validators, stakers, infrastructure providers, and saying the only revenue there is is what goes exclusively to token holders and mostly the unstaked tokens, right? If I stake my token, I get other rewards such as priority fees or MEV tips. So that's the issue with burn transaction fees. You're taking a very, very small subset of the total revenue or the total top line number and saying, no, no, no, forget all the other stuff. The only piece of revenue is this. And you're basically saying the only participant in the system or the only participant in the network that I care about is the unstaked token, which conceptually just doesn't make a ton of sense. And I have some data if you want to throw it up here on the screen, we can kind of walk through. Maybe both Ethereum and Solana's distribution. So Sankey diagrams are flawless for this. They are the most simplest way to think about how this flows. So if you look at this first left-hand column here and I, you know, I'm personally a podcast listener on like Spotify, but strongly recommend YouTube for this. Get the full screen here, really immerse yourself in the Sankey diagram. So this first left column—

Let the Sankey diagram just come over you.

Let it take you.

Really throw yourself into it. Yeah.

So this first left-hand column here, we have 4 things. We have Jito tips, we have priority fees, we have base fees, and we have vote fees. So the last 3 pieces, priority fees, base fees, and vote fees, those are the transaction fees in the system. And the Jito tips are the out-of-protocol tips that go directly to validators. Again, just to say, hey, here's a buck. You know, put me first. And so here you can see there is blue lines and let's call them orange lines. And so there is a subset of the, of the REV. Again, this total left column, all those things combined that flows to token holders, which is a combination of the stakers and the non-stakers. And then there's the other chunk that flows to these network operators, whether it's validators, liquid staking token providers or Jito, the Labs team, because they're running this infrastructure that brought in $675 million of total revenue for the network in 2024. And here to me, it seems like, all right, if we wanted to look at this and say, go through those two examples we talked about, is the only thing that counts is transaction fees, then you'd, you'd ignore this Jito Tip section up top and say, all we're going to count is prio fees, base fees, and vote fees. Again, you're like directionally there, but the piece that you're missing is, okay, this other $650— excuse me, $675 million of value that moved through the system that users paid for the product, that paid for transaction execution, and that goes to stakers and goes to these infrastructure providers. You're just ignoring that. So to me, there's like no logical conclusion as to why you can exclude that. I think you could— I've seen arguments like, hey, you know, another company manages and runs those rails. True, but the validators run the code to accept that, and the validators roughly are the network. 90% of stake on Solana runs the Jito client, which enables this. So, okay, sure. Like, again, this one goes to— it's not a business, it's a network, and the validators run the code that operates the network, and they're opting in to create this thing and allow it to be in existence. And oh, by the way, roughly half of the REV, or the total amount of value that users paid into the system last year, came from this. So it's incredibly important when you're talking about a top line metric to include it. And then if we only looked at burn transaction fees, so if we look at in Solana last year, 50% of all transaction fees were burned. So 50% of prio fees, 50% of base fees, 50% of vote fees. So you can see that basically each of these buckets, half goes into the burn and the other half goes to validators. So if we were only to count, you know, this revenue again in air quotes, I really don't think blockchain revenue exists. But if we're going to do this and say blockchain revenue equals the burn, Well, instead of this roughly $12 or $1.2 billion, you're going to say there was only, you know, $370 million of burn or excuse me, of revenue in this, in this network over the year. So again, you're just taking a subset of this and saying this is what the revenue is when yet, okay, if we look at the burn, that $370 million, you just take the stake rate over the period and allocate this between stakers and non-stakers. and you'll notice that a good portion goes to stakers because most of the assets on the network are staked. And then you're basically saying, all right, all we really care about is non-stakers and like this little chunk of stakers here when, oh, by the way, they made $550 million from Jito tips. So you see that it gets pretty hard to say, you know, this is the top, or only a subset of the REV should be the top line because you're ignoring that the fact that users paid money to transact on the chain.

Uh, okay, if you're listening on Spotify and Apple, I'm sorry because we might have just lost you there. But, um, why does this matter, Dan? Why, why does this matter for like the individual investor here? And then why does this matter for, for just the industry as a whole?

For the individual investor, I think there, there is a fundamental value to these things. Um, you can you know, like your, your price to sales ratio probably looks a lot like your P/REV ratio, if you will. And then there is an earnings piece here. There is a price to earnings, right? If we look at the bottom right-hand corner of this, we have stakers and non-stakers who generated, you know, roughly $900 million in 2024. That was value that was distributed to them. If that creates a fundamental value, right? If you forecast future Solana activity and, you know, break this out and what percentage is going to come through tips versus transaction fees and how that's burned or not burned or distributed to stakers, there is a fundamental value. Does that mean that's the only thing that will drive value to a token? I don't know, probably not. But the fact that there is a fundamental value, in my view, is very important to consider and understand how to properly calculate. So if you're taking a subset of the activity and not the full picture of our— of our view, then you're going to get an incorrect number when you go do this valuation analysis. So I think that's kind of why it's important from an investor standpoint, from the industry writ large, we have no standardization of metrics, right? And so there are protocol or there are networks that burn 100% of transaction fees. There are networks that burn no transaction fees. There are networks where this value, like all REV goes to the validators and stakers only get like issuance, for example. So you need a framework that can capture all of that nuance, and our— beautifully does this. So on the Blockworks Research site, we walk through some of these examples. So we've been looking at Solana, so we'll keep rolling with it. And you can build like a very classic income statement here where you have your revenue as your top line metric. I will use the annual here so we can base it off that Sankey diagram. So here's your, you know, roughly $1.4 billion of revenue in 2024. And you can see which pieces of those puzzles or that those orange lines we were talking about earlier go to infrastructure providers. We call that operator payments. It looks a lot like OpEx if you really were trying to shove this into a traditional income statement. And the net of that, so REV less operator payments, get you this token holder net income. That is the value that token holders received in the network over the period. So again, this there is a very logical progression of why this makes sense when you can run these multiples. Um, so it's kind of like the next step of this analysis. It's like, okay, well, I don't think anything today trades on a fundamental view, to be completely honest. I think every— if you are the globally accepted, uh, on-chain economy, and like that all happens on a single chain or a collection of chains, that will be worth a significant sum of money. Let's just like really hypothesize here and say like global oil trade is settled on a blockchain, that blockchain will likely, like, transcend— the valuation of the token will likely transcend the fundamental value here, right? It's sort of like this moneyness narrative, but it's because a very important activity is happening on that chain and participants need that thing to do to execute these trades. Um, so I don't know, it, it gets more hand-wavy when you try to do the, the more monetary analysis. Of like why these things have value versus this is a very concrete way of saying, hey, here's all the activity that happened on-chain, here's how much went to the token, and here are the multiples based on the top line and the bottom line.

Hmm. Okay. What do you think of folks who try to basically apply blanket P&Ls to L1s and L2s?

It depends what you mean by blanket. I mean, again, if you get the top line right and you do our— like, I think it's possible, right? If you're looking at this and It's the question is like, okay, if I'm a token holder, what am I getting right? And we can break this down to a token holder net income line. It's important to note that that line consists of both the unstaked, the aggregate of the unstaked and the staked tokens. Once you start getting breaking that down lower, it gets pretty hairy, to be honest. Like, okay, if you're a staker, you're going to get different returns based on which provider you use or if you solo stake or even which validator you stake to. So it gets super hairy. So the question that you kind of want to answer is like, all right, hypothetically, let's say I wanted to buy every token on the network.

Work.

Obviously not possible, but let's just pretend it for a second. You're not going to care if your unstaked tokens make a different amount of money than your staked tokens if you own all the tokens. You're just going to care about how much value is coming in the door, how much you have to pay to operate the network, and what comes down into your hands.

Geodnet is a first-of-its-kind DePIN protocol that's revolutionizing satellite navigation services. They're actively generating on-chain revenue that's growing 500% year over year by providing precision location services that are 100 times more accurate than standard GPS. On Empire, we always talk about finding how crypto can power completely new business models, and they're a perfect example of this. They're already trusted by over 30 enterprise customers across industries including automotive, agriculture, construction, and even robotics. The network is powered by its native token, GEOD, and easily mined with their satellite miner. By setting up a base station, you can get involved with this groundbreaking Web3 ecosystem. Learn more by heading over to geodnet.com or just by hitting the link in the description of today's episode. Today's episode is brought to you by Unichain, an upcoming Layer 2 solution that's changing DeFi forever. It's built with a vision to be the home for cross-chain liquidity and DeFi innovation. As part of the Optimism Superchain, Unichain brings you up to 95% cheaper transactions than Ethereum's base layer, as well as near-instant finality with 250-millisecond block times coming shortly after mainnet launch. To make things even better, seamless cross-chain transactions. If you're a developer, this means you can build DeFi applications that truly push the envelope of what's possible on-chain. Visit unichain.org or follow Unichain on X to stay updated on the launch, upcoming features, and getting started on building your dream applications. Earlier in today's episode, I mentioned Ledger's latest products, the Stax and Flex, and I wanted to take a few seconds to tell you more about them. These wallets feature the world's first secure touchscreens, which don't just simplify your digital transactions but also keep them extremely safe. These wallets are virtually impenetrable to online attacks because they store your private key in a secure offline chip. You can manage more than 5,500 tokens and install up to 100 apps. Choose the most trusted name in hardware wallets and take control of your digital security today at ledger.com, or hit the link in the description of today's episode to check out their latest wallets.

If you were talking to a traditional allocator and they were starting to invest in crypto and they said, look, I want to invest in the things that have fundamentals, right? I want to invest in things that have fundamentals and I want, I want a couple of metrics to look at. And, you know, obviously the metrics in the industry today are probably like what TVL, you like active users, number of developers. What metrics would you advise them to look at?

First and foremost is REV. I think it is a beautiful metric for capturing what chains have activity and in what size. It's normalized to dollars. It's the dollar willingness to transact on the chain. And we have seen chains with historically very low transaction fees produce very high REV. So the argument that like, oh, our transactions are so cheap, that's why our REV is so low, is not true. It's provably false. You can send USDC on Solana for less than a penny. And it has the industry-leading revenue last quarter. So I think that's the most interesting single metric. If it was like gun to your head, you get one metric, that's the one. If then the immediate question is like, okay, well, what types of activity are driving that, that revenue? And we do also cover that on our dashboard. And the answer today is like trading tokens across the industry writ large. The— that is, that is what drives our revenue. So Solana today, that's very meme coin heavy, AI heavy. Uh, Radium, PumpFun, and Jupiter are all— and the like token program are all sitting at, you know, the top 6 of what's driving REV on Solana. Uh, but that's not a Solana-specific story, right? If we go look at Base as well, Base is, you know, the second most active chain in terms of, uh, REV and whatnot. So if you were to look here, you know, you can see the same story where the, uh, What's driving there is largely sex-decked volume. So arbitrageurs, well, there's deep liquidity for something like CBBTC or Ethereum ETH on Base, and that is driven by a lot of the activity or a lot of the revenue is same story, driven by those arbitrageurs. So there's this one interesting trading bot, we'll call him 0x6F, and he's doing 15% of daily transaction fees and does roughly 30 to 40% of Bitcoin DEX volume and Ethereum DEX volume. Um, so basically what happened was sex DEX arbitrage for ETH, the asset, has shifted off of Ethereum mainnet and onto Arbitrum and Base. Uh, and that is really what drives REV capture within both of those L2s as well. So that's kind of like a quick one-two on like, okay, how you take this top line metric and then say, okay, well, that's great, it's making a lot of money, but what type of activity is happening in that, on that chain? And do I think that's going to carry on into the future?

Can you, you know, okay, so can you start to apply REV to all— basically, where does REV break down? Like, can you apply REV across— like, okay, what's my question here? You can apply REV to all the L1s, I think. Can you apply REV to also all the L2s? Can you apply REV to apps as well? Like, where does REV as a metric start to break down and how does it work as a metric if you use it to try to compare, you know, A to B to C?

Great question. The beauty of RAV is it does map across all blockchains, not applications. Applications are businesses. Traditional P&Ls are going to look great there. Applications are businesses. Blockchains are these weird networky things that don't have this very clean-cut and dry, you know, what is revenue discussion. I think L2s look a little more businessy. Just because there's like a— today there's a single sequencer that plays a very key role and the DAO controls that thing, etc., etc. But largely, they're still blockchains and REV does apply. There are transaction fees paid, there are out-of-protocol mechanisms. It's all the same. So if we look at REV globally, well, I guess one step back, that's not to say there's not nuance. So something like Tron. Tron does this very interesting mechanism. I think it's the only chain that really does this. Basically, if you stake the TRX token, you'll get, let's call them gas credits. You get free transactions every day on the chain. So if you just like summed up all of the gas spent on the chain, multiplied by that, that by the TRX, the gas token, multiply that by the price, you wouldn't get the actual like transaction fees spent on the chain. It would get this like massive number. You have to actually reduce out the rebates that the chain gives. So think about like, again, it's, it's easy to think about traditional businesses in this sense, but I want to use this for like a logical comparison, not a one-to-one mapping. But if you had a, you know, if you sold widgets and you gave discounts on your widgets, you'd have a gross revenue and a net revenue. REV captures that. It's only looking at the bottom line of that, like, net revenue number. So for Tron's REV, it is the total amount of transaction fees paid in dollars, not excluding gas rebates. So there is nuance here. But again, REV captures this metric because all it is trying to do is say, how many dollars did users pay to execute transactions over a period? And I actually think when you look at this globally, so we're looking at a chart here of network REV for most chains in the industry. It's not perfect. I think SUI is probably the big one missing here, but largely this is very directionally correct. You're looking at roughly 99% of our revenue over time. This is like a really interesting where are we at in the cycle chart, because if we look at 2021 and we look at now, you know, Ethereum, November 2021, a monster, monster month of like $1.8 billion of user-paid fees to transact on a chain. Crazy. If you remember back, that's like peak NFT craze. It was absolute nonsense happening on-chain and it was a ton of fun. But if you look at where we're at today, we're still about 2, 2.5 times off that number. Important caveat here is there is far more computation happening on-chain today. The cost of computation has come way, way, way, way down. And that has kind of like enabled this, this new rise in growth. But I'm trying to like, I'm toying with the idea of like, okay, although it's much cheaper to transact, we have seen a significant increase in total transaction activity. And like, what does the user care about? Do they care about like the fact that they, you know, have a dollar and they're going to spend that whole dollar on transaction execution, or do they care about just the, you know, whether it's the simple swap, um, and they wanted to execute one swap regardless of the price. So I don't know, if we see this chart kind of like topping out back in 2021 highs, to me it's like a, whoa, okay, there's extreme froth because we're seeing the same REV on far more computation. Um, and I guess while we're on that topic, one more piece to layer on there I think is Okay, it's great that the chain's making money, but are the applications making money? And we're actually at new all-time highs in that metric. A lot of this is driven by Solana, given the rise of all of this meme coin trading and users willing to spend a lot of money to trade meme coins.

This is okay. This is interesting. So you think that the— okay, go back to that other one. Go to the chart. So you think this chart best summarizes why Solana is outperforming ETH?

I think it's a— again, gun to your head, you only get one metric. Yes, I think it is. Users are— they want to spend money to transact on the chain.

If you think about why that is, what is the Bitcoin REV there back in the end of 2023? Those are Ordinals and things like that.

Ordinals. That was— you can actually see even on like a grander timescale. Like, you know, the Ordinals is more of like a flash in the pan, but, uh, it's crazy to see the, uh, the rise of, of Ordinals.

Go— all right, go to the app— sorry, I cut you off before, but go to the application revenue now.

Um, yeah, so I guess to also answer your question about like, all right, from a price per standpoint, you know, Solana has been white hot this last year and Why is that? Well, we just did a very depressing episode on 0xResearch. I don't recommend you listen to it. It was— we were coming into it being like, all right, bull case for Ethereum. And I don't know, I'm probably guilty for just turning the corner on that episode. But Ethereum made the decision that it was going to deprioritize L1 execution in pursuit of the L2 roadmap. And what that did was move activity to L2s. An obvious consequence of that is the apps went to where the activity was going, and now that's where they're building. And so REV is, you know, at— in like cyclical decline on Ethereum. And the question is like, okay, that's very obvious when you look at a chart, but is that a good thing or is that a bad thing? And to me, it's extremely hard to say that that's okay. Um, you didn't— like, ETH is not money. I'm sorry, it's not money. It can be this like store of value thing to like transport wealth through time, similar to Bitcoin. I think the supply dynamic on Ethereum is beautiful. I think it's in a great state. Inflation is plus or minus 1%, pretty much guaranteed. It's in a great spot there. The issue is like, what's the demand to use ETH as money? And I don't see any examples of this. I really do not, um, other than like a few of us on crypto Twitter that denominate a portfolio in ETH, like That's about it. And so like more concretely, the idea is that you'd push ETH onto these L2s and the moneyness thing would happen there. Okay, well, Base— I'll actually pull up a chart of this. I think GrowThePie does a fantastic job of aggregating most Ethereum L2 activity. Base does almost all of Ethereum L2 activity. So I'm just going to go ahead and add every L2 that's listed on GrowThePie onto this chart. And you'll see that from an ARV basis and, or just total transaction fees spent on this, uh, in, in the entire L2 landscape, you know, yesterday base was 76% and it looks like it tops out at 79.99% of all, of all fees paid. So like base, and everyone kind of expected this to happen.

You're saying 80% of, do I get that right? 80% of the fees On, on Ethereum L2s, 80% of the fees are base.

Yes.

Interesting.

And like DEX volumes in a very similar spot to a lesser extent, Arbitrum is doing quite well in DEX volume, but largely that's the same story. And like whatever metric you want to use, this chart will look roughly the same. So base is— that's— I think that's why Kyle Samani always trolls with this, like the future of Ethereum is Coinbase is because there's metrics like these are what we see in production today. And so, okay, if we look at, you know, what's the moneyness of ETH happening on Base today? Well, they're actually rolling out a program to remove it as a gas token— or not remove it as a gas token, sorry, but to incentivize the use of USDC as the gas token. That's better for the user, right? Most people in the world certainly do not denominate in ETH. So why would you make them do that? You're going to enable account extraction in your— there. It's a new tool. Base actually makes— or Coinbase makes money the more Base or USDC is on Base. So of course they're incentivized to have more usage of USDC on base. And so when you think about like the moneyness standpoint, it's like, you know, a lot of their activity metrics are through the roof, as we can prove. And then you get to the point of nobody— it's not even a gas token really anymore. Well, today it very much is. But if they're trying to get away from that, then how— like, I don't know, I always feel like I'm grasping at straws when I'm like, okay, well, this is why it'll be valuable. Valuable as a money item. But that's why I think RIV is super important. It's, it's a measure of demand to use the thing.

Interesting. Let's talk about another metric, which is that I've just seen you going off on, on Twitter, which is active— I think it's active addresses.

Yes, it is. I guess one more point just to visualize this last topic and we'll jump into active addresses. Another Sanky. We love Sankys. So this In Q4—

and can we build thank yous inside of our research platform?

Eng is grinding on it very soon. This is all— everything I'm doing is just like giving them tools to be like, hey, here's a— here's why I want to build thank yous. And so it's coming. Stay tuned. But Q4 2024, Base saw about $30 million of transaction volume or $30 million of network revenue. Coinbase kept 78% of that. 14% went to the OP Collective and 8% went to Ethereum. Like, so this is $0.08 on the dollar, I should say, not, not 1 or 2. But it's shocking to me that the OP Collective has a better deal with Base from a dollar perspective than Ethereum does. It's shocking to me. And when you like, you know, the Ethereum maxi community will say, yeah, yeah, the fees don't matter. It's all about scaling the asset. And again, I think that's fine if we can make that work. Sure. But I do not see any evidence of that being the case. And so to answer your— this is a very long-winded answer to your question about like, why has Solana outperformed? It's because you don't see any of that. Everyone's just like, throw as much activity on this damn chain as we can. And like, let's see, let's break it and then fix it and then break it again. And it's just a totally different ethos. And I also don't think you— nobody is like viewing it as this money in this aspect. Either. I think it's important. Again, we saw a proposal to change the inflation structure we can get into later come across this morning. But I don't know, largely it's just like they're there to maximize our revenue. And like you can get to a trillion-dollar valuation with revenue alone. Like it's a lie. Do not let anyone convince you that's not possible.

Active addresses. Tell me about them.

Let's jump in. I actually think I have a pinned tweet thread here. Uh, but why this is a silly metric. So this is single-handedly the most noisy metric in crypto, and it also carries like real weight. Um, when you say active addresses are users, you are directly or indirectly, maliciously or no ill intent, doesn't matter, you're implying like something that has a very important meaning in Web2 Companies are valued on ARPU, maybe less these days, or revenue per user. But it's not like Twitter has a bot problem as well. So maybe I don't have been caught up in the tech side of, you know, do we still care deeply about the user number? But when you call them users, you are implying very direct things about what that word carries and what that means. And my grievance here is that it is extremely cheap to operate a Sybil farm of many addresses, and there is significant incentive to do so for airdrop farming or just for doing— like, there's a huge reason about this for meme coins as well, and like distributing to many token holders. So you climb up all these silly leaderboards so people see your token. It's like a marketing thing. This happens pervasive, like a very, very— it's pervasive on-chain. It's everywhere. And even if you look at like trading bots that are doing sextex arbitrage or like running very complex strategies and you know, being generally good, like only backrunning or whatever. I'm not talking about like malicious activity here. They run multiple addresses on their bots because it improves the efficiency of the bot that they run. So it's not like if there's one trader running through one contract using 100 addresses, it's not 100 people, it's not 100 users, it's one user. So I just think that when you point to something and portray it as something it's not, so when you point to active addresses and you call them users, you are making a huge leap that is sending us down the wrong path. And if we do not self-police this, you know, the— and the industry, you know, now we're kind of going into this golden era of the industry. If we don't self-police this, someone else is going to come in and be like, holy shit, guys, like you're calling 80 million users when there's, you know, a few hundred thousand. It just doesn't make sense. And so we're trying to build out a better metric to this. We're like really workshopping it internally. I doubt we'll like launch it publicly until it's pretty hardened. But it's a hard problem to solve. You can't just like do this overnight. Like, and so the question is like, what are you even trying to do? Do you want to know the number of people? Do people even matter? Like, especially in this world of AI and AI agents, like, you're going to see way more non-human transactions. Like, what are you actually trying to measure? Uh, gets pretty hard. And like, I think, again, I think Web2 companies have this problem too. Think of like, I don't know, on my Twitter, I have like my account, my Anon account I basically never use, and then like a couple Blockworks accounts on there. So am I suddenly 5 users? Like, what like, I don't know, the word user has like really gotten diluted meaning. Uh, and yeah, active addresses are—

I mean, crypto has it way worse because to, you, you know, one click you can create a wallet, whereas, and then, you know, two clicks, one more click and you can send some money to the wallet. Like to create a second Twitter account, it is kind of annoying.

You have to, you know, yeah.

I mean, there's, there's probably 12 clicks there, which is, you know, I also have multiple accounts and It's, you know, it's just like I wouldn't have like 10 accounts though, but I do have like probably 30 wallets or something.

I don't know.

I've lost track. I think I've lost some wallets at this point.

Like, right. And so like, are you 30 users? No. And like, we're not even denting this problem.

So how do you do it? So what—

okay, what are you trying to accomplish though? Is it—

I guess people want to know how many people use crypto. That's why it's— how many, how many How many daily active users of crypto are there? How many monthly active users of crypto are there? That's what I mean. That feels like I've heard like 50 different answers to that.

It's because there's a very small subset of industry participants that know the answer, and it's centralized exchanges and wallet providers. That is it. And you will have to pry that data out of their cold, dead hands to get that from them.

Yeah, but you could add up like MetaMask shares their user data like once every couple of months, they announce how many users they have. And Fantom, you know, I think announced they have like 5 million users or something like MAUs, I think it was.

Yeah. So that's, that's interesting. And then you have to get into the whole like, are they counting things in the same regard and whatnot? But yeah, I mean, yeah, it's, it's, it's tough. And yeah, I'll— maybe we can throw this link in the show notes, but you should walk through the thread on your own. It's going to be— it would be brutal to do that live. But there's a few examples in here of these cyborg farms that like literally just farm a fake transaction, um, with a new account that creates this new user perception. It's just a silly metric. And again, there's so much nuance in all this, even DEX volumes. DEX volumes are pretty interesting to see what's driving on-chain activity. You can see what types of assets people are trading, et cetera, et cetera. Uh, but there's like a ton of noise in those too. I think they're directionally useful, but like challenging to use. So again, that's why I always fall back on REV. How much are users willing to pay to be a part of this ecosystem?

Yeah. Yeah. Dan, anything else on crypto data you're thinking about?

I think my broad mission, I suppose, is like, how do we march in the direction of just broader standardization? It's so complicated to like, you know, if you just want to compare two ecosystems, it's so challenging. It is so, so challenging. But people, you know, demand it. That's— I think that's like a very reasonable thing to like want to strive for and to push towards. So that's what we're doing at Blockworks Research is we really want to make this easier for the user because all the— there's so much nuance and we just want to reduce that down into a few simple numbers that you can— that you can use to compare— compare blockchains together. And again, at the application layer, I think it's much, much, much, much, much more straightforward.

Yeah. What do you think of TVL as a metric?

I think it's useful, right? If you like, in the context of, you know, how much capital resides on this chain, I think there's like a good security discussion to be had there. So Coinbase is doing something interesting. They announced this. I'm not like accusing them of anything. This is just a thing they're doing. They're parking user deposits of USDC on Base. And so like the L2 Total Value Secured number is like screaming up into the right on USDC growth. And yeah, there, that guy shows up in bridging metrics as well. But again, this is how all metrics are nuanced. Is, is a centralized exchange parking user deposits on-chain like a useful thing to be factoring into like how active this economy is? Like, yeah, no, probably not. But again, this happens everywhere. Like Binance has a few billion dollars of USDT on Arbitrum. It's like 60% of all USDC on the chain. Like they have to put it somewhere and they like diversify the risk. I don't know how their risk management systems work, but like that's clearly what they're doing and that's a-okay. Uh, she has a question, it's like, if you just take TVL at face value, is it useful like directionally but not really? But if you parse out a few things, it's like, yeah, it's absolutely— it's the amount of idle capital waiting to be pushed into the economy or already in the economy if you're talking about like DeFi TVL.

Yeah. Um, all right, I have to jump in a few minutes, but I do want to get your quick take on, uh, this Multicoin proposal that I just saw go live.

Yeah, it's super cool. So basically the point is they want to reduce inflation on Solana. So Solana today, their inflation rate was just basically fired from the hip. I think Anatoly has been super open and transparent. He was like, I don't know, our original set of core validators came from Cosmos, so we like sort of did what they did and called it a day. Solana grew into a top ecosystem and now Multicoin was like, look, this is not a sustainable or realistic curve. Like, let's put some work into it. I think the TL;DR is it's going to have like a target stake rate. They propose 50%. When the total amount staked pushes above 50%, the inflation will reduce to incentivize like the fact that, hey, you know, we're above this threshold, we don't really need anymore. So we're going to lower the rate. And then of course, if it drops back below, the rate will increase. So you're kind of like trying to have this target rate. We actually see a lot of that in the Cosmos right now anyway. So there's— it's kind of interesting there as well. I think this is good right now. Like, I don't know, take a step back and say, why do we need inflation? Well, it's— I think in the very, very basic form, it's to incentivize staking and to offset the, the operational costs of validators. So validators take a commission on that inflation and then pass the rest back to stakers. That inflation commission, you know, is largely supposed to be to subsidize the fact that they pay a few tens of thousands of dollars on Solana to, to operate their machine. If you look at the distribution today between stakers and validators, stakers earn 97% of inflation. Okay, so validators take 3%. So like, okay, it feels a little bit unnecessary. Why are we doing this? Like, this doesn't really make a ton of sense. And it's pretty circular, right? If you're like getting diluted by, you know, roughly 7 or 8% today, then— and you're also getting paid in that dilution. It's like, you know, the price goes down, but you have more tokens. Like, that's basically the change. So it's just sort of like circular and I don't know, it is, it's just not clean. And inflation does impact the price. Inflation pushes the price lower, like value equals or price equals value divided by supply. When you increase supply, you're increasing the denominator, you get a lower price. That assumes there is some like fundamental value there. But, but that's how the math works. So I do think inflation matters. I think this is the right step forward. Lower inflation. Today's situation is just unnecessary, unnecessarily high.

Good proposal.

You're a supporter? Yes, I am a supporter.

Yeah. Is it too much too, too quick?

No, I, you know, they said this in a chat somewhere that this is kind of like step one, like let's just put in this variable rate and then step two will be— they actually have a very long form post about the idea of like building out a risk curve basically for staking, where long-term willingness to stake should be rewarded more than short-term. That seems pretty reasonable. And if they shoved all of that in, I would have 100% agreed with you. That's like, okay, we went from, I don't know, bro, we just had a— this curve looked good, so we threw it in to like, you know, we're bringing the risk curve on-chain. That's like two extremes. So they actually did like a halfway, which I think is actually interesting.

Interesting. Yeah. Because, okay. Yeah. Yeah. I got to go read that.

Yeah. And I don't know, you see like maturation on the economic side from Ethereum happening over the last, let's say, 4 years. You know, Solana is kind of at this maturation point as well where it's very interesting to see like historically a year ago if someone said, yeah, hey, we should lower the inflation, they would have gotten screamed at by the engineers. Get out of here. We're not worried about that now. It's like, okay, yeah, I know this is kind of dumb. Like, happy to fix it.

Hmm. I got to jump, Dan. This is awesome. I did want to call something out, which is we are hiring a bunch on Dan's team. Dan's hiring a bunch of folks. Dan started at Blockworks because he cold DM'd me on Twitter and said, I'm a big fan of your feed and Blockworks. I currently work in business valuation.

Oh God, he's reading the whole thing live.

At EY. And I'm a part of a valuation group in Atlanta, Georgia. It was like the most professional group, like I'm about to begin working towards my CFA. So he said, don't, don't do any of that. Come work at Blockwork. So yeah, we've got a bunch of open roles and Dan's hiring a bunch. So yeah, if you want to avoid the embarrassing cold DMs and just, just shoot one of us a normal DM or apply on the website.

Cut all that out. Good Lord. No, it's funny, actually. I, I've spent $1,200 on the CFA prep books. Sent that message literally the next day, ended up with this job in roughly a month and threw them away.

So nice. Good man.

Never looking back.

Got to invest in yourself, you know? Amen. So, Dan, awesome. Thank you for joining. Thanks, everyone, for listening. Either you— I'm assuming you either loved this episode or you didn't like it. If you don't like crypto data, either way, we will see you Tuesday. I think we have an episode with— I'm pretty sure on Monday it is The op is a big episode on the Superchain with Ryan Wyatt and Ben Jones from Optimism, asking them a whole bunch of stuff. That's either on Monday or it's the Monday after. So I'm 50/50. I got that one right. But quick plug, check out optimism.blockworksresearch.com.

We've got the top chains in the Superchain listed there. We talked a lot about Base. There's an awesome Base DEX activity tab on that dashboard. It's public. Definitely go check it out. There you go.

Thanks, everyone. Hey everyone, just wanted to give a quick thanks to today's title sponsor, Geodnet.

By setting up a base station, you can get involved with this groundbreaking Web3 ecosystem. Learn more by heading over to geodnet.com or just by hitting the link in the description of today's episode.