Connect with us

Ethereum

Ethereum [ETH], EOS and Litecoin [LTC] emerge as biggest winners among the top 10 club

Akash Anand

Published

on

Ethereum [ETH], EOS and Litecoin [LTC] emerge as biggest winners among the top 10 club
Source: Unsplash

The start of 2019 for the cryptocurrency market has seen multiple spikes across the spectrum which includes popular coins like Bitcoin [BTC], Ethereum [ETH] and XRP. The biggest winner within the top 10 cryptocurrency club has been Ethereum, with the Vitalik Buterin co-founded cryptocurrency emerging as a surprise entrant. The three biggest winners are Ethereum, EOS, and Litecoin [LTC].

At the time of writing, Ethereum was going up by a massive 13.02% with a market cap of $15.820 billion. The cryptocurrency was trading for $151.89 with a 24-hour market volume of $3.139 billion. A majority of the cryptocurrency’s trade volume was split between OEX and OKEx, with the former controlling $168.196 million worth of ETH transactions while the latter had a hold on $154.878 million Ethereum trade.

Ethereum was also in the news recently when it overtook XRP to become the second largest cryptocurrency on the charts. The overtake comes after weeks of Ethereum being on a bearish slide which saw it close to its lowest support break.

Next in line was EOS which was growing at the rate of 10.65% with a total market cap of $2.579 billion. With a price of $2.85, the cryptocurrency held a 24-hour market volume of $805.21 million. EOS was majorly traded on OKEx, which had a hold on 11.22% of all EOS Transactions. Huobi came in a close second, overseeing 6.19% of the total EOS trade.

The fifth largest cryptocurrency was also pointed out by Tron’s Justin Sun when he stated that TRX would surpass EOS in terms of dApps by the end of this month. Sun had tweeted:

“#TRON grows rapidly and has 83 Dapps in @dapp_review now! Mission accomplished! We will surpass EOS on the number of Dapps (now 259) at the end of January, 2019!”

The third biggest gainer was Litecoin, seeing a rise of 7.20% and holding a market cap of $1.968 billion. The Charlie Lee founded cryptocurrency was trading for $32.9 with a 24-hour market volume of $420.751 million.

Charlie Lee also made news when he said:

“So, it’s easy to understand and it helps people get in and gives them a reason why Litecoin is valuable and I think just the fact that like coin has been around the network has been very stable hasn’t had any downtime, hasn’t been attacked it’s protected by its own basic mining machine.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter




Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook



Engineering graduate,crypto head and Arsenal fan. Is fascinated by technology and all its marvels. Strictly against pineapple on pizza.

News

Coin Metrics data reveals inaccuracies in Kik’s claim of being as dominant as BTC, ETH blockchains

Avatar

Published

on

Source: Pixabay

Upon investigating Kik’s claims in response to SEC’s lawsuit filed earlier this month, CoinMetric data reported inconsistencies in the on-chain activity and adoption rate of its native token, Kin.

In a study dubbed, “An Analysis of Kin’s On-Chain Activity,” the crypto-asset elaborated on the two assertions made by Kik in its letter to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Kik’s first claim was regarding its blockchain activity. Its in-house token, Kin, supposedly exceeded Ether and Bitcoin to record the fifth highest daily blockchain activity. This was debunked by CoinMetric’s investigation after taking into account its “Operation Count” [the same metric used by Kik to support their claim] and “Transfer Value.”

In terms of the Operation Count, the report explained,

“According to Kik’s source for the metric, “blockchain activity” is defined as “the number of operations on the blockchain in the last 24 hours.” Operations are broadly defined as any type of action that could be recorded on chain. But operations are not standardized across blockchains which makes comparing across chains difficult.”

Besides, drawing parallel comparisons across blockchains with radically different use cases and operations is difficult.

Although Kik’s original research showed a high number of account creations, Coin Metrics data revealed that many of these accounts were empty.

Additionally, Kin’s “create account” operation has a fee of .001 Kin. The report highlighted that a metric such as “operations count” for the purpose of blockchain activity cannot be used as a measurement tool since Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains do not track account creations on-chain.

In terms of Transfer of Value, the report elaborated,

“Theoretically, high daily transfer value should signify high activity. But transfer value is often quite noisy, especially on low fee blockchains where there are minimal costs to sending transactions. Some transfers might simply be users moving money around between addresses they own”

Instead, Coin Metrics contrived “adjusted transfer value” metric to eliminate what it called, “noise and certain artifacts like self-sends, or deliberate spammy behavior.” Coin Metric noted that this gives a clearer picture of the on-chain activity, resulting in a decreased transfer value when compared to other blockchains, even if it had a high number of daily blockchain operations.

Additionally, Kin’s average transaction value was also low, when compared to other blockchains. For the first claim, Coin Metrics concluded that the Kin platform had more micro-transactions than Bitcoin and other dominant blockchains, while highlighting the fact that the latter blockchains are not primarily used for such transactions.

Regarding Kik’s second claim that said that over 300,000 users were earning and spending Kin as a currency, Coin Metrics assessed its blockchain usage. The number of addresses is not necessarily equal to the number of users since a single user could have multiple addresses. Hence, Coin Metrics took the number of active users into account, which the report defined as “the number of unique addresses that were active in the network [either as a recipient or originator of a ledger change] during that day.” The report noted,

“Kin 2 has significantly more originating active addresses than Kin 3. Although Kin is in the process of migrating to Kin 3, it appears that Kik is using data from the Kin 2 chain to support their claims about usage.”

Further, Kin 2 and Kin 3 had more active addresses that received payments than originated payments, which meant that there were more “earners” on Kin than “spenders,” also noting that only 35,000 addresses held over 10,000 kin [nearly $0.23]. The report added that the figures are lower than other blockchains which have a minimum of 1,000,000 addresses with at least $1.

After examining multiple critical aspects, Coin Metrics concluded that Kin fell below dominant blockchains in terms of daily active addresses, despite maintaining steady growth. It said,

“A majority of Kin’s active addresses have small account balances. While this makes sense for a network built around micropayments, when viewed across multiple metrics, our data show that Kin is not more widely used than dominant chains such as Bitcoin or Ethereum.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Continue Reading