Optimism has conducted four airdrops for the OP community. The first and fourth airdrops were for claim, while the second and third were pushed to wallets. In this analysis, we’ll delve deeper into the effectiveness of the OP airdrops and examine the impact they’ve had on the OP chain. By scrutinizing key metrics and user behaviors, we aim to unveil valuable insights into the dynamics of the OP community and its engagement with the airdrop initiatives. Through comparative analysis with previous airdrop campaigns, we seek to provide a comprehensive understanding of the evolving landscape of community incentives within the OP ecosystem.
OP VS ARB
To better assess its impact, we will compare it to the ARB airdrop, as they both represent Layer 2 solutions for Ethereum, albeit with different roll-up mechanisms. By conducting a comparative analysis between these two airdrop initiatives, we aim to gain deeper insights into the unique contributions and challenges posed by each Layer 2 solution. This comparative approach will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the broader ecosystem dynamics and the implications of airdrop strategies on community engagement and adoption within the Ethereum network
The number of weekly active wallets corresponding to the OP airdrop has witnessed an exponential surge, particularly following the successive OP airdrop events. Presently, the active wallet count has reached an all-time high (ATH) subsequent to the latest airdrop, Airdrop 4, which incentivizes NFT creators. This significant uptick underscores the growing interest and participation within the OP community, indicative of the impactful nature of these airdrop initiatives. In contrast, the ARB weekly active users experienced a spike during the airdrop week, followed by a subsequent decline in wallet activity until most recently, when it returned to its all-time high (ATH) following claims. Comparing these two charts, we can discern that the OP airdrop, divided into multiple sessions, proves more effective in attracting a larger user base. This segmentation strategy likely enhances engagement and sustains interest over an extended period, resulting in more consistent and prolonged user participation.
To provide a clearer visualization, we roughly calculate the post-OP airdrop user base. After each airdrop, we observe an average increase of approximately 70% in the post-airdrop user count. This trend underscores the substantial impact of OP airdrops in expanding and engaging the community base.
- Pre OP airdrop 1– 180k active wallet
- Post OP airdrop 1–340k active wallet
- Post OP airdrop 2–550k active wallet
- Post OP airdrop 3–400k active wallet
- Post OP airdrop 4–760k active wallet
Similarly, we observe a similar trend for the transaction count post-airdrop for both OP and ARB. The weekly transaction count on OP has been steadily increasing, surpassing the transaction count of the previous airdrop. Conversely, on ARB, the transaction count decreased post-ARB airdrop, with a return to its all-time high (ATH) only occurring recently. This comparison highlights the differing impacts of airdrop strategies on transactional activity within each ecosystem.
To gain a deeper understanding of user behavior, we’ll categorize users into new and retained wallets to assess the impact of the airdrops. In the case of the OP chain, we observe a simultaneous increase in both new and retained users. However, upon normalization, we note that the market share of retained wallets has steadily increased since OP airdrops 1 and 2, stabilizing at around 25%. Conversely, in the ARB ecosystem, the retained user market share was already significant, contributing to around 30% even before the ARB airdrop, and has remained consistent since then. This disparity underscores the differing dynamics of user retention strategies between the two projects.
To delve deeper into the impact, we categorize active wallets into airdrop recipients and non-recipients. Following OP airdrop 1, we observe a gradual increase in wallets not receiving the airdrop, with a significant uptick occurring post OP airdrop 2. Currently, non-OP airdrop recipients contribute to 90% of the total active wallet market share. It’s worth noting that OP Labs has implemented strategies such as providing grants to protocols to attract new users to the OP chain, aiming to foster greater adoption and activity within the ecosystem. Similar observations are noted on the ARB chain, where following the ARB airdrop, wallets not receiving ARB increased, now constituting 90% of the ARB wallet market share. This trend is reinforced by the Arbitrum Foundation’s ongoing allocation of grants and funding to DeFi and gaming protocols, aimed at expanding their user base and fostering ecosystem growth.
Based on the weekly retention rate data, following OP airdrop 1, we observed a remarkable increase in both the 7-day and 1-month retention rates, rising from 20% to 80% just before OP airdrop 2. This surge suggests users may have been anticipating OP airdrop 2. Subsequently, we observed a decline in retention rates post-OP airdrop 2, followed by a resurgence just prior to OP airdrops 3 and 4. This multi-airdrop strategy has proven highly effective in reengaging users with the chain. Conversely, on the ARB chain, we note a consistent decrease in retention rates following the ARB airdrop.
LTV/Economic Growth
In terms of revenue, we noticed that before OP airdrop 2, approximately 90% of revenue was generated by OP airdrop claimers. However, following OP airdrop 2, there was a noticeable spike in revenue generated by mostly non-airdrop recipients. As of the post-OP airdrop 4 period, around 80% of revenues are now contributed by non-airdrop recipients. This suggests that the majority of current revenue is generated by non-airdrop recipients rather than airdrop claimers. This shift in revenue distribution indicates the evolving dynamics of user behavior and value creation within the ecosystem, potentially affecting the LTV of both airdrop and non-airdrop users.
Total Delelgated OP
One of the most significant outcomes of OP airdrops 2, 3, and 4 is the increased user engagement in delegating their OP tokens in anticipation of further rewards such as future airdrops. Prior to OP airdrop 2, we observed stagnant or slow decreases in delegated OP, indicating reduced user activity in OP governance. However, with the introduction of criteria to receive more OP airdrops as a delegator, there has been a noticeable uptick in users delegating more of their OP tokens. This strategy has proven highly successful in incentivizing users to become more actively engaged within the ecosystem.
Conclusion OP airdrop research
- Analysis of weekly retention rates post-airdrops revealed a significant increase in both 7-day and 1-month retention rates, indicating heightened user engagement, particularly just prior to subsequent airdrops.
- Examination of active wallets categorized into airdrop recipients and non-recipients highlighted a substantial increase in the market share of non-recipients, which now constitutes 90% of total active wallets.
- Preceding OP airdrop 2, around 90% of revenue was contributed by airdrop claimants, whereas post-airdrop 4, approximately 80% of revenues were generated by non-airdrop recipients, showcasing a notable shift in revenue distribution.
- Notably, the introduction of criteria to receive more OP airdrops as a delegator led to a significant increase in delegated OP tokens, indicating successful incentivization of user participation in OP governance.
- These findings underscore the effectiveness of OP’s multi-airdrop strategy in driving user engagement and fostering ecosystem growth, while also reflecting evolving user behaviors and value creation dynamics within the OP community.
REF: https://dune.com/ahkek/op-airdrop-large-analysis
By Jason (https://twitter.com/ahkek4)
