Showing 1–9 of 9 results for author: Gogol, K

Layer-2 Arbitrage: An Empirical Analysis of Swap Dynamics and Price Disparities on Rollups

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Johnnatan Messias, Deborah Miori, Claudio Tessone, Benjamin Livshits

Abstract: This paper explores the dynamics of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) within the Layer-2 ecosystem, focusing on Automated Market Makers (AMM) and arbitrage on Ethereum rollups. We observe significant shifts in trading activity from Ethereum to rollups, with swaps on rollups happening 2-3 times more often, though, with lower trade volume. By examining the price differences between AMMs and centralized e… ▽ More This paper explores the dynamics of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) within the Layer-2 ecosystem, focusing on Automated Market Makers (AMM) and arbitrage on Ethereum rollups. We observe significant shifts in trading activity from Ethereum to rollups, with swaps on rollups happening 2-3 times more often, though, with lower trade volume. By examining the price differences between AMMs and centralized exchanges, we discover over 0.5 million unexploited arbitrage opportunities on rollups. Remarkably, we observe that these opportunities last, on average, 10 to 20 blocks, requiring adjustments to the LVR metrics to avoid double-counting arbitrage. Our results show that arbitrage in Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism pools ranges from 0.03% to 0.05% of trading volume, while in zkSync Era it oscillates around 0.25%, with the LVR metric overestimating arbitrage by a factor of five. Rollups offer not only lower gas fees, but also provide faster block production, leading to significant differences compared to the trading and arbitrage dynamics of Ethereum. △ Less

Submitted 4 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

The Writing is on the Wall: Analyzing the Boom of Inscriptions and its Impact on EVM-compatible Blockchains

Authors: Johnnatan Messias, Krzysztof Gogol, Maria Inês Silva, Benjamin Livshits

Abstract: Despite the level of attention given to rollups there is limited empirical research about their performance. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive data-driven analysis of the late 2023 transaction boom that is attributed to inscriptions: a novel approach to record data onto a blockchain with no outside server needed. Inscriptions were first introduced on the Bitcoin blockchain to allow f… ▽ More Despite the level of attention given to rollups there is limited empirical research about their performance. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive data-driven analysis of the late 2023 transaction boom that is attributed to inscriptions: a novel approach to record data onto a blockchain with no outside server needed. Inscriptions were first introduced on the Bitcoin blockchain to allow for the representation of NFTs or ERC-20-like tokens without smart contracts, but were later spread to other blockchains. This work examines the applications of inscription transactions in Ethereum and its major EVM-compatible rollups and their impact on blockchain scalability during periods of sudden transaction surges. We found that on certain days, inscription-related transactions comprised over 89% on Arbitrum, over 88% on zkSync Era, and over 53% on Ethereum. Furthermore, 99% of these transactions were related to the minting of meme coins, followed by limited trading activity. Unlike L1 blockchains, during periods of transaction surges, zkSync and Arbitrum experienced lower median gas fees, attributable to the compression of L2 transactions for a single L1 batch. Additionally, zkSync Era, a ZK rollup, demonstrated a stronger reduction in fees than optimistic rollups considered in our study: Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism. △ Less

Submitted 24 May, 2024; originally announced May 2024.

Comments: This research article is a work of scholarship and reflects the authors' own views and opinions. It does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of any other person or organization, including the authors' employer. Readers should not rely on this article for making strategic or commercial decisions, and the authors are not responsible for any losses that may result from such use. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2404.11189

SoK: Decentralized Finance (DeFi) -- Fundamentals, Taxonomy and Risks

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Christian Killer, Malte Schlosser, Thomas Bocek, Burkhard Stiller, Claudio Tessone

Abstract: Decentralized Finance (DeFi) refers to financial services that are not necessarily related to crypto-currencies. By employing blockchain for security and integrity, DeFi creates new possibilities that attract retail and institution users, including central banks. Given its novel applications and sophisticated designs, the distinction between DeFi services and understanding the risk involved is oft… ▽ More Decentralized Finance (DeFi) refers to financial services that are not necessarily related to crypto-currencies. By employing blockchain for security and integrity, DeFi creates new possibilities that attract retail and institution users, including central banks. Given its novel applications and sophisticated designs, the distinction between DeFi services and understanding the risk involved is often complex. This work systematically presents the major categories of DeFi protocols that cover over 90\% of total value locked (TVL) in DeFi. It establishes a structured methodology to differentiate between DeFi protocols based on their design and architecture. Every DeFi protocol is classified into one of three groups: liquidity pools, pegged and synthetic tokens, and aggregator protocols, followed by risk analysis. In particular, we classify stablecoins, liquid staking tokens, and bridged (wrapped) assets as pegged tokens resembling similar risks. The full risk exposure of DeFi users is derived not only from the DeFi protocol design but also from how it is used and with which tokens. △ Less

Submitted 17 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

The Writing is on the Wall: Analyzing the Boom of Inscriptions and its Impact on Rollup Performance and Cost Efficiency

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Johnnatan Messias, Maria Ines Silva, Benjamin Livshits

Abstract: Late 2023 witnessed significant user activity on EVM chains, resulting in a surge in transaction activity and putting many rollups into the first live test. While some rollups performed well, some others experienced downtime during this period, affecting transaction finality time and gas fees. To address the lack of empirical research on rollups, we perform the first study during a heightened acti… ▽ More Late 2023 witnessed significant user activity on EVM chains, resulting in a surge in transaction activity and putting many rollups into the first live test. While some rollups performed well, some others experienced downtime during this period, affecting transaction finality time and gas fees. To address the lack of empirical research on rollups, we perform the first study during a heightened activity during the late 2023 transaction boom, as attributed to inscriptions - a novel technique that enables NFT and ERC-20 token creation on Bitcoin and other blockchains. We observe that minting inscription-based meme tokens on zkSync Era allows for trading at a fraction of the costs, compared to the Bitcoin or Ethereum networks. We also found that the increased transaction activity, over 99% attributed to the minting of new inscription tokens, positively affected other users of zkSync Era, resulting in lowered gas fees. Unlike L1 blockchains, ZK rollups may experience lower gas fees with increased transaction volume. Lastly, the introduction of blobs - a form of temporary data storage - decreased the gas costs of Ethereum rollups, but also raised a number of questions about the security of inscription-based tokens. △ Less

Submitted 17 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Comments: Work in progress, exploring zkSync Era. More EVM chains will be added in the final version

SoK: Liquid Staking Tokens (LSTs)

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Yaron Velner, Benjamin Kraner, Claudio Tessone

Abstract: Liquid Staking Tokens (LSTs) function as tokenized representations of staked native assets while also accruing staking rewards. They emerged as a preferred method of staking within Proof of Stake (PoS) blockchains, owing to their ease of use and tradability. In this Systematization of Knowledge (SoK), we establish a general framework describing the design choices and protocols underlying liquid st… ▽ More Liquid Staking Tokens (LSTs) function as tokenized representations of staked native assets while also accruing staking rewards. They emerged as a preferred method of staking within Proof of Stake (PoS) blockchains, owing to their ease of use and tradability. In this Systematization of Knowledge (SoK), we establish a general framework describing the design choices and protocols underlying liquid staking. We then employ the framework to systematically compare the top LST implementations, examining their node operator selection, validator operations, and staking rewards distribution models. We further discuss security concerns associated with liquid staking, its implications for PoS blockchain security, and Distributed Validator technology (DVT) as a potential solution. Finally, we empirically analyze LSTs' performance and find that the design choices and market events affect peg stability; particularly, LSTs with centralized governance and operations are more efficient in tracking staking rewards. △ Less

Submitted 31 March, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Quantifying Arbitrage in Automated Market Makers: An Empirical Study of Ethereum ZK Rollups

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Johnnatan Messias, Deborah Miori, Claudio Tessone, Benjamin Livshits

Abstract: Arbitrage can arise from the simultaneous purchase and sale of the same asset in different markets in order to profit from a difference in its price. This work systematically reviews arbitrage opportunities between Automated Market Makers (AMMs) on Ethereum ZK rollups, and Centralised Exchanges (CEXs). First, we propose a theoretical framework to measure such arbitrage opportunities and derive a f… ▽ More Arbitrage can arise from the simultaneous purchase and sale of the same asset in different markets in order to profit from a difference in its price. This work systematically reviews arbitrage opportunities between Automated Market Makers (AMMs) on Ethereum ZK rollups, and Centralised Exchanges (CEXs). First, we propose a theoretical framework to measure such arbitrage opportunities and derive a formula for the related Maximal Arbitrage Value (MAV) that accounts for both price divergences and liquidity available in the trading venues. Then, we empirically measure the historical MAV available between SyncSwap, an AMM on zkSync Era, and Binance, and investigate how quickly misalignments in price are corrected against explicit and implicit market costs. Overall, the cumulative MAV from July to September 2023 on the USDC-ETH SyncSwap pool amounts to $104.96k (0.24% of trading volume). △ Less

Submitted 26 June, 2024; v1 submitted 24 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Comments: In proceedings of Marble 2024

Liquid Staking Tokens in Automated Market Makers

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Robin Fritsch, Malte Schlosser, Johnnatan Messias, Benjamin Kraner, Claudio Tessone

Abstract: This paper studies liquid staking tokens (LSTs) on automated market makers (AMMs), both theoretically and empirically. LSTs are tokenized representations of staked assets on proof-of-stake blockchains. First, we theoretically model LST-liquidity on AMMs. This includes categorizing suitable AMM types for LST liquidity, as well as deriving formulas for the necessary returns from trading fees to adeq… ▽ More This paper studies liquid staking tokens (LSTs) on automated market makers (AMMs), both theoretically and empirically. LSTs are tokenized representations of staked assets on proof-of-stake blockchains. First, we theoretically model LST-liquidity on AMMs. This includes categorizing suitable AMM types for LST liquidity, as well as deriving formulas for the necessary returns from trading fees to adequately compensate liquidity providers under the particular price trajectories of LSTs. Two relevant metrics are considered. Firstly, losses compared to holding the liquidity outside the AMM (loss-versus-holding, or impermanent loss). Secondly, the relative profitability compared to fully staking the capital (loss-versus-staking) which is a metric specifically introduced for the case of LST-liquidity. Subsequently, we empirically measure these metrics for Ethereum LSTs across the most relevant AMM pools. We find that, while trading fees often compensate for impermanent loss, fully staking is more profitable for many pools, putting the sustainability of current LST allocation to AMMs into question. △ Less

Submitted 15 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Empirical and Theoretical Analysis of Liquid Staking Protocols

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Benjamin Kraner, Malte Schlosser, Tao Yan, Claudio Tessone, Burkhard Stiller

Abstract: Liquid staking has become the largest category of decentralized finance protocols in terms of total value locked. However, few studies exist on its implementation designs or underlying risks. The liquid staking protocols allow for earning staking rewards without the disadvantage of locking the capital at the validators. Yet, they are seen by some as a threat to the Proof-of-Stake blockchain securi… ▽ More Liquid staking has become the largest category of decentralized finance protocols in terms of total value locked. However, few studies exist on its implementation designs or underlying risks. The liquid staking protocols allow for earning staking rewards without the disadvantage of locking the capital at the validators. Yet, they are seen by some as a threat to the Proof-of-Stake blockchain security. This paper is the first work that classifies liquid staking implementations. It analyzes the historical performance of major liquid staking tokens in comparison to the traditional staking for the largest Proof-of-Stake blockchains. Furthermore, the research investigates the impact of centralization, maximum extractable value and the migration of Ethereum from Proof-of-Work to Proof-of-Stake on the tokens' performance. Examining the tracking error of the liquid stacking providers to the staking rewards shows that they are persistent and cannot be explained by macro-variables of the currency, such as the variance or return. △ Less

Submitted 29 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Report number: ChainScience/2023/21

Cross-border Exchange of CBDCs using Layer-2 Blockchain

Authors: Krzysztof Gogol, Johnnatan Messias, Malte Schlosser, Benjamin Kraner, Claudio Tessone

Abstract: This paper proposes a novel multi-layer blockchain architecture for the cross-border trading of CBDCs. The permissioned layer-2, by relying on the public consensus of the underlying network, assures the security and integrity of the transactions and ensures interoperability with domestic CBDCs implementations. Multiple Layer-3s operate various Automated Market Makers (AMMs) and compete with each o… ▽ More This paper proposes a novel multi-layer blockchain architecture for the cross-border trading of CBDCs. The permissioned layer-2, by relying on the public consensus of the underlying network, assures the security and integrity of the transactions and ensures interoperability with domestic CBDCs implementations. Multiple Layer-3s operate various Automated Market Makers (AMMs) and compete with each other for the lowest costs. To provide insights into the practical implications of the system, simulations of trading costs are conducted based on historical FX rates, with Project Mariana as a benchmark. The study shows that, even with liquidity fragmentation, a multi-layer and multi-AMM setup is more cost-efficient than a single AMM. △ Less

Submitted 30 January, 2024; v1 submitted 22 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: This paper was presented at the Crypto Finance Conference (CfC) Academic Track 2024 in St. Moritz, Switzerland