Are Ordinals actually down 97%.

20 Aug 2023, 16:30

Are Ordinals actually down 97%? 🤔 Yesterday, @DappRadar writer @the_LeticiaMelo published a hit piece on Ordinals with incorrect data. This article was then picked up by @Cointelegraph writer Brian Quarmby, furthering the spread of misinformation. For someone who doesn't know any better, you may think Dapp Radar does thorough research. For others, we've seen Dapp Radar publish incorrect and erroneous information before. Personally, I remember when Dapp Radar launched its Stacks integration in 2022 with a big announcement. ALL the data was wrong. They launched a dashboard ranking the apps with TVLs, active users, etc. and none of the data was correct. It's embarrassing that a website calling itself an authority is willing to launch something with so many errors. Sadly, yesterday's article another example of Dapp Radar publishing incorrect information, likely just to piggyback on a trend. ---------------------------------------- So what did Dapp Radar get wrong? ---------------------------------------- 1⃣ Volume Data is Wrong Dapp Radar claims $452M volume for May and $35M for July. A 92% decrease. Is it correct? No. According to @cryptoslamio volume was $195M for May and $65M for July. Still a significant drop at 66%, I know. But it tells a very different story than Dapp Radar. Looking at CryptoSlam alone, Dapp Radar's numbers are off by around 60% and 100% for May and June. Let's look at another data source. @domodata 's Dune Dashboard for Ordinals Marketplaces has May at $155M and July at $50M. Almost identical to the drop shown by CryptoSlam at 68%. What are the odds? /TO/status/1693299546359480729/photo/1 No doubt the market is down after hype cycle, but as you can see, the severity of the decline according to Dapp Radar is highly inaccurate. Math geeks will know, 92% is a more significant drop than losing 67% and then losing another 67% again. So Dapp Radar's data is not only inaccurate but also highly misleading. /TO/status/1693299546359480729/photo/3 2️⃣ No mention of BRC-20s Dapp Radar's article has no mention of BRC-20s at all. In fact, I'm willing to bet the author has no idea that BRC-20s are part of the Ordinals protocol. Considering that May volume according to Dune was 74% from BRC-20s, I would consider this a significant oversight. /TO/status/1693299546359480729/photo/2 Why? The article compares BRC-20 + Bitcoin NFT volume trends to Ethereum and Polygon NFT volume trends. Any first day analyst on the job would know if you're writing an article about Non-Fungible Tokens, you shouldn't mix in data that doesn't apply. 3️⃣ Comparing the ATH of a hype cycle to a mature ecosystems NOT in a hype cycle makes no sense Quoting Dapp Radar writer Leticia: "Bitcoin Ordinals faced a sharper decline, hinting at possible concerns specific to its platform or the perceived utility of its NFT offering. It’s crucial to understand that while Bitcoin Ordinals brought novelty, Ethereum and Polygon have a longer-standing reputation and wider applications in the NFT world, making them less vulnerable to dramatic market shifts." So this begs the question, has Ethereum NFT volume ever experienced a significant decline in a two month period? YES. Of course it has. According to Dune Analytics: Jan. 2023, ETH volume dropped 49% in March April 2023, ETH volume dropped 77% in June /TO/status/1693299546359480729/photo/4 Drops like what we've seen in Ordinals are nothing new in the hype cycle of NFTs. In fact, it was worse on Ethereum in April 2023. Remember, even Bitcoin dropped from a high of $68,000 to a low of $16,000 a 76% drop during the last cycle. Albeit over a much longer time frame. Volatility should be expected in this space, not something people are shocked by. 🟠Concluding Thoughts Did Ordinals speed-run a hype cycle? Absolutely. Is Ordinals volume down significantly compared to the peak? Yes. Could it go down further? Sure. But so what? The Ordinals market is no different than any other new asset in the space and no different from what we've seen on other NFT ecosystems These things come and go in cycles Many people knew this would happen, and it doesn't change change my conviction on the technology or future of the space Dapp Radar's article is an incorrect and misleading hit piece While I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, the magnitude of their errors is unacceptable Especially when they claim to be an authoritative resource in the space We need to hold Dapp Radar to a higher standard And I hope their team reads this and makes the appropriate corrections or clarifications