Optimism presyoOP

Klaar met Pi Network? Begin nou Mira Network ontgin. laai Mira Network op jou selfoon af en begin ontgin. Gebruik my verwysingskode: ajaysoni. laat groei saam. Alles van die beste!!!

🔥 Mint Blockchain (MINT) is an Ethereum-native Layer 2 network developed by NFTScan Labs, utilizing OP Stack technology. As a core member of the Optimism Superchain, Mint Blockchain aims to connect global consumers with NFTs by building a decentralized network focused on NFT issuance, trading, and settlement. The mainnet was launched in May 2024, and the ecosystem currently hosts over 100 applications and more than 6 million wallet addresses. On March 7, 2025, at 08:00 (UTC), Bitget listed MINT in its Innovation and Public Chain Zone, offering the trading pair MINT/USDT. This listing provides Bitget users with the opportunity to engage with a project that is promoting and driving innovation in NFT standards. For more information on Mint Blockchain (MINT), you can visit Bitget's official announcement. $MINT

Avail Nexus enables seamless cross-chain communication through four key components: 1/ Message Layer – The entry point for developers via the Nexus API, which formats and routes cross-chain messages to the Nexus Runtime. 2/ Avail Nexus Adapter – Translates blockchain-specific messages (ZK, EVM, etc.) into a standardized format, selecting the appropriate execution method (ZK, TEE, OP) before passing transactions to the runtime. 3/ Avail Nexus Runtime – Processes interop transactions by assembling state roots, verifying proofs, and generating a single proof that can be validated by other chains and light clients. 4/ Avail Nexus Verifier – Confirms state transitions by validating proofs against blockchain records before finalizing and relaying transactions to the destination chain.

The workflow from messaging layer → verifier is shown below 🔽 Avail Nexus leverages multiple interop apps which developers connect to via the Avail Nexus API, choosing an interop model for diverse cross-chain transactions. These are: > ZK Interop App: For highly secure, trust-minimized transactions. > TEE Interop App: For trust-minimized transactions relying on secure hardware. > OP Interop App: For rapid cross-chain transactions with economic security. Below is a comparison of how each of them works:

Billions are disappearing from Layer 2s… or are they? Layer 2 TVL has dropped to $30.07B, down 19% YoY, hitting its lowest point in the past year. Is this an actual liquidity outflow, or is TVL simply adjusting due to falling token prices? Top 5 L2s Hold 90%+ of TVL, But All Are Down 1️⃣ @arbitrum : $11.81B (-5.86%) 2️⃣ @base : $10.39B (-6.75%) 3️⃣ @Optimism : $3.85B (-10.5%) 4️⃣ @zksync : $650.57M (-15.3%) 5️⃣ @Starknet : $487.89M (-12.7%) Bridge Flows – Is Liquidity Leaving? Instead of just looking at TVL, bridge inflows vs. outflows tell us whether users are actually withdrawing: 🔴 Optimism ($846M in monthly bridge volume) → Deposits exceed withdrawals, meaning its TVL drop is mostly market-driven. 🟡 Mode ($12.83M in monthly bridge volume) → Deposits exceed withdrawals, showing net liquidity inflow. 💙 🧡 Arbitrum ($4.85B in monthly bridge volume) → Consistently net negative flows since January, withdrawals exceeding deposits. Arbitrum’s Outflows – A Cause for Concern? • January 2025: -$445M net outflow • February 2025: -$444M net outflow • March 2025 (so far): -$124M net outflow Arbitrum has seen consistent net outflows since December 2024, but are withdrawals excessively large relative to deposits? → Withdrawals are only ~6-10% larger than deposits—not insignificant, but not a collapse either. → Deposits remain high, meaning capital is still flowing into Arbitrum despite steady net outflows. → This looks more like capital rotation than a liquidity crisis. Token Dependency – Why TVL is declining A significant portion of L2 TVL is in non-stable assets, meaning its value fluctuates with the market. Here’s how much of each rollup’s TVL is NOT stablecoins: • Arbitrum: 51.74% (ARB + ETH + Others) • Optimism: 81.84% (OP + ETH + Others) • zkSync Era: 77.94% (ZK + ETH + Others) • Starknet: 87.32% (STRK + ETH + Others) • Base: 56.14% (ETH + Others) Since TVL is not just stablecoins, its decline is largely a result of token price depreciation rather than capital outflows. Key Takeaways • TVL decline ≠ mass liquidity exit. Most of the drop is due to token price depreciation, not heavy withdrawals. • Over half of TVL in major L2s is NOT in stablecoins, meaning price fluctuations have an outsized impact. • The top 5 rollups hold over 90% of TVL, making their movements critical for overall trends. • Arbitrum is seeing sustained outflows since January, but not at crisis levels. What’s Next? • If withdrawals accelerate, L2s may need stronger incentives to retain liquidity. • If deposits recover, it confirms capital rotation rather than an ecosystem-wide exit. For now, this is more about market sentiment than an L2 liquidity crisis.