Summary The Elrond blockchain network was rebranded to "MultiversX" late last year. Network activity is mixed. Raw address growth is strong, up 12% year to date. However, weekly active addresses are showing weakness. The DeFi footprint is minimal and still entirely reliant on the top protocol. Concerns include centralization and lack of transparency pertaining to team-held EGLD. Late last year , the Elrond blockchain was rebranded to MultiversX (EGLD-USD). In my view, this is a fairly large departure from what Elrond originally set out to be as "eGold" a few years ago. I first covered EGLD back in September and shared some of the technological elements that made MultiversX different from some of the other layer 1 blockchains. In this article, I'll explore updated network metrics of the blockchain and assess some general concerns that potential investors should be aware of. Key Network Metrics When I assess broad network activity, some of the things I generally like to look at include total addresses, active users, transactions, and token holder data. EGLD Addresses (explorer.multiversex) From a raw address numbers perspective, MultiversX now touts 2.2 million total wallets. This is up 12% year to date and is stronger growth than more well-capitalized alternative layer 1 networks like Cardano (ADA-USD) or Algorand (ALGO-USD). However, daily actives are noticeably well off the peak and also down over the last year. Weekly Active Users (Token Terminal) In the chart above, I'm showing how MultiversX compares to something like Cosmos Hub (ATOM-USD). For the sake of scalability, we can see two chains with similar levels of weekly active users. For Cosmos, that trend is higher over the last year, while for MultiversX is the opposite. Transaction Breakout (explorer.multiversx) As for the transactions on the network, the trend appears to be a bit more stable and actually growing in the NFT category. Token transactions are generally sideways. Taking all of these numbers together would seem to indicate fewer daily users on the chain appear to be using the chain more often. DeFi and NFT Activity Two of the more popular utilities for a public blockchain are decentralized financial transactions and NFT sales. For MultiverseX, we can observe each of these activities and get two very different tales. For the NFT component, we see a generally positive trend in sales according to data from MultiversX NFT exchange XOXNO: MultiversX NFT Sales (xoxno.com) Raw NFT unit sales increased 51% from an average monthly figure of 23,685 in the three months before the rebrand to 35,870 average monthly NFT sales in the three months following the rebrand. Though it should be noted that May is off to a slow start and the current month is pacing a year-over-year decline. For DeFi, the broader trend is rough: MultiverseX TVL (DeFi Llama) TVL has collapsed when measured in dollars. This is mostly explainable as a symptom of EGLD's 93% price decline from its peak of $541 per coin in November 2021. But even adjusting for the coin price variance, when measuring TVL in EGLD we see a 45% year to date reduction in TVL measured in EGLD. As was the case when I covered EGLD last September, the network is still completely dominated by one protocol. And the stablecoin presence is very minimal, with just $19 million in stables on the network. This puts MultiversX as the 34th largest blockchain for stablecoins. The lack of stables coupled with the large 63.7% staking ratio will likely result in continued difficulty in growing a notable DeFi footprint organically. Risks From where I sit, MultiversX has a fairly clear centralization concern. It looks and behaves less like a decentralized public blockchain and more like a centralized enterprise. Governance is somewhat opaque in my view. And we can see that offline governance is by design according to the network economics paper : The MultiversX governance model will be outlined in a future paper, to be released at a later stage, after the official launch of the MultiversX Network. Prior to that point, MultiversX will use a robust off-chain governance approach to ensure maximal speed and efficiency By itself, this is not unique to MultiversX. There are several public blockchain networks that could be considered centrally controlled and governed. Some of which I'm quite bullish . For me, there are two key differentiators for something like Polygon (MATIC-USD), which also went through a rebrand, and MultiversX. First, Polygon's network usage is robust in several different areas, rather than specialized for one niche. Second, Polygon has hitched its wagon to a proven Layer 1 chain rather than going it alone as an entirely separate ecosystem. Top 5 EGLD Holders (egldscan) There is another valid concern that was pointed out in the comments of my last EGLD article a few weeks ago. The MultiversX Protocol Treasury wallet is empty . We can see large fund flows from the treasury address to other wallets over the last year or so. Two of which are listed as "unknown" in the screengrab above and are 2 of the 5 largest addresses by EGLD holdings. While those addresses appear to be controlled by the MultiversX team, the lack of transparent labeling coupled with the optics of an empty treasury is not ideal, and that's me being generous. Summary MultiversX has a compelling network construction and a growing base of wallet addresses. The NFT community appears to be picking up steam, and I think we can reasonably attribute a large portion of that to the rebrand from Elrond to MultiversX. That said, there are clear concerns with this network. There is a large amount of competition in the NFT space, and the overwhelming majority of NFT communities aren't going to make it. The centralization level is higher than what might be acceptable for crypto investors, and the "multiverse" brand shift feels like a second attempt at scaling a blockchain that has failed to find broad adoption. The empty treasury wallet is also something that should raise an eyebrow or two. The bottom line is crypto is a risky industry. Many if not most of these chains are going to fail, and MultiversX is on the outside looking in from a user adoption standpoint. If I were an EGLD holder, I'd probably move on.
