Introduction
Chainflip is an innovative cross-chain swapping protocol and liquidity network that stands out for its efficient token swapping capabilities without the need for wrapped tokens. It operates on its own blockchain called Chainflip State Chain, which utilizes Aura Proof of Stake (POS) provided by Substrate. The protocol also supports non-Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) chains and features its native token, $FLIP, which serves various purposes like rewarding validators, governance, and network fee buy-and-burn mechanisms.
Innovation
Chainflip introduces several innovative features, such as its decentralized virtual liquidity system powered by off-chain Threshold Signature Scheme (TSS). Additionally, the implementation of a Just-In-Time Automated Market Maker (JIT AMM) based on Uniswap V3 is noteworthy. The protocol also has plans for cross-chain messaging, showcasing a focus on continued innovation.
Architecture
The Chainflip core protocol exhibits a well-thought-out architecture that employs TSS to create aggregate keys among a network of 150 validators. These validators control contracts or wallets known as vaults on multiple chains, allowing for seamless cross-chain operations. The presence of two distinct layers (Accounting Layer and Settlement Layer) controlled by the same set of validators ensures a robust and secure ecosystem.
Code Quality
The code quality of Chainflip is commendable, with the project being open source and built using languages like C, C++, Rust, Erlang, Ruby, among others. The substantial number of lines and regular commits on their GitHub repository reflects an active and dedicated development team. Additionally, the impressive test coverage and maintainability index contribute to the overall quality of the codebase.
Product Roadmap
The mainnet release is projected to occur in the future, which currently holds a score of 0.00% due to its pending status. However, it’s crucial to monitor their progress and execution of the outlined roadmap.
Usability
Chainflip seems to cater well to infrastructure projects with an easy-to-use interface for end customers, scoring positively in usability.
Chainflip Team
The Chainflip team boasts a considerable number of active developers with a solid coding style, indicating a strong technical background and commitment to the project.
Conclusion
Chainflip presents a promising cross-chain swapping protocol with an innovative architecture and strong code quality. The product roadmap, though promising, hinges on the successful mainnet release. With a current overall score of 74.55%, Chainflip showcases the potential to be a significant player in the crypto space, but continuous evaluation is crucial to monitor their progress and execution.
| Initial Screening | |||
| Keep researching | |||
| Does this project need to use blockchain technology? | Yes | ||
| Can this project be realized? | Yes | ||
| Is there a viable use case for this project? | Yes | ||
| Is the project protected from commonly known attacks? | Yes | ||
| Are there no careless errors in the whitepaper? | Yes | ||
| Project Technology Score | |||
| Description | Scorecard | ||
| Innovation (Out Of 11) | 7 | ||
| How have similar projects performed? | Good | 2 | |
| Are there too many innovations? | Regular | 2 | |
| Percentage of crypto users that will use the project? | 1-5% | 1 | |
| Is the project unique? | Yes | 2 | |
| Architecture (Out of 12) | 10 | ||
| Overall feeling after reading whitepaper? | Good | 2 | |
| Resistance to possible attacks? | Good | 2 | |
| Complexity of the architecture? | Not too complex | 2 | |
| Time taken to understand the architecture? | More than 1 hour | 1 | |
| Overall feeling about the architecture after deeper research? | Good | 4 | |
| Code Quality (out of 15) | 14 | ||
| Is the project open source? | Yes | 2 | |
| Does the project use good code like C,C++, Rust, Erlang, Ruby, etc? | Yes | 2 | |
| Could the project use better programming languages? | No | 0 | |
| Github number of lines? | More than 10K | 1 | |
| Github commits per month? | More than 10 | 2 | |
| What is the quality of the code? | Good Quality | 2 | |
| How well is the code commented? | Good | 2 | |
| Overall quality of the test coverage? | Outstanding | 2 | |
| Overall quality of the maintainability index? | Good | 1 | |
| When Mainnet (out of 5) | 5 | ||
| When does the mainnet come out? | Mainnet | 5 | |
| Usability for Infrastructure Projects (out of 5) | 5 | ||
| Is it easy to use for the end customer? | Yes | 5 | |
| Team (out of 7) | 5 | ||
| Number of active developers? | 5+ | 2 | |
| Developers average Git Background? | Intermediate | 1 | |
| Developers coding style? | Solid | 2 | |
| Total Score (out of 55) | 46 | ||
| Percentage Score | |||
| Innovation | 12.73% | ||
| Architecture | 18.18% | ||
| Code Quality | 25.45% | ||
| Mainnet | 9.09% | ||
| Usability | 9.09% | ||
| Team | 9.09% | ||
| Total | 83.63% |
