Review Date: 22/02/2023
Injective Protocol is a layer-one blockchain that is designed specifically for building decentralized finance (DeFi) applications. The platform provides plug-and-play financial infrastructure that includes a fully decentralized order book, decentralized bridges, oracles, and a smart contract layer built on top of CosmWasm.
The core exchange module of Injective offers advanced on-chain order book and matching engine capabilities, enabling users to trade various markets, including spot, perpetual, futures, and options. Injective is also resistant to Miner-Extractable Value (MEV) through frequent batch auction order matching, which ensures that trades are executed in a fair and transparent manner. Additionally, the platform offers zero gas fees for users, making it a cost-effective option for traders.
Injective is built using the Cosmos SDK and uses a Tendermint-based Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanism. This design enables the platform to achieve instant transaction finality while sustaining high speeds of over 10,000 transactions per second. Injective is natively interoperable with multiple layer-one blockchains, including Ethereum, Polygon, and Solana, thanks to its use of Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC) protocols. This interoperability allows cross-bridging of various assets and tokens between different blockchains.
Smart contracts are implemented on Injective through CosmWasm, which is a smart contract engine built using the Rust programming language. This powerful engine enables developers to create complex financial instruments, and the smart contracts are executed in a secure and transparent manner.
The native utility token that powers the Injective platform is INJ. It has multiple functions, including protocol governance, dApp value capture (collateral), tendermint-based Proof-of-Stake (PoS) security, developer incentives, and staking. The extensive use of the INJ token throughout the platform demonstrates its importance in supporting the Injective ecosystem.
Notes to Take
- Injective is a layer-one blockchain for building DeFi applications
- Provides a decentralized order book, bridges, oracles, and smart contract layer
- Advanced on-chain order book and matching engine for spot, perpetual, futures, and options markets
- Resistance to MEV through frequent batch auction order matching
- Zero gas fees for users
- Built with Cosmos SDK and uses Tendermint-based PoS consensus
- Achieves instant transaction finality and 10,000+ TPS
- Interoperable with multiple layer-one blockchains through IBC protocols
- Smart contracts implemented through CosmWasm, built with Rust
- INJ is the native token used for governance, dApp value capture, PoS security, developer incentives, and staking.
| 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) | 8 | ||
| How have similar projects performed? | Good | 2 | |
| Are there too many innovations? | Medium | 1 | |
| Percentage of crypto users that will use the project? | 6-10% | 3 | |
| Is the project unique? | Yes | 2 | |
| Architecture (Out of 12) | 8 | ||
| Overall feeling after reading whitepaper? | Good | 2 | |
| Resistance to possible attacks? | Good | 2 | |
| Complexity of the architecture? | Not too complex | 1 | |
| Time taken to understand the architecture? | More than 1 hour | 1 | |
| Overall feeling about the architecture after deeper research? | Good | 2 | |
| Code Quality (out of 15) | 13 | ||
| 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 | 2 | |
| How well is the code commented? | Outstanding | 2 | |
| Overall quality of the test coverage? | Good | 1 | |
| Overall quality of the maintainability index? | Good | 1 | |
| When Mainnet (out of 5) | 5 | ||
| When does the mainnet come out? | Live | 5 | |
| Usability for Infrastructure Projects (out of 5) | 5 | ||
| Is it easy to use for the end customer? | Yes | 5 | |
| Team (out of 7) | 6 | ||
| Number of active developers? | 5+ | 2 | |
| Developers average Git Background? | Senior | 2 | |
| Developers coding style? | Solid | 2 | |
| Total Score (out of 55) | 45 | ||
| Percentage Score | |||
| Innovation | 14.55% | ||
| Architecture | 14.55% | ||
| Code Quality | 23.64% | ||
| Mainnet | 9.09% | ||
| Usability | 9.09% | ||
| Team | 10.91% | ||
| Total | 81.82% |
