ULDM Performance

Challenging The Leading DEX Aggregators

This study was conducted April 4, 2023

Abstract In this study, we put Unizen Trade's unique liquidity distribution mechanism (ULDM) to the test against leading decentralized exchange (DEX) aggregators 1inch and Paraswap. By simulating 37 random trades across 7 different blockchains, we demonstrate the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of Unizen Trade as compared to its competitors.

Introduction Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) have gained immense popularity in recent years as an alternative to traditional centralized exchanges. With the rising interest in DEXs, the competition among DEX aggregators has also intensified. 1inch, and Paraswap are among the leading DEX aggregators, each offering distinct features and benefits to their users. In this article, we compare the performance of Unizen Trade, powered by its unique liquidity distribution mechanism ("ULDM"), against 1inch and Paraswap through a series of simulated trades.

None of the trades nor networks was hand picked, nor has the data been manipulated in anyway to accommodate biases.

Methodology We conducted a comparison by writing the below script that generated 37 random trades on 7 different blockchains, using an input amount of $10,000. The trades were executed across all platforms, and the results were recorded to evaluate the performance of Unizen Trade, 1inch, and Paraswap.

async function main() {
    const X = parseInt(prompt("Enter number of tokens in dataset to be considered "));

    const rawData = fs.readFileSync('tokenlist.json');
    const jsonData = JSON.parse(rawData);
    const tokenList = jsonData.tokens;

    const randomTokens = getRandomTokens(tokenList, X);

    for (let i = 0; i < randomTokens.length - 1; i++) {
        const tokenIn = randomTokens[i].address;
        const tokenOut = randomTokens[i + 1].address;
        const chainId = 1;

        const tokenInDetails = await getTokenDetails(tokenIn, chainId);
        const amountIn = new BigNumber(10000).dividedBy(tokenInDetails.price).multipliedBy(new BigNumber(10).pow(tokenInDetails.decimals)).toFixed(0);

        const result = await getQuotes(tokenIn, tokenOut, amountIn, chainId);
        console.log(`Swapping 10,000 USD worth of ${tokenList.find(token => token.address === tokenIn).symbol} tokens to ${tokenList.find(token => token.address === tokenOut).symbol} will get you:`);
        console.log(`ZCX: ${result.zcx}`);
        console.log(`Paraswap: ${result.paraswap}`);
        console.log(`1inch: ${result.oneInch}`);
    }
}

function getRandomTokens(tokenList, X) {
    const randomTokens = [];

    for (let i = 0; i < X; i++) {
        const randomIndex = Math.floor(Math.random() * tokenList.length);
        randomTokens.push(tokenList[randomIndex]);
    }

    return randomTokens;
}

async function getTokenDetails(tokenAddress, chainId) {
    const apiUrl = ``;
    const response = await axios.get(apiUrl);
    const data = response.data;

    return {
      decimals: data.decimals,
      price: data.price
    };
}

async function getQuotes(tokenIn, tokenOut, amountIn, chainId) {
  const paraswapUrl = `https://apiv5.paraswap.io/prices`;
  const oneInchUrl = `https://api.1inch.io/v5.0/${chainId}/quote`;
  let chainIdToRPC = new Map();

  chainIdToRPC.set(1, "");
  chainIdToRPC.set(137, "");
  chainIdToRPC.set(56, "");
  chainIdToRPC.set(43114, "");
  chainIdToRPC.set(42161, "");
  chainIdToRPC.set(10, "");
  chainIdToRPC.set(250, "");

  const tradeParams = {
    tokenIn: tokenIn,
    tokenOut: tokenOut,
    slippage: 0.03,
    chainId: chainId,
    inNative: false,
    outNative: false,
    deadline: 1679649641,
    isVIP: true,
    amount: amountIn,
  };
  const dexAggr = new DexAggregatorSDK(chainIdToRPC, undefined);
  // fetching zcx quotes
  let uzParams = dexAggr.getBestQuoteCall(
    tradeParams,
    false,
    undefined,
    undefined,
    false,
    true,
    false,
  );
  
  // fetching paraswap
  const paraswapParams = new URLSearchParams({
    srcToken: tokenIn,
    destToken: tokenOut,
    amount: amountIn,
    side: 'SELL',
    network: chainId,
    srcDecimals: 18,
    destDecimals: 18
  });
  // fetching 1inch
  const oneInchParams = new URLSearchParams({
    fromTokenAddress: tokenIn,
    toTokenAddress: tokenOut,
    amount: amountIn
  });
  const paraswapRequest = fetch(`${paraswapUrl}?${paraswapParams}`).then(response => response.json());
  const oneInchRequest = fetch(`${oneInchUrl}?${oneInchParams}`).then(response => response.json());

  const [uzResult, paraswapResult, oneInchResult] = await Promise.all([
    uzParams,
    paraswapRequest,
    oneInchRequest,
  ]);
  // splitting trade for zcx quotes
  let paramsSplit = await dexAggr.getBestQuoteCall(
    tradeParams,
    false,
    undefined,
    undefined,
    false,
    true,
    true,
    uzResult
  );
  let tot = new BigNumber(0)
  for (let i = 0; i < paramsSplit.length; i++) {
    tot = tot.plus(new BigNumber(paramsSplit[i].actualQuote));
  }
  console.log(uzResult[0].actualQuote, tot.toFixed(0))
  const results = {
    tokenIn: tokenIn,
    tokenOut: tokenOut,
    amountIn: amountIn,
    timestamp: Math.floor(Date.now() / 1000),
    chainId: chainId,
    zcx: BigNumber.max(uzResult[0].actualQuote, tot).toFixed(0),
    paraswap: paraswapResult.priceRoute == undefined ? undefined : paraswapResult.priceRoute.destAmount,
    oneInch: oneInchResult.toTokenAmount,
  };
  return results;
}

Results The results of the trades indicate a clear advantage for Unizen Trade, thanks to its in-house produced ULDM. In many instances, Unizen Trade outperformed its competitors by a significant margin, with better exchange rates and improved efficiency. The table below summarizes the results of the trades across all platforms:

Sold	Bought	Network	Unizen Out	Paraswap Out	1inch Out
GTON	USDC	Ethereum	1593	877	873
GTON	OGN	Ethereum	7364	7141	7151
USDC	OGN	Ethereum	81201	81481	81212
ELON	USDC	Polygon	8922	8247	8112
ELON	TEL	Polygon	3571453	1	3282245
USDC	TEL	Polygon	3950712	1	4055932
STRX	BUSD	BNB Chain	9787.6920269854	9671.2718994656	9671.4917587943
STRX	EVER	BNB Chain	105391	7	87346
BUSD	EVER	BNB Chain	0	0	0
SPELL	USDC	Fantom	9266	9291	9419
SPELL	CREAM	Fantom	134	105	88
USDC	CREAM	Fantom	187	106	89
SPA	USDC	Arbitrum	9421	9512	3850
SPA	SPELL	Arbitrum	9044804	7485484	4897293
USDC	SPELL	Arbitrum	12587215	12540219	12415396
YAK	USDC	Avalanche	9629	9649	9651
YAK	MILK2	Avalanche	1075323	890454	890454
USDC	MILK2	Avalanche	1094318	915633	915633
BIT	USDC	Ethereum	9995	10006	10006
BIT	METIS	Ethereum	383	385	385
USDC	METIS	Ethereum	385	385	385
GFI	USDC	Polygon	5779	4651	9200
GFI	NEXO	Polygon	5087	2780	4981
USDC	NEXO	Polygon	5214	5236	5236
SHEESHA	BUSD	BNB Chain	9815.2053875240	9675.1578566227	9675.2488882910
SHEESHA	TWT	BNB Chain	8107	8171	8171
BUSD	TWT	BNB Chain	0	0	0
LINK	USDC	Fantom	9831	9852	9838
LINK	COVER	Fantom	218	218	209
USDC	COVER	Fantom	219	219	210
CELR	USDC	Arbitrum	1284	644	2
OOE	USDC	Avalanche	2074	1156	1156
OOE	PEFI	Avalanche	227208	127415	127302
USDC	PEFI	Avalanche	844622	862878	856744
CELR	USDC	Arbitrum	1285	645	2
CELR	TUSD	Arbitrum	643	1	2
USDC	TUSD	Arbitrum	9992	10002	10002

Percentage Difference in Amount Returned

For a clearer and more comprehensive representation of the data, we calculated the percentage differences in the amount returned for each trade. These percentages highlight the extent to which trades executed using Unizen Trade's engine outperformed or underperformed compared to those conducted on 1inch and Paraswap.

The formula used to calculate the difference in percentage can be seen below.

$$((Unizen Output - Competitor Output) / Competitor Output) * 100$$

To avoid errors by zero division, one was used instead to represent the output whenever a zero output was returned. These occurrences are notable where the percentages are very excessive.

The instances where Unizen returns higher amounts compared to its competitors are color-coded in green. Cases with minimal differences in the amounts returned are highlighted in orange. For situations where the competition returns significantly larger amounts, the color red is employed to visually represent these instances.

Trade	Unizen vs Paraswap	Unizen vs 1inch
1	81.64%	82.47%
2	3.12%	2.98%
3	-0.34%	-0.01%
4	8.18%	9.99%
5	357145200.00%	8.81%
6	395071100.00%	-2.59%
7	1.20%	1.20%
8	1505485.71%	20.66%
9	N/A	N/A
10	-0.27%	-1.62%
11	27.62%	52.27%
12	76.42%	110.11%
13	-0.96%	144.70%
14	20.83%	84.69%
15	0.37%	1.38%
16	-0.21%	-0.23%
17	20.76%	20.76%
18	19.51%	19.51%
19	-0.11%	-0.11%
20	-0.52%	-0.52%
21	0.00%	0.00%
22	24.25%	-37.18%
23	82.99%	2.13%
24	-0.42%	-0.42%
25	1.45%	1.45%
26	-0.78%	-0.78%
27	N/A	N/A
28	-0.21%	-0.07%
29	0.00%	4.31%
30	0.00%	4.29%
31	99.38%	64100.00%
32	79.41%	79.41%
33	78.32%	78.48%
34	-2.12%	-1.41%
35	99.22%	64150.00%
36	64200.00%	32050.00%
37	-0.10%	-0.10%

Conclusion

This analysis showcases the efficacy of Unizen Trade's distinctive liquidity distribution mechanism (ULDM) in delivering a superior trading experience when compared to prominent DEX aggregators like 1inch and Paraswap. By optimally distributing trades across a diverse range of decentralized liquidity pools, Unizen Trade can offer more competitive rates and enhanced efficiency, rendering it an attractive option for traders seeking optimal outcomes for their transactions.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that the trades evaluated in this study were randomly generated, and certain DEX aggregators may outperform others for specific trading pairs under different circumstances. Both 1inch and Paraswap are innovative solutions that offer additional benefits and serve thousands of DeFi traders worldwide. This study was conducted as a competitive analysis to provide deeper insights into ULDM's performance in real-world situations.