Particle officially announced the launch of its first chain-abstract trading platform for C-end users, UniversalX, officially entering the competitive landscape of on-chain trading platforms. This makes me curious about what chain abstraction + on-chain trading means.

My initial experience with UniversalX trading is roughly as follows: mixed-use of full-chain liquidity, no need for bridging, and a trading experience very close to that of CEX.

On the backend, UniversalX maintains the characteristics of Web3: user assets are self-custodied, publicly transparent, and non-reversible. This is the essential difference between UniversalX and Moonshot.

However, on the frontend, users see the same extremely simplified interface—selecting coins, entering amounts, and one-click trading.

In this light, the target users of UniversalX actually cover the following groups:

-- MeMe players who enjoy discovering Alpha opportunities across multiple chains

-- DeFi Degens who pursue passive income and execute arbitrage strategies across multiple chains

-- Retail investors who like the CEX trading experience but do not trust CEX asset management

-- Non-Web3 native users who lack understanding of on-chain and multi-chain

Compared to other MeMe trading tools on the market, UniversalX is clearly superior in terms of security (DEXX users will deeply resonate with this).

So how should we view trading platforms like UniversalX and Infinex, which are native to Web3?

First, we consider a meta-question: what will the structural map of the future multi-chain world in Web3 look like?

On this point, different organizations/communities have different visions.

The vision of the Ethereum community is a parallel radiation structure of L1 + L2, with L1 serving as the settlement layer and L2 specialized to adapt to different application scenarios or community cultures.

The vision of the Solana community, on the other hand, is to make Solana higher, faster, and stronger, becoming the most powerful hegemonic presence in the multi-chain world.

In the year 2023, which is seen as the year of L2, it seems that the Ethereum community's vision is about to be realized. But in 2024, which is seen as the year of Solana, the situation flips, and Solana's vision becomes within reach. Currently, Solana has surpassed the entire Ethereum ecosystem in terms of trading volume, active addresses, and is solidifying its advantageous position.

In the face of this changing environment, the Ethereum community should not hope for Solana's chain performance to quickly deplete, but should find effective new competitive strategies, similar to how they once suppressed EVM-compatible L1 with L2.

The version of the answer provided by Vitalik and the Ethereum Foundation is: BeamChain and Pectra upgrades. One aims to enhance the scalability of the consensus layer, while the other primarily serves chain abstraction, unifying the fragmented Ethereum ecosystem once again.

However, regardless of how Ethereum, Solana, and other Alt L1s attempt to define the future of Web3, "the future will be a multi-chain world" has already become an underlying consensus in the industry. But no one wants this multi-chain world to be a series of isolated islands with fragmented accounts (addresses), interactions, and liquidity. A unified account, unified interaction, and unified liquidity are prerequisites for Web3 mass adoption. Technically, we need to make the middle layer invisible to developers and the infrastructure layer invisible to users.

This is essentially how a group of projects centered around accounts in the chain abstraction track is approaching the market, represented by Particle Network's chain abstraction infrastructure, Universal Account (Unified Account).

Looking back at history, in every round of spectacular bull markets, the crypto market has been able to sell two highly competitive products to traditional financial users: high volatility and high asset yield. For example, the last round's FTX primarily sold high volatility, while Celsius Network primarily sold high asset yield. Although both ultimately ended in collapse, the fault did not lie in the business model, but in their centralized architecture.

So, to some extent, UniversalX is equivalent to using a decentralized Web3 stack to build new products to revalidate the feasibility of the above business models. What happens when product + traction + business model aligns with the most hyped narrative?

That's all.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。