Pris för Cronos

OKCoin Europe Ltd

54930069NLWEIGLHXU42

Cronos

Cronos is present on the following networks: Cosmos, Cronos, Cronos Pos, Ethereum, Osmosis, Solana. The Cosmos network uses the Cosmos SDK, a modular framework that enables developers to build custom, application-specific blockchains. Cosmos SDK chains rely on Tendermint Core, a Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus engine that supports interoperability and fast transaction finality. Core Components: 1. Tendermint BFT Consensus with Proof of Stake: Validator Selection: Cosmos validators are selected based on the amount of ATOM they stake or receive from delegators. These validators participate in block proposal and validation through a two-thirds majority voting system. Security Threshold: Tendermint BFT ensures network security as long as fewer than one-third of validators act maliciously. 2. Modular Cosmos SDK Framework: Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC): The Cosmos SDK supports IBC, allowing seamless interoperability between Cosmos-based blockchains. Application Blockchain Interface (ABCI): This interface separates the consensus layer from the application layer, enabling developers to implement custom logic without modifying the consensus engine. Cronos operates on a Proof of Stake (PoS) model integrated with Tendermint’s Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus, designed for decentralization, security, and interoperability. This model enables validators to be selected based on staking power, rewarding them for securing and validating the network. Core Components: Proof of Stake (PoS) with Tendermint BFT Validator Selection: Validators are chosen based on the amount of CRO tokens staked, securing the network and producing blocks. Delegation Model: Token holders can delegate their CRO to validators, enabling participation in network security without needing to run a validator node. Cosmos SDK and Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC) Cross-Chain Connectivity: Built on the Cosmos SDK, Cronos enables cross-chain communication, connecting to other Cosmos blockchains and ecosystems such as Ethereum and Binance Smart Chain. The Cronos POS Chain operates as a Layer-0 blockchain within the Cosmos ecosystem, utilizing the Tendermint Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus engine. It employs a Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) model, where the top 100 validators by total staked CRO tokens form the active set responsible for block production and network security. The crypto-asset's Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism, introduced with The Merge in 2022, replaces mining with validator staking. Validators must stake at least 32 ETH every block a validator is randomly chosen to propose the next block. Once proposed the other validators verify the blocks integrity. The network operates on a slot and epoch system, where a new block is proposed every 12 seconds, and finalization occurs after two epochs (~12.8 minutes) using Casper-FFG. The Beacon Chain coordinates validators, while the fork-choice rule (LMD-GHOST) ensures the chain follows the heaviest accumulated validator votes. Validators earn rewards for proposing and verifying blocks, but face slashing for malicious behavior or inactivity. PoS aims to improve energy efficiency, security, and scalability, with future upgrades like Proto-Danksharding enhancing transaction efficiency. Osmosis operates on a Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism, leveraging the Cosmos SDK and Tendermint Core to provide secure, decentralized, and scalable transaction processing. Core Components: Proof of Stake (PoS): Validators are chosen based on the amount of OSMO tokens they stake or are delegated by other token holders. Validators are responsible for validating transactions, producing blocks, and maintaining network security. Cosmos SDK and Tendermint Core: Osmosis uses Tendermint Core for Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus, ensuring fast finality and resistance to attacks as long as less than one-third of validators are malicious. Decentralized Governance: OSMO token holders can participate in governance by voting on protocol upgrades and network parameters, fostering a community-driven approach to network development. Solana uses a unique combination of Proof of History (PoH) and Proof of Stake (PoS) to achieve high throughput, low latency, and robust security. Here’s a detailed explanation of how these mechanisms work: Core Concepts 1. Proof of History (PoH): Time-Stamped Transactions: PoH is a cryptographic technique that timestamps transactions, creating a historical record that proves that an event has occurred at a specific moment in time. Verifiable Delay Function: PoH uses a Verifiable Delay Function (VDF) to generate a unique hash that includes the transaction and the time it was processed. This sequence of hashes provides a verifiable order of events, enabling the network to efficiently agree on the sequence of transactions. 2. Proof of Stake (PoS): Validator Selection: Validators are chosen to produce new blocks based on the number of SOL tokens they have staked. The more tokens staked, the higher the chance of being selected to validate transactions and produce new blocks. Delegation: Token holders can delegate their SOL tokens to validators, earning rewards proportional to their stake while enhancing the network's security. Consensus Process 1. Transaction Validation: Transactions are broadcast to the network and collected by validators. Each transaction is validated to ensure it meets the network’s criteria, such as having correct signatures and sufficient funds. 2. PoH Sequence Generation: A validator generates a sequence of hashes using PoH, each containing a timestamp and the previous hash. This process creates a historical record of transactions, establishing a cryptographic clock for the network. 3. Block Production: The network uses PoS to select a leader validator based on their stake. The leader is responsible for bundling the validated transactions into a block. The leader validator uses the PoH sequence to order transactions within the block, ensuring that all transactions are processed in the correct order. 4. Consensus and Finalization: Other validators verify the block produced by the leader validator. They check the correctness of the PoH sequence and validate the transactions within the block. Once the block is verified, it is added to the blockchain. Validators sign off on the block, and it is considered finalized. Security and Economic Incentives 1. Incentives for Validators: Block Rewards: Validators earn rewards for producing and validating blocks. These rewards are distributed in SOL tokens and are proportional to the validator’s stake and performance. Transaction Fees: Validators also earn transaction fees from the transactions included in the blocks they produce. These fees provide an additional incentive for validators to process transactions efficiently. 2. Security: Staking: Validators must stake SOL tokens to participate in the consensus process. This staking acts as collateral, incentivizing validators to act honestly. If a validator behaves maliciously or fails to perform, they risk losing their staked tokens. Delegated Staking: Token holders can delegate their SOL tokens to validators, enhancing network security and decentralization. Delegators share in the rewards and are incentivized to choose reliable validators. 3. Economic Penalties: Slashing: Validators can be penalized for malicious behavior, such as double-signing or producing invalid blocks. This penalty, known as slashing, results in the loss of a portion of the staked tokens, discouraging dishonest actions.

Cronos is present on the following networks: Cosmos, Cronos, Cronos Pos, Ethereum, Osmosis, Solana. The Cosmos network incentivizes both validators and delegators to secure the network through staking rewards, funded by transaction fees and newly minted ATOM. Incentive Mechanisms: 1. Staking Rewards for Validators and Delegators: ATOM Rewards: Validators earn staking rewards in ATOM tokens for participating in consensus, with rewards shared with delegators who stake ATOM through delegation. 2. Slashing for Accountability: Penalties for Misconduct: Validators who act maliciously, such as double-signing or staying offline, face slashing penalties, which remove a portion of their staked ATOM. Delegators may also experience slashing if their chosen validator is penalized, encouraging careful selection of trustworthy validators. Applicable Fees: 1. Transaction Fees: User-Paid Fees in ATOM: All transactions on the Cosmos Hub incur fees paid in ATOM, compensating validators for transaction processing and helping to prevent network spam. 2. Customizable Fee Model: Custom Token Fees: Cosmos SDK allows individual chains to define their own transaction fees in tokens other than ATOM, supporting varied application requirements within the ecosystem. Cronos incentivizes validators and delegators with staking rewards and transaction fees, aligning economic incentives with network security and growth. Incentive Mechanisms: Staking Rewards Validators and Delegators: Both groups earn CRO rewards for supporting network security. Delegators earn a portion of the validator rewards, promoting broader network participation. Deflationary Mechanism Token Burning: A portion of transaction fees and staking rewards may be periodically burned, reducing CRO supply over time and potentially increasing token value. Applicable Fees: Transaction and Smart Contract Fees Standard Transactions: Users pay CRO for network transactions and dApp interactions, providing a steady income for validators. Ethereum-Compatible Gas Fees: Executing Ethereum-compatible smart contracts incurs gas fees, similar to Ethereum, payable in CRO. The Cronos POS Chain uses its native CRO token to coordinate economic incentives and governance. Validators are rewarded for producing and validating blocks through a combination of inflationary block rewards and transaction fees. Transaction fees, also paid in CRO, are distributed between validators and a community pool. The crypto-asset's PoS system secures transactions through validator incentives and economic penalties. Validators stake at least 32 ETH and earn rewards for proposing blocks, attesting to valid ones, and participating in sync committees. Rewards are paid in newly issued ETH and transaction fees. Under EIP-1559, transaction fees consist of a base fee, which is burned to reduce supply, and an optional priority fee (tip) paid to validators. Validators face slashing if they act maliciously and incur penalties for inactivity. This system aims to increase security by aligning incentives while making the crypto-asset's fee structure more predictable and deflationary during high network activity. Osmosis incentivizes validators, delegators, and liquidity providers through a combination of staking rewards, transaction fees, and liquidity incentives. Incentive Mechanisms: Validator Rewards: Validators earn rewards from transaction fees and block rewards, distributed in OSMO tokens, for their role in securing the network and processing transactions. Delegators who stake their OSMO tokens with validators receive a share of these rewards. Liquidity Provider Rewards: Users providing liquidity to Osmosis pools earn swap fees and may receive additional incentives in the form of OSMO tokens to encourage liquidity provision. Superfluid Staking: Liquidity providers can participate in superfluid staking, staking a portion of their OSMO tokens within liquidity pools. This mechanism allows users to earn staking rewards while maintaining liquidity in the pools. Applicable Fees: Transaction Fees: Users pay transaction fees in OSMO tokens for network activities, including swaps, staking, and governance participation. These fees are distributed to validators and delegators, incentivizing their continued participation and support for network security. Solana uses a combination of Proof of History (PoH) and Proof of Stake (PoS) to secure its network and validate transactions. Here’s a detailed explanation of the incentive mechanisms and applicable fees: Incentive Mechanisms 4. Validators: Staking Rewards: Validators are chosen based on the number of SOL tokens they have staked. They earn rewards for producing and validating blocks, which are distributed in SOL. The more tokens staked, the higher the chances of being selected to validate transactions and produce new blocks. Transaction Fees: Validators earn a portion of the transaction fees paid by users for the transactions they include in the blocks. This provides an additional financial incentive for validators to process transactions efficiently and maintain the network's integrity. 5. Delegators: Delegated Staking: Token holders who do not wish to run a validator node can delegate their SOL tokens to a validator. In return, delegators share in the rewards earned by the validators. This encourages widespread participation in securing the network and ensures decentralization. 6. Economic Security: Slashing: Validators can be penalized for malicious behavior, such as producing invalid blocks or being frequently offline. This penalty, known as slashing, involves the loss of a portion of their staked tokens. Slashing deters dishonest actions and ensures that validators act in the best interest of the network. Opportunity Cost: By staking SOL tokens, validators and delegators lock up their tokens, which could otherwise be used or sold. This opportunity cost incentivizes participants to act honestly to earn rewards and avoid penalties. Fees Applicable on the Solana Blockchain 7. Transaction Fees: Low and Predictable Fees: Solana is designed to handle a high throughput of transactions, which helps keep fees low and predictable. The average transaction fee on Solana is significantly lower compared to other blockchains like Ethereum. Fee Structure: Fees are paid in SOL and are used to compensate validators for the resources they expend to process transactions. This includes computational power and network bandwidth. 8. Rent Fees: State Storage: Solana charges rent fees for storing data on the blockchain. These fees are designed to discourage inefficient use of state storage and encourage developers to clean up unused state. Rent fees help maintain the efficiency and performance of the network. 9. Smart Contract Fees: Execution Costs: Similar to transaction fees, fees for deploying and interacting with smart contracts on Solana are based on the computational resources required. This ensures that users are charged proportionally for the resources they consume.

2024-10-16

2025-10-16

107713.21983 (kWh/a)

The energy consumption of this asset is aggregated across multiple components: For the calculation of energy consumptions, the so called 'bottom-up' approach is being used. The nodes are considered to be the central factor for the energy consumption of the network. These assumptions are made on the basis of empirical findings through the use of public information sites, open-source crawlers and crawlers developed in-house. The main determinants for estimating the hardware used within the network are the requirements for operating the client software. The energy consumption of the hardware devices was measured in certified test laboratories. Due to the structure of this network, it is not only the mainnet that is responsible for energy consumption. In order to calculate the structure adequately, a proportion of the energy consumption of the connected network, cosmos, must also be taken into account, because the connected network is also responsible for security. This proportion is determined on the basis of gas consumption. When calculating the energy consumption, we used - if available - the Functionally Fungible Group Digital Token Identifier (FFG DTI) to determine all implementations of the asset of question in scope and we update the mappings regulary, based on data of the Digital Token Identifier Foundation. The information regarding the hardware used and the number of participants in the network is based on assumptions that are verified with best effort using empirical data. In general, participants are assumed to be largely economically rational. As a precautionary principle, we make assumptions on the conservative side when in doubt, i.e. making higher estimates for the adverse impacts. For the calculation of energy consumptions, the so called 'bottom-up' approach is being used. The nodes are considered to be the central factor for the energy consumption of the network. These assumptions are made on the basis of empirical findings through the use of public information sites, open-source crawlers and crawlers developed in-house. The main determinants for estimating the hardware used within the network are the requirements for operating the client software. The energy consumption of the hardware devices was measured in certified test laboratories. When calculating the energy consumption, we used - if available - the Functionally Fungible Group Digital Token Identifier (FFG DTI) to determine all implementations of the asset of question in scope and we update the mappings regulary, based on data of the Digital Token Identifier Foundation. The information regarding the hardware used and the number of participants in the network is based on assumptions that are verified with best effort using empirical data. In general, participants are assumed to be largely economically rational. As a precautionary principle, we make assumptions on the conservative side when in doubt, i.e. making higher estimates for the adverse impacts. To determine the energy consumption of a token, the energy consumption of the network(s) cosmos, cronos_pos, ethereum, osmosis, solana is calculated first. For the energy consumption of the token, a fraction of the energy consumption of the network is attributed to the token, which is determined based on the activity of the crypto-asset within the network. When calculating the energy consumption, the Functionally Fungible Group Digital Token Identifier (FFG DTI) is used - if available - to determine all implementations of the asset in scope. The mappings are updated regularly, based on data of the Digital Token Identifier Foundation. The information regarding the hardware used and the number of participants in the network is based on assumptions that are verified with best effort using empirical data. In general, participants are assumed to be largely economically rational. As a precautionary principle, we make assumptions on the conservative side when in doubt, i.e. making higher estimates for the adverse impacts.