# Simple "chainalytics" for xx chain

**URL:** <https://forum.xx.network/t/simple-chainalytics-for-xx-chain/7035>\
**Category:** General\
**Created:** [November 15, 2024, 3:31am UTC](https://forum.xx.network/t/simple-chainalytics-for-xx-chain/7035 "2024-11-15T03:31:37Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rothbardian](https://forum.xx.network/user_avatar/forum.xx.network/rothbardian/32/818_2.png) [@rothbardian](https://forum.xx.network/u/rothbardian)\
**Post date:** [November 21, 2024, 10:57am UTC](https://forum.xx.network/t/simple-chainalytics-for-xx-chain/7035/5 "2024-11-21T10:57:48Z")

</div>

As I look at this, there isn’t much to like. Today these are:

- With on-chain ID
- With \< 25% commission
- Sorted in descending ROI

```raw
Name Return (%) Commission (7d avg) SS58                                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEE-WOO-SEOK 22.31 5.5 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6abksNA5dp8Gkz86EVC9BVYFWNRgpzT4bMNb3rAYosoL53W4
KIM-JE-DEOK 22.1 5.5 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6ZL9NXqophtrvFxDYf1k4ToJvPMp67sVZWFqTHTetiX1pqrG
SONG-GWANG-SA 22.1 5.5 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6a22YrSXwheE1zdgrVeVYJdXubYpj2CfBA28zgm6yVn3jTso
KIM-WOO-JIN 22.06 5.5 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6YCuzDwkymNHTUFJ2AB6MjuDPF7HubdrLcjDmzbhrXPLMuuu
HAE-IN-SA 21.9 5.5 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6WnydqSSi7aJMZd99aW4yHjcduZsxMV7xnJ9v2tWfvcJosSC
CHAMYUVA 20.0 11.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6aChc8idv5YKuWrsWWz62qfp5kvTALK83FXB6GVikfDDwX2F
CERES 19.71 9.99 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6YC2oieX73fPiwShGgsPJ1SU5bpGCPFrp4uh9jWuCYwD9Ni6
BLOCKSHARD 19.69 16.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6Y58dmMN9H3FqvBzutdRTDA83q6uDFwBtQXpcpqzdh7hnm26
RADIANCE NODE 19.69 18.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6ZUXNuVhDJqBuMtjyzzexR53SYRoAHRE8Yr1zWMycGTMVZuU
PETIT FOUR 19.32 2.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6WEaEfBWYKGYtT8MU1M9JQnopNXxNVDi8BTvjUuY9Rn5S8kV
SHELDON 19.07 17.5 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6aX9njNNh2MvWjLofPBiSUMoUsyqg5K7WFv7WeytTts9yq8x
CUPCAKE 19.05 2.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6YA7iZLpRfoMsRD8zuZwyTFZS5VbKzxnFTHbwNwqy4UBQNj9
NEWAY 18.97 12.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6aVwUBe8RTnN1UtsjBKr3gyWMqUGyDqDC8FoumMTe2HqNjHj
EXCALIBUR 18.85 16.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6VfsB3UxXfnz3EqJk12s5aiffeB8ePEqDXzc6MPBfwPTNcFh
VERTEX 18.85 13.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6XfZWcMorKzCFVXAvxzhUY5V5UGjucLuPCmdokBKAjGRAYQd
SPECTRUM 18.83 15.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6YA9CzuJ7FL9Wd3iuRwfcYdyZCTkgtL9eMtuh4RJTtzMCLpr
BLOCKBARD 18.82 14.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6XceRx74wAmaK4sXeTr5kPVwjASLhutMVxEP6aWxBGPHbMLo
EYEZ 18.72 17.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6YHzR5k7y6b5vnX2VuByeWzJnLaaye2LDGArpw3yWoZvSTiD
NODE0311 18.72 14.0 https://wallet.xx.network/#/staking/query/6WfVqSzGvcmSzYuWPBywqvKwzUvEJtzBbyQ66qiTCN4LxQa4

```

What’s not to like?

Well, for starters, **ALL** top 5 are likely the same validator (see blockchain transactions in [here](https://explorer.xx.network/accounts/6XCxcrkFft34ETpH4nJM8e3jAV2DyUKE8aUmaAe9Pq1ktwke)).  
I’ve nothing against individuals running multiple nodes, but not more than 4. This guy appears to have 5, so … Afuera!

 ![image](https://forum.xx.network/uploads/default/original/1X/942f29d32ff5fae7873546962c5e6089378697db.jpeg)

Next, `CHAMYUVA`. It doesn’t take long to see he’s connected to `CERES` (incidentally, right after him on the list). Who knows how many nodes… Afuera!

`BLOCKSHARD` and `RADIANCE NODE` seem okay.

`PETIT FOUR` seems related to `CHIAMERA` (another validator, not in the list), `CUPCAKE` (in the list), etc. All of them: afuera!

Go down the list, nothing changes. Some 80% may be running multiple nodes (again, fine) **but** not disclosing that on-chain ( **NOT** fine). And they may have 5 or more, which I haven’t tried to find out because there’s nothing I can do about it in any case.

Nodes **without** an on-chain ID (which I eliminated up-front) are generally even worse, because while those with IDs aren’t disclosing, many aren’t trying to hide, whereas some of those without on-chain IDs are actively trying to avoid those simple checks.

So, to sum it up, after few hours of work I disqualified almost 100% of nodes:

- first I removed those without on-chain ID (most of those are similarly fishy, obviously centrally managed)
- then I removed all with \> 25% commission
- At this point 84 out of 370 left. Then I sorted (descending) according to the ROI and looked at first 20-30
- Approximately ~80% of those got rated `Afuera`

(84/370) - 80% is less than 5%.

I also looked at those in Waiting, thinking there are some deserving, hard-working validators there. Mostly very poor quality, some scammers, and 2-3 bottom feeders (some never did any cMixx-ing, just the blockchain part).

In conclusion, if you care just about your ROI as a nominator, there’s value in easy filtering and some DIY “analytics”.  
If you care about the ROI _as well as_ the network, it’s probably better to run 1 to 4 nodes on your own, make that transparent in on-chain identity, run them at a reasonable commission, and help kick out some of those undisclosed validators, centralized pools and crooks from active validation pool. You’ll also make more than nominating these groups I just mentioned.

The network has to improve this situation before it gets out of hand, so there’s some work to be done by the Council here…

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.xx.network/t/simple-chainalytics-for-xx-chain/7035)._