N.B: In the spirit of full transparency, the following Coin Report on Trittium is a Sponsored Post.
Welcome to the twelfth Coin Report. In today’s report, I will be assessing the fundamental and technical strengths and weaknesses of Trittium. This will comprise of an analysis of a number of significant metrics, an evaluation of the project’s community and development and an overview of its price-history. The report will conclude with a grading out of 10. I hope you enjoy the read!
Prior to the Trittium team getting in touch to commission this report, I had not heard of the project. Having now completed my research, I am surprised I had not, given the number of areas of personal interest the project is looking to find success in. Of all coins I have written reports for, I believe Trittium is the second-smallest in terms of Network Value (market cap), only larger than Altbet; a fact that will be of some significance as we discuss the various strengths and shortcomings of the project.
I hope this report will prove objective where it must be and fair on more subjective matters. For those who’d like to learn a little more about Trittium prior to reading this report, here are some primary links:
Sector: Collateralised Loans & Masternode Hosting Platform
Exchanges: CryptoBridge, CoinExchange & Graviex
Trittium was launched in May 2018, operating on the XEVAN algorithm with a dual Proof-of-Work/Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanism. The Proof-of-Work stage was only in operating for ~800 blocks, and the coin is now exclusively Proof-of-Stake, alongside a network of masternodes. There was a premine of 1.45mn TRTT, equating to 1.04% of the maximum supply; this has now been either used in development or burned, with zero remaining. The project was launched with private investor funding of 7.5 BTC, and there was no public ICO.
As Trittium is less than 12 months old, there is very little price-history for reference. However, TRTT did make an all-time high of $0.11 against the Dollar in June 2018, and ~1400 satoshis against BTC around the same time. Price has since experienced a bear market in line with macro market conditions, and is currently trading over 90% below these highs.
Trittium is looking to build a financial services ecosystem, with a particular focus on collateralised loans.
As per the abstract of their whitepaper:
“The next step in evolution of the private and commercial loan industry, built on top of blockchain technology.”
This is a very competitive industry, even amongst cryptocurrencies. The majority of collateralised loan platforms being built, however, are heavily reliant on ICO funding; let’s see how Trittium is doing sans-ICO…
Below are listed a number of important metrics, all of which are accurate as of 8th February 2019. For anyone reading this who has yet to read a Coin Report, it might be worth reading this section of the first report, where any potentially unfamiliar terms are explained. For any terms or metrics specific to this post, I will provide explanations besides the figures.
Price: $0.009 (253 satoshis)
Exchange Volume: $746
Circulating Supply: 110,098,440 TRTT
Total Supply: 110,792,317 TRTT
Maximum Supply: 140,000,000 TRTT
% of Max. Supply Minted: 79.14%
Network Value: $955,980 (278.55 BTC)
Network Value at Max. Supply: $1.216mn
Exchange Volume-to-Network Value: 0.08%
Average Price (30-Day): $0.008
Average Exchange Volume (30-Day): $1,701
Average Network Value (30-Day): $840,608
Average Exchange Volume (30-Day)-to-Network Value: 0.2%
Volatility* (30-Day): -0.0599
Average Daily On-Chain Transactions** (24H): 400
Average Daily Transactional Value*** (24H): $31,720 (source)
NVT**** (24H): 30.14
% Price Change USD (30-Day): +34.1%
% Price Change USD (1-Year): N/A
USD All-Time High: $0.11
% From USD All-Time High: -92%
Premine % of Max. Supply: 1.04%
Premine Location: Zero remaining (burned or used in development)
Liquidity (calculated as the sum of BTC in the buy-side with 10% of current price across all exchanges): 0.225 BTC
Liquidity-to-Network Value %: 0.08%
Amount Available on Exchanges: 676,416 TRTT
% of Circulating Supply Available on Exchanges: 0.61%
*Volatility is calculated by taking the average price over the given time-period, calculating the difference between it and the highest price and it and the lowest price over that same time-period, and multiplying those figures together. The closer to 0, the less volatility during that period, and vice-versa. Read this for more on volatility.
**Average Daily On-Chain Transactions: This is usually calculated by taking the total number of transactions over the previous 30 days and dividing it by 30. However, as the Trittium block explorer has limited functionality, and I was only able to find data for the past 100 transactions, the calculations are even less refined. These 100 transactions took place over almost exactly 6 hours; as such, I simply multiplied this by 4 to find an expected figure for 24 hours. This is obviously far less useful than if I had access to 30 days of data, as the past 6 hours of data could be an anomaly.
***Transactional Value in $ is calculated by taking the daily transactional value in TRTT and multiplying it by price.
****NVT is calculated by dividing the Network Value by the Average Daily Transactional Value. See here for more on NVT.
Supply Emission & Inflation:
Block Reward Schedule: Current block reward is 40 TRTT. This reward stage will last for 62375 more blocks (~43.3 days). After this, the reward halves to 20 TRTT for 525,599 blocks (~1 year). 1,440 blocks minted daily.
Average Block Time: 60 seconds
Current Block Height: 397614
Annual Supply Emission*: 11,759,500 TRTT (29.75 BTC at current prices)
Annual Inflation Rate: 10.68%
Circulating Supply in 365 Days: 121,857,940 TRTT
*Annual Supply Emission is calculated as: (62,375 * 40) + (463,225 * 20)
Staking & Masternodes:
Network Staking Weight: N/A
Staking ROI (Annual)*: 5.06% (Minimum)
Masternode Collateral Size: 50,000 TRTT
Masternode Price: $434
Masternode Count: 1272
Masternode Count Growth (30-Day): -3.93%
Supply Locked in Masternodes: 63,600,000 TRTT
Masternode ROI (Annual)**: 14.79%
Masternode Reward / Block Reward: 80%
Masternode Network Value: $552,236
MNV / Network Value: 57.77%
*To calculate minimum annual staking ROI: (Annual Supply Emission * (Stake Reward / Block Reward)) / (Circulating Supply – Supply Locked in Masternodes) = (11,759,500 *0.2) / 46,498,440 = 5.06%
**To calculate annual masternode ROI based on current active masternodes: (Annual Supply Emission * (Masternode Reward / Block Reward)) / Supply Locked in Masternodes: (11,759,500 * 0.8) / 63,600,000 = 14.79%
Address Count: N/A
Supply Held By Top 10 Addresses: 10.76%
Supply Held By Top 20 Addresses: 15.38%
Supply Held By Top 100 Addresses: 25.46%
Inactive Address Count in Top 20 (30 Days of No Activity): 5
With that mountain of metrics identified, perhaps we should delve a little deeper and unearth what we can about Trittium. Given that its primary aim of being used for collateralised loans is not yet being fulfilled (as I’ll dig into later), Trittium’s capacity as both a masternode itself and a masternode platform must be considered. In its use on the masternode platform, TRTT functions as a means-of-payment; as such, transactional metrics are of some significance.
Unfortunately, the Trittium block explorer has limited functionality; whilst it does provide data for the last 100 transactions, this is the maximum available. In the case of Trittium, these 100 transactions took place over a period of 6 hours, hence only crude calculations concerning transactions could be made.
I used the 6 hours-worth of data and multiplied the figures by 4 to find a possible figure for a day’s-worth of transactions. This is about as unrefined a methodology as it gets, as those 6 hours could well have been an anomaly; ideally, I like 30 days-worth of data for these calculations to have any weight. Regardless, this put Trittium’s daily transactions at ~400. Further, 24H on-chain transactional value amounted to $31,720, giving Trittium a NVT of 30.14. Whilst this is a strong figure (Bitcoin’s NVT is usually over 100; and yes, I am well aware this is a false comparison given the respective sizes of the networks), it isn’t a reliable one, as there simply wasn’t enough data to confirm this over any significant period of time. If, however, TRTT experienced a similar value of transactions daily for a month, that would indeed be promising.
For the rest of this section, I’ll run through the remaining General metrics, before moving onto Supply Emission & Inflation, the all-important masternodes, and conclude with an evaluation of Trittium’s Distribution.
Firstly, let’s take a look at the metrics related to supply and demand:
Trittium has Liquidity of 0.225 BTC, equating to 0.08% of its Network Value. For context, this places it joint-lowest amongst previous reports with Bismuth; a poor showing of demand at current prices. Whilst this can, in part, be attributed to Trittium’s current exchange listings, all of which are relatively low volume, it is nonetheless not a particularly strong show of buy support; coins with similar exchange listings, like Altbet, had greater Liquidity.
But what about its supply? Well, ~675k TRTT is currently available for purchase on those exchanges, equating to 0.61% of circulating supply. This places it as the strongest of the coins previously reported on, with less supply available than Altbet, which is the second-strongest on this metric. This is a conflicting picture being painted; on the one hand, we find that buy support at current prices is very low, but that sellers are also in limited supply. This is perhaps explained by the incentives created to hold Trittium, as we will come to a little later…
Now, let’s take a look at Trittium’s volatility over the past 30 days, which comes in at -0.05987; this is less volatility than was experienced by MonetaryUnit or Altbet, but greater than that experienced by CloakCoin.
I’d like to highlight the metrics relating to price next, as these are somewhat relevant to the aforementioned volatility. Trittium has experienced a 34.1% surge over the past month, likely accounting for the volatility, but remains 92% below its all-time high of $0.11 against the dollar. Perhaps this is a buying opportunity? We won’t know for certain until the fundamentals have been fully evaluated.
To conclude analysis of these General metrics, let’s examine volume:
Firstly, the volume is abysmal in real-terms. $746 was traded over the past 24 hours and the average volume for the past month is $1,701. Again, this is undoubtedly in part a symptom of the low-volume exchange listings, but there are coins on these exchanges experiencing much more volume, so this is no excuse.
Trittium’s 24H Exchange Volume equates to 0.08% of its Network Value, and its Average Exchange Volume equates to 0.2% of its Average Network Value; the former of these places Trittium bottom in the table, and the latter places it third-from-bottom. I know market conditions at present aren’t particularly optimal for smaller, newer projects on small exchanges, but this isn’t great. It indicates that speculative interest in TRTT, the coin, is low; contrasting against the relatively high value of on-chain transactions.
But what relationship does this degree of exchange-traded volume have with Trittium’s Supply Emission & Inflation?
Well, the first point to note is that Trittium, despite being less than a year old, has already minted almost 80% of its maximum supply, indicating that inflation will likely be quite low.
In fact, with block times of 1 minute – thus 525,600 blocks minted annually – and a current block reward of 40 TRTT (halving to 20 in just over a month), Trittium will have ~11.75mn minted over the next 365 days, or 29.75 BTC of supply emission at current prices. This gives Trittium an annual inflation rate of 10.68%. Not bad at all.
Delving a little deeper, we can work out using the above figures that, on average, ~32k TRTT will be minted daily, or 0.08 BTC. This is roughly $280 of daily supply emission. All of a sudden, the weak volume metrics don’t look quite as rough.
Given this amount of supply emission, Trittium’s 24H volume is 2.66x greater and its average volume is over 6x greater. This, whilst not quite as strong as similar volume-to-emission ratios of other coins, is plenty to suggest that TRTT should be able to sustain current prices on current volume. Further, Trittium’s Liquidity of 0.225 BTC is 2.76x greater than average daily supply emission.
Now, let us move on to masternodes – a primary feature of the Trittium project:
Firstly, it is important to mention that staking is also a feature for TRTT, with 20% of block rewards going to stakers. Whilst I could not determine network staking weight due to the lack of functionality on the Trittium block explorer, I calculated that the minimum annual ROI for stakers would be 5.06% if all circulating supply minus that locked in masternodes was being staked. This is quite a low return, especially since annual inflation is around twice that.
Regarding masternodes, the first thing to mention is that there are 1272 active nodes, with a decline in the count of 3.93% over the past month. This is, in essence, a stable network. With masternode collateral set at 50,000 TRTT, this equates to 63.6mn TRTT locked in masternodes, giving holders an annual ROI of 14.79%. Whilst not a huge ROI, this more than covers inflation, and is thus a better choice for investors than staking.
Trittium’s Masternode Network Value is $552,236 at current prices, equating to 57.77% of its Network Value. This is indicative of a strong masternode network.
Lastly, we come to Distribution:
Here, Trittium is rather strong, with an impressive degree of supply decentralisation. The top 10 richest address control 10.76% of the circulating supply; the top 20 control 15.38%; and the top 100 control 25.46%. This places Trittium fourth in the decentralisation of supply amongst the top 100 addresses, behind only Altbet, Bulwark and ALQO.
Of the top 20 addresses, 5 have been inactive over the past 30 days. And of the remaining 15, addresses, 0 addresses are in active distribution; a good sign for those looking to buy. 13 of these addresses are either accumulating stake rewards or masternode rewards, and 1 address added 200,000 TRTT to his position this month. Promising.
And that concludes this section on Metric Analysis. Onto the Trittium Community:
There are two primary aspects of community analysis: social media presence and Bitcointalk threads. I’ll begin with the former before moving on to the latter.
Concerning social media presence, there are four main platforms to examine: Twitter, Facebook, Telegram and Discord.
Trittium is present on Twitter and Discord. To begin with, let’s look at the various social metrics that I calculated from the Trittium Twitter account:
Twitter Followers: 1,870
Average Twitter Engagement: 0.76%
As usual, I will be using RivalIQ‘s social benchmark report for evaluation purposes.
As is expressed in the report, the average engagement rate on Twitter across all industries is 0.046%, and the average in the Media industry is 0.013%; Trittium’s engagement rate of 0.76% is 16.5x greater than the former and 58.5x greater than the latter. However, given that Trittium has 1,870 followers on Twitter, I would have expected the engagement rate to be even higher. For context, Altbet, which has ~1,700 followers, had an engagement rate of 3.1%; over 4x greater than that of Trittium. That being said, of all coins previously reported on, Trittium places in the middle of the pack for engagement on Twitter.
Moving onto Discord, the situation is rather different, with a much larger group of 5,908 members here. Usually, Twitter is the largest audience for cryptocurrencies, so I am surprised to find such a large disparity between their Discord group and their Twitter account.
My first impressions when joining the group were that it contained the most channels I’ve ever seen, with a dedicated channel for all manner of relevant topics to the project. This is a good start.
Beginning with Announcements, this is updated almost every other day, with this commitment to updates being evident over several months. I like that the team are keen to keep the community informed.
Over the past two weeks in this channel, there are: development updates on daily business; issues solved with the project; coin burn announcements; listings of coins to the Trittium platform; audience analytics provided for Twitter; a burn of 200,000 TRTT; information on the 25% revenue share that will be implemented for masternode holders (25% of total revenues will be burned and 50% will go towards funding); and a graphic design contest currently underway. Useful stuff to know for the potential investor.
General, as the most active channel, has around 60 individuals involved in conversation over the past 7 days, equating to about 1% engagement. There is a lot of conversation concerning the platform itself, which is great to see, as it shows a keen interest in the use-cases of the project and not just speculative interest. There is also a lot of team-led development discussion, updates provided about the daily ongoings, plus very fast replies from the team to any community suggestions (of which there are quite a few) and any issues. This is all promising stuff.
The most interesting points here were those concerning reward reinvestment on the masternode platform, where any masternode rewards can be automatically reinvested on the platform to benefit from compound interest. Also the discussion around so-called PoCon (Proof-of-Consumption), which I will dig into in the Development section of this report, was very promising. In essence, it is the novel consensus mechanism designed by Trittium to reward holders with revenue share. A concluding thought on the General channel was that there were some maintenance-related issues evident, with a number of occasions where maintenance had to be scheduled over a short period of time. Nothing major, however.
FAQ and Official Links are two highly informative and comprehensive channels, full of useful material for new users, ensuring accessibility. What We Are Working On is an announcements-esque channel, though less frequently updated but with far more detail, including development screenshots etc. In this channel, I discovered that the remaining premine was recently burned. Another interesting channel is Budget, in which the community is provided regular updates on expenses and revenues of the project.
In general, this degree of transparency and consistency in providing updates is rare, and it’s a great sign on the team’s part.
The Trittium BitcoinTalk thread was created on May 6th, 2018, and has since generated 369 posts spanning 19 pages in 278 days. This equates to 1.33 post per day, on average, which is not particularly active. However, in the past 90 days, the thread has had 18 posts via 10 individual posters, giving an average of 0.2 posts per day; a massive decline in engagement.
Regarding the content of the thread, the announcement page itself is in dire need of copy-editing. We are told that the project was launched with the help of private investment, to the tune of 7.5 BTC, and thus no public ICO took place.
There are very regular updates provided by the team; so regular, in fact, that moderators deleted their posts due to too many consecutive posts by one individual poster (what a ridiculous policy). These updates are supplemented by links to more detailed weekly reports from their Medium blog. On the team’s side, all looks as it should, but it seems the curse of low engagement has followed through from Twitter to BitcoinTalk, with too few replies and questions being posted by those outside of the team.
For the following Development analysis, I will be evaluating project leadership, the website, the roadmap, the whitepaper, the wallets and, in conclusion, providing a general overview:
There are 6 core team members listed on the website, 2 of which are founders with decades of cumulative experience in development. There is also a marketing director with 8 years of experience, and a consultant, an intern and a quality assurance advisor. Overall, the team seems solid; balanced and experienced.
The website is professional in design, with very clean and sleek UI/UX. It is well-branded and features a clear navigation menu. All social links are accessible and the copy is simple, concise and informative.
There is a native blog that is meant to be updated weekly with reports, but this seems to have been neglected since November; instead, the Medium blog is regularly updated. Some consistency here would be great, as the optimal user experience would not require them to leave the website in order to remain informed.
On the homepage, we can find benefits of the Trittium platform highlighted for both, borrowers, and lenders; plus there are details on the three plans available (though not actually live yet, as the secured loans platform is yet to be released) for borrowers.
Most importantly, there is a Current Services page, with important info on Trittium’s 4 main services: TrttAuth (a single sign-in service to be used for all other services); TrttWallets (combining web and mobile wallets for seamless transactions; TrttNodes (the masternode hosting platform with reward reinvestment and revenue share schemes); and TrttLoans (the upcoming collateralised loans platform).
I did find that links to the platform itself were difficult to find, and having mentioned this to the team, I found out that the entire website and platform is currently being redesigned with releases imminent. I was given a sneak preview, and the platform looks superb; very clean and easy-to-navigate. The website has also been improved, with clearer navigation to the platform, and a User Account panel on the homepage.
Whilst it is native to the website’s homepage, the roadmap isn’t designed particularly well. There is, however, a full history of goals and achievements, starting in Q2 2018, but these are not all that specific or detailed; I’d like to see some Further Info links to allow new users to better grasp progress. In general, it just needs to be more visually appealing and easy to read, with all sections fleshed out a little.
Concerning the achievements themselves:
Q2 2018: Project launch; website release; growth campaigns; desktop wallets; masternode stats; websites listings; ad campaign; exchange listing; whitepaper release; MVP release.
Q3 2018: This section states that some goals are in progress, so perhaps the team are running a little behind on expectations.
In Progress: iOS app; licence for storing crypto; licence for crypto-to-fiat transactions.
Completed: Fiat gateway; web wallet; Android wallet; CoinMarketCap listing; masternode hosting listing; PoCon conception; incorporation of Trittium;
KYD verification; whitepaper update.
In Progress: The first three In Progress items from Q3 are still so, and the Trittium collateralised loans Beta release is also in development.
Completed: Website redesign; TrttAuth release and integration; TrttNodes release.
In Progress: All four items from Q4 (the team are clearly a little behind schedule with these); TrttNodes redesign; wallet redesigns; marketing campaigns; new exchange listings.
The roadmap itself states that this quarter is “the most important stage of Trittium project development.” This is likely due to the Beta launch of the collateralised loans platform.
Overall, the roadmap is ambitious but perhaps this ambition is causing delays in the schedule.
The whitepaper is 13 pages in length, which is about optimum, in my opinion. The primary aim is stated in the abstract:
“The next step in evolution of the private and commercial loan industry, built on top of blockchain technology.”
As stated above, collateralized secured loans are the primary focus. We are given a short summary of the history of lending, giving some context to the project. The prose is accessible and actually quite enjoyable to read; it’s not dry, like many whitepapers can be.
This section is followed by a summary of the problems with current lending practices, of which we are told about the broken credit score system that excludes many individuals, and is fundamentally inadequate due to its one-size-fits-all policy.
Regarding types of loans currently available on the market, we have unsecured, secured and collateralised. Trittium will focus on the latter due to market saturation of the former two. There are graphics provided here to ensure accessibility for those unfamiliar with these processes. The argument made is that the divisibility of cryptocurrencies allows for more flexible collateralised loans. TRTT is to be used as collateral.
The following section is titled Why blockchain for loans? Here, it is acknowledged that Trittium isn’t the first crypto-based collateralised loans platform but it is stated that “it will be a leader among them.” This section could have gone into greater depth on the benefits of using a cryptocurrency for this purpose – an opportunity missed, here. It does mention that cryptocurrencies remove barriers to entry and reduce costs.
The loan opportunities available on the Trittium platform are then depicted, with three plan types (Base, Plus and Premium). Each plan has different costs and benefits, but primarily focus on the customisable nature of the loan and the flexibility of term lengths.
Importantly for us speculators, there is a section on Trittium’s revenue opportunities. Here, we are told that the team will focus on continually adding revenue streams to the Trittium ecosystem. The platform will receive revenue from: loan terms; coin integrations to Trittium platform; transaction fees; white-label mobile and web wallet sales; masternode hosting; and debit cards.
How does this translate into value generated for buyers of TRTT? This is where so-called PoCon (Proof of Consumption) comes into play.
PoCon is a consensus mechanism scheme designed by Trittium to reward holders via revenue share through block rewards. A brief description is provided to explain this process more clearly:
All revenue from the platform will be converted into TRTT. This will then be segmented in predetermined percentages between the team, the burn mechanism and the Trittium holders (masternode operators and stakers).
For more on PoCon, read here.
Overall, the whitepaper is highly informative and accessible regarding the collateralised loans platform and the importance of PoCon to investors, but it does miss out general information about the coin itself and other expected material in a whitepaper.
There are Windows, Mac and Linux wallets available, plus an Android wallet for mobiles and a web wallet. The iOS wallet is in development.
One thing I’d like to highlight in this conclusion of the fundamental analysis is the revenue share scheme and how this could play out in terms of value generation for buyers:
Using the figure of 25% revenue share, if the Trittium ecosystem generates, for example, $10,000 a month in revenue for the first year, this would equate to $30,000 of annual revenue share. Split between the 1272 current active masternodes, this gives each masternode holder $23.58 of annual revenue share; a 5.43% dividend of the $434.15 cost of buying a masternode.
Raise this to $25,000 a month in revenue, and we get $75,000 of annual revenue share. Split between 1272 masternodes, each holder receives $58.96; a 13.58% dividend. Not bad value at all.
This is neglecting the added incentive of an equal percentage of revenue being used towards buy-back-and-burns.
There is, in truth, little to say about Trittium’s price-history, given that the coin has only been in existence for around 9 months.
That said, the local high set in August led to price following suit with the rest of the market and bleeding out for several months, eventually finding a bottom above 100 satoshis. Price remained range-bound here for around 6 weeks, before breaking out above range resistance, with it becoming a new level of support at 150 satoshis. We have since seen an uptrend form, with a series of higher-lows over the past 6 weeks, but price is struggling to breakout above ~250-satoshi resistance (a signficant historical level).
Regarding valuation, the coin remains below a $1mn Network Value, with plenty of use-cases being developed, and, most importantly, low inflation for the remainder of its existence. With a maximum Network Value of around $1.2mn at current prices, I would find it difficult to disagree with the proposition that buyers here will be rewarded over time; provided that the team continues to deliver and that new exchange listings are established. Further, the revenue share scheme is genuine value generation for buyers, and thus a bet on prices being higher in ~12 months is likely a high-probability bet. There are a lot of projects valued far higher and doing far less.
This report is now approaching 5,000 words, and it is time to draw it to a close.
My final grading for Trittium is 7 out of 10. Whilst the project is certainly strong (particularly for one without ICO funding and less than a year old) in its development, and has a working product and value propositions for users, it is yet to launch its primary platform; the secured loans service. Further, it is yet to garner the engagement and volume required for a higher grading.
Lastly, here is a link to a Google Sheets file with any significant data from previous reports compiled for cross-comparative purposes. I will keep this updated as I continue to write these reports.
I hope this report has proved insightful and that you’ve enjoyed the read! Please do feel free to leave any questions in the Comments, and I’ll answer them as best I can.
If you’ve enjoyed this post and want to receive new posts straight to your inbox, I’ve set up a RSS-to-Email feed that will be sent out weekly; every Monday, 12pm. Just submit your email and I’ll make sure you’re included in the list. Cheers.