The Lightning Network in Numbers (ZAPs Protocol)
In an internal study conducted by The Hakon’s economics team on the Lightning Network, we collected data from 25 relays that return zap receipts. Between September 18 and October 18, we recorded 51,725 zaps with identifiable values, sent by 3,758 senders to 3,145 recipients. The total amounted to 19,286,971 sats, equivalent to 0.193 BTC, or approximately US$15,647.
This total should be understood as a lower bound, not a complete measure of activity. The research only accounts for receipts stored by the monitored relays. Historical coverage also varies between relays: Damus has data only from October 13 onward, Snort from October 17 onward, and offchain.pub stores receipts only from September 30 onward. As a result, some activity before these dates is not included in the results.
Across the complete days of data collection, the average was approximately 1,730 zaps and 646,000 sats per day, equivalent to around US$520. Daily transaction volume fluctuated considerably, ranging from 221,000 sats on October 11 to 1.56 million sats on October 9. The previous week’s total of 3.78 million sats fell below the average weekly volume over the 30-day period, estimated at approximately 4.5 million sats.
The typical zap remains small. The median was 21 sats, while the average reached 373 sats. The largest individual payment recorded was 792,749 sats. Zaps of up to 100 sats accounted for 85% of all transactions but only 6.3% of the total value. At the other end of the spectrum, the 304 zaps exceeding 10,000 sats represented just 0.6% of transactions but accounted for 57% of the total value. Even more significant, the 15 zaps exceeding 100,000 sats totaled 3.14 million sats, or 16% of all recorded value.
Value concentration is also evident in the distribution among participants. The top 1% of recipients received 52.7% of the total value, while the top 10% accounted for 90.9%. Among senders, concentration was even higher at the top: the top 1% accounted for 57.3% of the value sent, while the top 10% were responsible for 89.8%.
Top 10 senders
The top 10 paid 38% of the 30-day value. Names come from each account’s public profile. The sender is the account that signed the zap request inside the receipt.
| # | Sender | Identifier | Sats sent | % of total | Zaps | Recipients |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cyrill | nostr:npub18zpw8cg…7gevlw | 2,683,468 | 13.9% | 162 | 41 |
| 2 | 匿名応援者 | nostr:npub10rrh4ps…0vmfc2 | 890,676 | 4.6% | 144 | 6 |
| 3 | Scrotus | nostr:npub1t04cvx3…wm53m9 | 818,590 | 4.2% | 58 | 46 |
| 4 | @fiatjaf | nostr:npub180cvv07…yjh6w6 | 609,000 | 3.2% | 29 | 3 |
| 5 | ricky | nostr:npub1dykxl6e…kttahw | 471,317 | 2.4% | 5 | 1 |
| 6 | devotoare | nostr:npub1y82xnyz…dnng9h | 446,806 | 2.3% | 6 | 1 |
| 7 | Greeny | nostr:npub1ht4cvte…ajqeku | 407,232 | 2.1% | 477 | 150 |
| 8 | AQSTR | nostr:npub1dsn6t2s…j92h64 | 377,043 | 2% | 7,441 | 180 |
| 9 | BitBetBot | nostr:npub1ynnjxp5…puu3gk | 346,396 | 1.8% | 129 | 18 |
| 10 | derKUEKeNFunktionaer | nostr:npub1er8k805…2xff35 | 287,210 | 1.5% | 15 | 6 |
Among identified recipients, Fountain Boost Bot ranked first, receiving 2.52 million sats across 1,353 zaps, equivalent to 13.1% of the total value. It was followed by an account with no published name, which received 849,000 sats, and Turiz, with 743,000 sats. On the sending side, Cyrill ranked first, sending 2.68 million sats across 162 zaps, representing 13.9% of all value transferred.
Top 10 recipients
The top 10 hold 33.1% of the 30-day value. Names come from each account’s public profile.
| # | Recipient | Identifier | Sats | % of total | Zaps | Senders | Receipt provider |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fountain Boost Bot | nostr:npub1hpnvua4…tktplc | 2,519,851 | 13.1% | 1,353 | 219 | not confirmed |
| 2 | No name published | nostr:npub1sax9lkg…u8n53z | 849,109 | 4.4% | 59 | 1 | not confirmed |
| 3 | Turiz | nostr:npub1q6ps7m9…pm0kxr | 742,721 | 3.9% | 226 | 60 | confirmed |
| 4 | Vanuatu Bible Translation | nostr:npub1vw5xewl…am04ks | 471,382 | 2.4% | 9 | 5 | confirmed |
| 5 | Rachel-Ann Mabulay | nostr:npub1qkxnrrj…csvpmv | 349,043 | 1.8% | 47 | 7 | confirmed |
| 6 | BitBetBot | nostr:npub1ynnjxp5…puu3gk | 336,656 | 1.8% | 64 | 18 | confirmed |
| 7 | No name published | nostr:npub1flud4td…pl4qpy | 294,000 | 1.5% | 14 | 1 | not confirmed |
| 8 | No name published | nostr:npub1e9k0xpg…rumqf4 | 294,000 | 1.5% | 14 | 1 | not confirmed |
| 9 | Vitor Pamplona | nostr:npub1gcxzte5…lfnj5z | 271,652 | 1.4% | 256 | 172 | confirmed |
| 10 | Janet Macabit | nostr:npub19ylk2yt…huj8kx | 262,324 | 1.4% | 23 | 8 | confirmed |
Confirmed provider: the key that signed the receipts is the same one the recipient’s LNURL announces.
The distribution
The distribution by target type also reveals important differences. Approximately 66% of the value went to notes, 29% to profiles, and 4% to articles. The research also identified 556 self-zaps, totaling 286,000 sats. In addition, two LNURL service providers accounted for 44.6% of the recorded value.
The data show that the Lightning Network handles transactions of widely varying sizes: most zaps are small, but a relatively small share of transactions accounts for a large portion of the money transferred. At the same time, a handful of participants account for a substantial share of the value sent and received. The findings also highlight an important limitation when analyzing network activity: the amount of available data depends on the historical records retained by each relay. Therefore, while these figures provide a useful snapshot of the zaps observed during the period, they do not necessarily represent the full extent of activity on the Lightning Network.
Come be part of The Hakon, the biggest NOSTR blog in the English language
Write a comment