When it comes to AVAX vs Ethereum, there are a number of variables to consider as to which is the best blockchain platform. AVAX has posed itself as a direct competitor against one of the most widely used blockchains, Ethereum. As the Ethereum blockchain has become overwhelmed by a large number of users, other organizations and blockchain projects have seized the opportunity to provide users with a speedier and more cost-effective solution. For instance, Avalanche offers users extremely speedy transactions with a time-to-finality of fewer than 2 seconds (1) as compared to Ethereum with a time-to-finality of around 6 minutes. One of the problems with the Ethereum blockchain is that the transaction fees (called ‘gas') have been getting increasingly higher as more users and applications start depending on the platform. Avalanche (AVAX) presents itself as an alternative that can be a solution to some of these downsides to more established blockchains like Ethereum.
Common comparisons often arise among Solana vs. Polkadot vs. Ethereum. There are many different blockchain projects that have broken into the industry and it is still difficult to tell who will be the winner when it comes to match-ups like these. Solana, and Polkadot are both in a group of blockchain platforms known as the Ethereum killer list (2). They are called Ethereum killers because they are all in the hunt to outpace and conquer Ethereum as the second-largest cryptocurrency in space that has a market value of $560 billion (3). All of these Ethereum killer coins are trying to provide the same features that have made Ethereum so popular along with solving some of the problems that have started to limit Ethereum’s growth. Experts are watching this competition closely and the general consensus appears to be that though Ethereum’s position remains strong, these competitors will be able to consume portions of its market value.
Aside from Ethereum, there are several other companies that could be considered direct AVAX competitors. These competitors include Cardano (ADA), Polygon (MATIC), and Cosmos (ATOM). Each of these platforms is looking to outdo Ethereum’s speeds as well as prove themselves to be the best blockchain providers.
The first comparison worth making is ADA vs AVAX. One of the advantages that the ADA blockchain has over Avalanche is that it has double the market cap (4) and as the world’s sixth-largest cryptocurrency is more solidly established in the industry. However, some have pointed out (5) that Cardano has a flaw in the form of slower speeds and versatility when compared to AVAX.
Another comparison to make is AVAX vs. MATIC. Launched in late 2017, MATIC is in the top 15 cryptocurrencies by capitalization and has recently experienced a surge in its price (6). As of right now, Polygon’s MATIC token tends to have lower fees associated with transactions than Avalanche. However, Avalanche appears to have the advantages of a higher market capitalization and a speedier solution to Ethereum problems.
Finally, it is worth considering Cosmos vs. Avalanche. Cosmos seeks to create something it calls The Internet of Blockchains (7), which it envisions as a network of interconnected blockchains connected in a decentralized manner. Both Avalanche and Cosmos are built for speed but are focused on different objectives. However, AVAX still has the advantage of solving one of the biggest issues with the Ethereum blockchain, gas fees.
Of course, the comparisons do not end just yet. It is also worth analyzing AVAX vs Elrond. Elrond (EGLD) is a new software project, focused on competing against other more established blockchains including Ethereum. Its goals are similar to AVAX in that it is focused on scalability and lower transaction fees. However, AVAX has the advantage of having lower transaction costs (8), and twice the speed. Elrond has two unique features: adaptive state sharding (a process of splitting its own infrastructure to support more transactions) and secure proof-of-stake (a mechanism that provides for the syncing of components to the blockchain’s ledger (9). Elrond’s native cryptocurrency is EGLD.
Elrond vs Solana are also commonly compared. When it comes to comparing the Solana blockchain to the Elrond platform, we see that once again, Elrond is losing in the area of fees and speed of transaction completion (10). However, Elrond is more decentralized than Solana, making it more secure against censorship. Both of these cryptocurrencies are widely accepted at online marketplaces, but Elrond may also be winning the P.R. battle. Recently, Solana experienced a setback when more than $320 million was stolen in the currency through a hack (11).
Finally, we should look at Elrond vs. Cardano. In this case, transaction fees over the Elrond blockchain are actually cheaper than over the competitor, Cardano. Furthermore, Elrond’s speeds are over 66 times faster than Cardano’s, making it a far more usable cryptocurrency that has great future potential (12).
One of AVAX’s top competitors is the “Ethereum killer” Solana
. One of the major advantages Solana has over Avalanche is that it is an older and more established blockchain with a market capitalization that is double the size. When looking at AVAX vs. SOL (the native token for Solana), there are a number of factors to consider. For example, Avalanche tends to be more popular among users despite Solana’s older age (13). Also, this greater popularity is in spite of the fact that AVAX fees are somewhat higher and that its transaction speeds are somewhat slower. Finally, the future utility of the Avalanche blockchain is looking to be more positive than for Solana because of the solutions the AVAX platform is providing.
The native token for another competitor in this Battle of the Blockchains is NEAR. As such, it is common for NEAR vs Solana to be compared. This is the token name for the NEAR protocol. Founded in 2018, the NEAR protocol is another open-source blockchain platform. Looking at the statistics, Solana wins the market cap competition by having a far higher value than NEAR’s $6 billion (14). Transactions on the Solana platform are also cheaper and faster than on NEAR (15).
Most blockchain projects are designed to create smart contracts and the Greek word for “smart contract” is “Tezos” (16). That brings us to another comparison, Tezos vs Solana. Tezos has a unique governance structure where participants can decide the rules of the platform for themselves which was designed to be an evolving network. Solana has lower fees and faster transaction speeds than Tezos and is a more popular platform.
ATOM is the native token for Cosmos. When comparing AVAX vs. ATOM, we can look at the same variables we’ve examined for the previous cryptocurrencies. When it comes to fees, AVAX is more affordable to conduct transactions on than ATOM and simultaneously has far better speeds. One of the unique aspects of AVAX versus other blockchain platforms like ATOM is that the AVAX platform was built using three different blockchain technologies and yet is still fully compatible with the Ethereum blockchain. Furthermore, Avalanche is designed to be scalable. One of the biggest challenges for cryptocurrencies is scalability. Most blockchains available today still could not handle the volume and speed required to compare with fiat currency payment systems. However, Avalanche is seeking to fill that gap in the blockchain industry with its innovative solution.
AVAX has been termed an Ethereum killer due to its potential to overthrow its rival, Ethereum, thanks to Avalanche’s technological advantages. The crypto AVAX certainly does answer many questions that have come up in this industry. If cryptocurrency is to attain more widespread use, it is more important than ever that the cryptocurrency be secure, fast, and capable of handling vast numbers of transactions. AVAX possesses all of these features with transaction costs that can tend to be as low as one-tenth that of Ethereum (17). Using AVAX, developers can launch their own customized blockchains and build fast applications. Furthermore, another big concern with Ethereum is its reliance on GPUs. This has seriously impacted the GPU market as large organizations have bought thousands of GPUs to use for mining cryptocurrency. This uses massive amounts of energy, but Avalanche is CPU-optimal and is designed to work much more efficiently.
What is Ethereum’s answer to all of this competition? Their answer is coming in the form of ETH 2.0, a massive overhaul of the entire Ethereum network which seeks to address many of its existing issues before competitors like AVAX can succeed. This is where ETH 2.0 vs AVAX comparisons may come into the conversation.
By moving the blockchain to a proof-of-stake model, developers hope to be able to address most of the energy efficiency problems that have plagued the platform in the past. With the traditional cryptocurrency model, miners would spend large amounts of time and money solving complex math equations in order to forge new tokens. With proof-of-stake, owners of ETH tokens will be able to use the coins on their own crypto wallets to validate and mint new currency. The goal of the updates that make up Ethereum 2.0 is to make the Ethereum network more scalable, secure, and sustainable (18). If these updates are as successful as the developers are hoping, Ethereum 2.0 could present a massive change to the cryptocurrency industry with a network that could possibly process 100,000 transactions per second (19). This new version could also make it harder for Avalanche to succeed as a competitor with Ethereum.