Comparing the speed of NEAR blockchain with other L1 blockchains in terms of transaction speed per minute:

• According to the chart, you can see that the NEAR blockchain has had a low fluctuating speed compared to some blockchains during the last month.
• You can also see in this chart that the two blockchains, Osmosis and Avalanche, are lower than the NEAR blockchain in terms of the number of transactions per minute in the last 30 days.
• Ethereum and Harmony blockchains are generally better than NEAR blockchain in the last 30 days in terms of the number of transactions per minute.
• The FLOW blockchain is higher than the NEAR blockchain until July 12th, but on July 12th, the number of transactions per minute of this blockchain is lower than that of the NEAR blockchain.
• since Jul15 Near has been better in TPM indicator.

comparing the percentage of failed transactions of the NEAR blockchain with other L1 blockchains:

• According to the left graph, we can say that the NEAR blockchain has a higher percentage of failed transactions than other blockchains in the last 30 days. In the examined blockchains, the Osmosis blockchain has a higher percentage of failed transactions in these 30 days than the NEAR blockchain.
• The Ethereum blockchain has a higher percentage of failed transactions than the NEAR blockchain on July 1st. But in general, in the last 30 days, compared to the NEAR blockchain, it has a lower percentage of failed transactions
• Also, Avalanche, FLOW, and Harmony blockchains are lower than NEAR blockchain in terms of the percentage of failed transactions in the last 30 days.

Introduction

Transaction speed is the rate at which data is transferred from one account to another. The faster a transaction is confirmed, the better the transaction speed is said to be. Transaction speed of a blockchain is one of the prime parameters through which viability of a blockchain is gauged. The transaction speed matters as it indicates which blockchain is more efficient. besides the speed of a blockchain, the fewer number of failed transactions is also important.

So In this analysis, we are going to:

Compare the performance and the speed of some blockchains in terms of TPM (transactions per minute) and the percentage of transactions that fail during the last 30 days. ['2022-06-18' ,'2022-07-17']

In order to do this analysis, We have compared 6 blockchains and have used these tables:

 ethereum.core.fact_transactions / flipside_prod_db.mdao_near.receipts / avalanche.core.fact_transactions / flow.core.fact_transactions / flipside_prod_db.mdao_harmony.txs / osmosis.core.fact_transactions 

Conclusion

According to our charts and descriptions, during the last 30 days, Near blockchain has been better than avalanche and osmosis in terms of TPM and the trend of TPM has almost without fluctuated over the last month.

Near has been better than osmosis in terms of failed transactions rate.

> Thanks to my friends: cmp#4286 and SGH#8588 (teammates)

This bar chart shows the percentage of failed transactions in the last month.

According to this chart, Osmosis is on top of all blockchains with 20.25% of failed transactions in the last month. Next is NEAR blockchain with 18.04% failed transaction percentage in the last month. Avalanche and Harmony blockchains are in the next rank with 10% of failed transactions, followed by FLOW blockchain with 5.47% of failed transactions in the last month. And below all these blockchains is the Ethereum blockchain with 4.21% of failed transactions in the last 30 days, which can be considered the best performer.

in this chart, we can compare the number of failed and successful transactions during the last month.

• Near blockchain ranks second in the number of failed transactions.
• Ethereum blockchain is better than others and it has the most successful transactions.