Try Quests to earn FLOWFlow vs L1s
In this dashboard, the Flow, Ethereum, Solana, and Algorand blockchains have been compared with each other since the 9th of May.
Flow is a fast, decentralized, and developer-friendly blockchain, designed as the foundation for a new generation of games, apps, and the digital assets that power them. It is a blockchain designed from the ground up for mainstream adoption and is the only blockchain that builds usability improvements into the protocol layer.
The required data for each blockchain were collected from their subsequent schema. Specifically, the fact_events and the fact_transactions tables from the flow.core schema, the fact_transactions table from the ethereum_core schema, fact_transactions table from the solana schema, and the transactions table from the algorand schema were used. All data were filtered from May 9th onward.
To measure the values for number of transactions, number of unique wallets and transaction fees, only the successful transactions were taken into account.
The comparison of the number of daily transactions has shown that Solana has the highest number of transactions almost 20 times higher than Ethereum and Algorand. It is an indication of the ability of Solana's Proof-of-History protocol compared to Ethereum's Proof-of-Work and Algorand's Pure-Proof-of-Stake. In theory, the PoS protocol of Algorand and Flow can handle more transaction throughput in comparison with Ethereum. However, the lower or equal number is an indication of a smaller user base on these blockchains.
The analysis of the success rates of transactions on each of the blockchains has demonstrated that above 94% of the transactions on the Ethereum network have been successful. Solana has had around a 62% success rate at best over the period. Surprisingly, Flow's success rate of its transactions has seen a major drop since May 25 and decreased to over 16% on May 29. Algorand's success rate was assumed to be 100% since the failed transactions do not register on the network.
The comparison of the daily number of unique wallet addresses has indicated that both Ethereum and Solana have had a solid user base over the measured period while Solana's addresses even surpassed Ethereum's. Algorand and Flow have also had a close number of unique addresses compared to each other just below 100k wallets. The number of Flow addresses massively dropped in late May following its drop in transaction success rate. The number of active users has also shown that Solana has had the highest number of wallets throughout the whole period. Flow only had 111 wallets that were active every day since the 9th of May.
The total and average transaction fees of each blockchain have been demonstrated in the following charts. As expected, Ethereum has the highest amount of total and average transaction fees. After that, Algorand has had the highest amount of fees which considering its transaction number shows a high fee to transaction ratio for the network. Solana's average fees have been immensely low which has resulted in low total transaction fees even though it has had the highest number of transactions over the measured period. Flow also has had a low average transaction fee which considering its low transaction number resulted in low transaction fees as well.
In conclusion, the analyzed data have demonstrated that although Flow is a great blockchain with unique features, it does not possess an edge over other top layer-1 blockchains. Its transaction numbers are much lower compared to the other 3 networks specially Solana. Also, it might have undergone a reliability issue over the end of May which resulted in a massive drop in its transaction success rate. Flow's number of unique wallet addresses has been at the same level as Algorand but much lower compared to Ethereum and Solana. Last but not least, although the transaction is much more cost-effective in Flow, they are not as low as Solana.
