Blockchain for Enterprise comparison & reviews

Summary
Rank
1st 5th 1st
Score
0%
0%
User Reviews
Question?
Not Enabled Not Enabled Not Enabled
Analysis expand by MLG Blockchain by MLG Blockchain by MLG Blockchain
Select All
Information expand
0%
0%
0%
  • Fully Supported
  • Limitation
  • Not Supported
  • Information Only
Pros
  • + Clear Use Case
  • + Wide Adoption in Finance
  • + Focused service offering that makes it easy to use
  • + Large development community
  • + Quick to develop applications on
  • + Wide array of use cases
  • + Modular Focus (customized transaction rules, consensus algorithms, permissioning)
  • + Part of the Hyperledger Ecosystem
  • + Harnesses IoT technology to provide additional data
Cons
  • - Speculators can have impact on the cryptocurrency side of the project
  • - Recent controversy with SEC (link in popup)
  • - Early ledger entries are missing
  • - Public blockchain creates security concerns
  • - Uses cryptocurrency as fuel for transactions
  • - Forks can cause complications
  • - Open source codebase
  • - Very young in development
  • - Still requires many bug fixes
  Content  
  •  
Overview
One of the first commercially viable Finance focused blockchain solutions. Uses 3 core products (xCurrent, xRapid, xVia) in order to facilitate cross border transactions, liquitiy, and payment processing
Generic, open-source,  blockchain based distributed computing platform for applications to be built upon.
Modular Blockchain Platform, released by Hyperledger and championed by Intel.

Applications expand
0%
0%
0%
  Crypto Assets  
  •  
Cryptocurrency
Ripple (XRP)
Ether (ETH)
None
  Logic  
  •  
Smart Contract Functionality
No
Yes
Yes
Support expand
0%
0%
0%
  Providers  
  •  
% Providers with experience
0.33
0.93
No data
  Community  
  •  
Size of Developer Team
Moderate
Large
Moderate
  •  
Support Team / Community
Moderate
Large
Moderate. Some developer resources on Wiki and GitHub.
  •  
Partnerships / Alliances / Size
Large
EEA - 150+ companies
Moderate
  Updates  
  •  
Frequency of Updates
Quarterly
High
High
  •  
Future Planned Work
Cobalt Algorithm
v3.5
Bug Fixes
Assessment expand
0%
0%
0%
  General  
  •  
Maturity
Initially released in 2012. Whitepaper released in 2017 with commercial applications
Live first in July 2015 (first public blockchain)

First stable release March 2016
Sawtooth 1.0 released in Nov 2017
  •  
Governance
Ripple Labs
Ethereum Developers
Linux Foundation - Hyperledger Project

On-chain Governance
  •  
Enterprise Focus
Strong focus, as their core product offerings cater to global banking solutions.
Moderate Focus. Through forks, Quorum and Enterprise Ethereum Alliance
Strong Focus
  •  
Production Ready
Yes
Yes
Yes
  •  
Website
Website link
Link
Link
Architecture expand
0%
0%
0%
  Security  
  •  
Security model
Transactions are confirmed and validated through validator nodes.
No data encryption or channel partition and is public.

Merkle Patricia Trie Data structure
SGX / PoET

All transactions are signed by known identities.
  •  
Permissions
Permissioned
Permissionless
Permissioned, Permissionless depending on application
  •  
Privacy
Transaction information on the ledger is public, but payment information is not.
Limited (zk-SNARKs, Ring signatures)
Configrable permissions for any node cluster within the network
  Algorithms  
  •  
Consensus
Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm

70+ validators
PoW & PoS
PoET
Dynamic, Pluggable Consensus Algorithms
  Efficiency  
  •  
Transaction Time
Fast
Moderate
Fast
  •  
Block Confirmation Time
TBD
~12 blocks
Varies
  Development  
  •  
Proprietary Codebase
Open source with proprietary applications
Open Source
Open Source
  General  
  •  
Blockchain / DLT type
Permissioned Network, Public Architecture
Public with Private Forks
Federated / Consortium, Permissioned Network
  •  
Modularity
Yes
Generic, with DApp and Smart Contract support for wider applications
Modular Architecture. Incorporates IoT Sensors that can broaden the use case.
  •  
Scalability
1500 TPS with potential of tens of thousands through Ripple Payment Channels
limited by PoW

currently supports a maximum of 15 TPS
1000 TPS. Built to be scalable in the way that consensus algorithms can be changed, applications are separate from the core system, and transactions can occur in parallel.
  •  
Storage Capacity
Large
Varies
Varies
TCO expand
0%
0%
0%
  Utilities  
  •  
Energy Consumption
Low
Low
Low
  Change Management  
  •  
Ease of Integration in Legacy Systems
Easy
Hard
Varies
  •  
Difficulty to Use
Easy
Moderate
Easy
  Maintenance  
  •  
Required ongoing Support
Low
Yes
Yes
  Pricing  
  •  
Cost to Use
Varies
Low
Low-Moderate
Integration expand
0%
0%
0%
  Licensing  
  •  
Licensing
ISC
Varous licenses for different parts of code
Apache 2.0
  industry focus  
  •  
Industry
Financial Services
Cross-industry
Cross-industry
  Developers  
  •  
Development Environment (Languages/SDKs)
C/C++, Java, node.js , Go
Golang, C++, Rust, Python, Solidity
Python, JavaScript, Go, C++, Java
  Third Party Support  
  •  
API Support
Yes
Yes
Yes
Market Presence expand
0%
0%
0%
  Engagements  
  •  
% share of engagements
0.04
0.52
No data
  Uses  
  •  
Number of Use Cases / Implementations
Large
Large
Moderate
  Industry Focus  
  •  
Retail
No
No
Yes
  •  
Finance
Yes
No
Yes
  •  
Logistics
No
No
Yes
  •  
Health Care
No
No
Yes
  •  
Government
Yes
No
Yes
  •  
Agriculture
No
No
Yes
  •  
Entertainment
No
Yes
No
  •  
Automotive
No
No
Yes

Matrix Score

  •  
  •  
  • The Linux Foundation
  • Ethereum Foundation
  • The Linux Foundation
  •  
  • 1 st
  • 5 th
  • 1 st
X
Login to access your personal profile

Forgot your Password?
X
Signup with linkedin
X

Registered, but not activated? click here (resend activation link)

Login to access your personal profile

Receive new comparison alerts

Show me as community member

I agree to your Terms of services

GDPR