Blockchain for Enterprise comparison & reviews

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

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

First stable release March 2016
Initially released in 2012. Whitepaper released in 2017 with commercial applications
Sawtooth 1.0 released in Nov 2017
  •  
Governance
Ethereum Developers
Ripple Labs
Linux Foundation - Hyperledger Project

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

Merkle Patricia Trie Data structure
Transactions are confirmed and validated through validator nodes.
SGX / PoET

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

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

currently supports a maximum of 15 TPS
1500 TPS with potential of tens of thousands through Ripple Payment Channels
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
Varies
Large
Varies
TCO expand
0%
0%
0%
  Utilities  
  •  
Energy Consumption
Low
Low
Low
  Change Management  
  •  
Ease of Integration in Legacy Systems
Hard
Easy
Varies
  •  
Difficulty to Use
Moderate
Easy
Easy
  Maintenance  
  •  
Required ongoing Support
Yes
Low
Yes
  Pricing  
  •  
Cost to Use
Low
Varies
Low-Moderate
Integration expand
0%
0%
0%
  Licensing  
  •  
Licensing
Varous licenses for different parts of code
ISC
Apache 2.0
  industry focus  
  •  
Industry
Cross-industry
Financial Services
Cross-industry
  Developers  
  •  
Development Environment (Languages/SDKs)
Golang, C++, Rust, Python, Solidity
C/C++, Java, node.js , Go
Python, JavaScript, Go, C++, Java
  Third Party Support  
  •  
API Support
Yes
Yes
Yes
Market Presence expand
0%
0%
0%
  Engagements  
  •  
% share of engagements
0.52
0.04
No data
  Uses  
  •  
Number of Use Cases / Implementations
Large
Large
Moderate
  Industry Focus  
  •  
Retail
No
No
Yes
  •  
Finance
No
Yes
Yes
  •  
Logistics
No
No
Yes
  •  
Health Care
No
No
Yes
  •  
Government
No
Yes
Yes
  •  
Agriculture
No
No
Yes
  •  
Entertainment
Yes
No
No
  •  
Automotive
No
No
Yes

Matrix Score

  •  
  •  
  • The Linux Foundation
  • Ripple
  • The Linux Foundation
  •  
  • 1 st
  • 3 rd
  • 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