Blockchain for Enterprise comparison & reviews

Summary
Rank
4th 3rd 5th
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
  • + Modular Focus (customized transaction rules, consensus algorithms, permissioning)
  • + Part of the Hyperledger Ecosystem
  • + Harnesses IoT technology to provide additional data
  • + 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
Cons
  • - Open source codebase
  • - Very young in development
  • - Still requires many bug fixes
  • - 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
  Content  
  •  
Overview
Modular Blockchain Platform, released by Hyperledger and championed by Intel.

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.
Applications expand
0%
0%
0%
  Crypto Assets  
  •  
Cryptocurrency
None
Ripple (XRP)
Ether (ETH)
  Logic  
  •  
Smart Contract Functionality
Yes
No
Yes
Support expand
0%
0%
0%
  Providers  
  •  
% Providers with experience
No data
0.33
0.93
  Community  
  •  
Size of Developer Team
Moderate
Moderate
Large
  •  
Support Team / Community
Moderate. Some developer resources on Wiki and GitHub.
Moderate
Large
  •  
Partnerships / Alliances / Size
Moderate
Large
EEA - 150+ companies
  Updates  
  •  
Frequency of Updates
High
Quarterly
High
  •  
Future Planned Work
Bug Fixes
Cobalt Algorithm
v3.5
Assessment expand
0%
0%
0%
  General  
  •  
Maturity
Sawtooth 1.0 released in Nov 2017
Initially released in 2012. Whitepaper released in 2017 with commercial applications
Live first in July 2015 (first public blockchain)

First stable release March 2016
  •  
Governance
Linux Foundation - Hyperledger Project

On-chain Governance
Ripple Labs
Ethereum Developers
  •  
Enterprise Focus
Strong Focus
Strong focus, as their core product offerings cater to global banking solutions.
Moderate Focus. Through forks, Quorum and Enterprise Ethereum Alliance
  •  
Production Ready
Yes
Yes
Yes
  •  
Website
Link
Website link
Link
Architecture expand
0%
0%
0%
  Security  
  •  
Security model
SGX / PoET

All transactions are signed by known identities.
Transactions are confirmed and validated through validator nodes.
No data encryption or channel partition and is public.

Merkle Patricia Trie Data structure
  •  
Permissions
Permissioned, Permissionless depending on application
Permissioned
Permissionless
  •  
Privacy
Configrable permissions for any node cluster within the network
Transaction information on the ledger is public, but payment information is not.
Limited (zk-SNARKs, Ring signatures)
  Algorithms  
  •  
Consensus
PoET
Dynamic, Pluggable Consensus Algorithms
Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm

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

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

Matrix Score

  •  
  •  
  • R3
  • Ripple
  • Ethereum Foundation
  •  
  • 4 th
  • 3 rd
  • 5 th
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