Blockchain for Enterprise comparison & reviews

Summary
Rank
1st 1st 6th
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
  • + Can support effective private networks
  • + Built for enterprise implementations
  • + Applies the hyperledger fabric to its business focused application
  • + Can support effective private networks
  • + Built for enterprise implementations
  • + Strong, professional backing of contributors
  • + Developing quickly with lots of capital and community presence
  • + Positioned well in the Entertainment Space as the market leader
  • + Development focus is for large commercial adoption
Cons
  • - Only centralized aspect is the Certificate Authority (CA) who issues certificates to eligible parties
  • - Support dependent on IBM’s help centre
  • - Still relatively young in development
  • - Only centralized aspect is the Certificate Authority (CA) who issues certificates to eligible parties
  • - Support dependent on IBM’s help centre
  • - Still relatively young in development
  • - Still a while before large scale viability
  • - Controversey with copying Ethereum's platform
  • - Not targeted for Private Enterprise use
  Content  
  •  
Overview
Modular Blockchain Environment using Hyperledger Fabric, delivered via IBM Cloud
Modular blockchain platform architecture allowing plug-and-play implementations of various functions. Hosts any mainstream language for smart contract development.
The Tron Protocol aims to host entertainment applications and digital content on a decentralized platform fuelled by the TRX token economy. Developed originally on the Ethereum protocol, Tron has invested significant development effort to create their own, scalable protocol and launch their main net in June 2018.
Applications expand
0%
0%
0%
  Crypto Assets  
  •  
Cryptocurrency
None
None
Tron (TRX)
  Logic  
  •  
Smart Contract Functionality
Yes
Yes
Yes
Support expand
0%
0%
0%
  Providers  
  •  
% Providers with experience
93% (Hyperledger)
0.93
no data
  Community  
  •  
Size of Developer Team
Large
Large
Large in house team
  •  
Support Team / Community
Large. IBM has a direct support line.
Large. IBM has a direct support line.
Modearte. Some developer resources on Wiki and GitHub. Active telegram group.
  •  
Partnerships / Alliances / Size
Large. Latest: Veridium Labs, Stellar - Generating and Tracking Carbon Credits on the Blockchain
200+
Moderate
  Updates  
  •  
Frequency of Updates
Frequent
Quarterly
Moderate
  •  
Future Planned Work
Scale into multiple industries
V1.2
Great Voyage 2020-2021: focus on ICO capabilities, dividend payments, managing supporters and measuring income.
Assessment expand
0%
0%
0%
  General  
  •  
Maturity
IBM unveiled its “Blockchain as a Service” offering in March 2017.
First release: July 2017


TRON ICO: August 2017
TRON testnet: March 2018
TRON mainnet: June 2018
  •  
Governance
IBM Proprietary BaaS Platform

Linux Foundation
Linux Foundation - Hyperledger Project Contributors
TRON Foundation. TRON Super Representatives upon main net launch
  •  
Enterprise Focus
Strong Focus. Major contributor to the Hyperledger Fabric project.
Strong Focus
Not enterprise focused, but has the capabilities to support adoption
  •  
Production Ready
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Website
Link
Link
Link
Architecture expand
0%
0%
0%
  Security  
  •  
Security model
Similar security models to Hyperledger Fabric, but also incorporates the IBM Cloud Services as an added security layer when using the platform.
Membership Service Provider - pluggable interface that supports customizable credential architectures and certificate authorities

Concrete identity format
User credential validation
User credential revocation
Signature generation and verification
Public Blockchain with security features built in.

Lamport digital signature algorithm. Claims to be resistant to quantum computer attacks.

Customized P2P network with data storage encryption, location transparency, source nontraceability

Merkle Patricia Trie data structure
  •  
Permissions
Permissioned
Consortium

Permissioned, private network.

Permissionless
  •  
Privacy
Private channels
Private Channels
Based on zero knowledge proof. Hides the send, receipt address and transfer amount.
  Algorithms  
  •  
Consensus
Plugable consensus (PBFT)
Multiple options:

Pluggable Framework
No-op (no consensus)
PBFT
Fast Paxos PoS variant.

The consensus of TRON adopts a three-step strategy.
  Efficiency  
  •  
Transaction Time
Varies
Varies
Moderate
  •  
Block Confirmation Time
Varies
Varies
Fast
  Development  
  •  
Proprietary Codebase
Hyperledger Fabric is open source. IBM Blockchain is a proprietary layer that sits on top of Hyperledger as a simple to use platform accessing the blockchain
Open Source
Open source but goverened by the TRON organization
  General  
  •  
Blockchain / DLT type
Federated / Consortium, Permissioned Network
Federated / Consortium, Permissioned Network
Public
  •  
Modularity
Plug + Play Architecture

Easy to operate software platform to build out use case, test, and implement
Modular Architecture is a core focus of Platform
Similar to Ethereum:
Generic, with DApp and Smart Contract support for wider applications
  •  
Scalability
Supports 1000 TPS. Designed for high throughput business applications. Scales relative to Hyperledger Fabric new developments.
1000 TPS capacity for now. Developed with scaling in mind. Provides flexibility in size and throughput depending on the implementation.

A Performance and Scalability Workgroup exists within the community to discuss, research, and identify key use cases and metrics for all blockchains.
Currently supports 15 TPS as it is on the Ethereum platform. Will be able to support up to 1000 TPS once main net launches
  •  
Storage Capacity
500 transactions per block
500 transactions per block
Varies
TCO expand
0%
0%
0%
  Utilities  
  •  
Energy Consumption
Low
Varies
Low - Moderate
  Change Management  
  •  
Ease of Integration in Legacy Systems
Easy
Varies
Hard
  •  
Difficulty to Use
Low
Low-Moderate
Moderate
  Maintenance  
  •  
Required ongoing Support
Yes
Yes
Yes
  Pricing  
  •  
Cost to Use
Free starter version, then $1000/month + $1000/month for each peer deployed
Free
Low
Integration expand
0%
0%
0%
  Licensing  
  •  
Licensing
Apache 2.0
Apache 2.0
GPL
  industry focus  
  •  
Industry
Cross-industry
Industry Agnostic
Entertainment Industry. Focused on consumer dApps.
  Developers  
  •  
Development Environment (Languages/SDKs)
Execution Runtimes (four are currently supported)
JavaScript SDK
Command Line Interface
REST Server
LoopBack Connector
Playground Web User Interface
Yeoman code generator
VSCode and Atom editor plugins
Golang, Java, NodeJS, Python
Java, Scala, C++, Python, Go
  Third Party Support  
  •  
API Support
Yes
Yes
In Development
Market Presence expand
0%
0%
0%
  Engagements  
  •  
% share of engagements
12% (Hyperledger)
0.12
no data
  Uses  
  •  
Number of Use Cases / Implementations
Large
Large
Moderate
  Industry Focus  
  •  
Retail
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Finance
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Logistics
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Health Care
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Government
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Agriculture
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Entertainment
Yes
Yes
Yes
  •  
Automotive
Yes
Yes
No

Matrix Score

  •  
  •  
  • IBM
  • The Linux Foundation
  • TRON Foundation
  •  
  • 1 st
  • 1 st
  • 6 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