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
  • + 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
  • + 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
  • - 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
  • - Still a while before large scale viability
  • - Controversey with copying Ethereum's platform
  • - Not targeted for Private Enterprise use
  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
Modular Blockchain Platform, released by Hyperledger and championed by Intel.

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
Ripple (XRP)
None
Tron (TRX)
  Logic  
  •  
Smart Contract Functionality
No
Yes
Yes
Support expand
0%
0%
0%
  Providers  
  •  
% Providers with experience
0.33
No data
no data
  Community  
  •  
Size of Developer Team
Moderate
Moderate
Large in house team
  •  
Support Team / Community
Moderate
Moderate. Some developer resources on Wiki and GitHub.
Modearte. Some developer resources on Wiki and GitHub. Active telegram group.
  •  
Partnerships / Alliances / Size
Large
Moderate
Moderate
  Updates  
  •  
Frequency of Updates
Quarterly
High
Moderate
  •  
Future Planned Work
Cobalt Algorithm
Bug Fixes
Great Voyage 2020-2021: focus on ICO capabilities, dividend payments, managing supporters and measuring income.
Assessment expand
0%
0%
0%
  General  
  •  
Maturity
Initially released in 2012. Whitepaper released in 2017 with commercial applications
Sawtooth 1.0 released in Nov 2017
TRON ICO: August 2017
TRON testnet: March 2018
TRON mainnet: June 2018
  •  
Governance
Ripple Labs
Linux Foundation - Hyperledger Project

On-chain Governance
TRON Foundation. TRON Super Representatives upon main net launch
  •  
Enterprise Focus
Strong focus, as their core product offerings cater to global banking solutions.
Strong Focus
Not enterprise focused, but has the capabilities to support adoption
  •  
Production Ready
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Website
Website link
Link
Link
Architecture expand
0%
0%
0%
  Security  
  •  
Security model
Transactions are confirmed and validated through validator nodes.
SGX / PoET

All transactions are signed by known identities.
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
Permissioned, Permissionless depending on application

Permissionless
  •  
Privacy
Transaction information on the ledger is public, but payment information is not.
Configrable permissions for any node cluster within the network
Based on zero knowledge proof. Hides the send, receipt address and transfer amount.
  Algorithms  
  •  
Consensus
Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm

70+ validators
PoET
Dynamic, Pluggable Consensus Algorithms
Fast Paxos PoS variant.

The consensus of TRON adopts a three-step strategy.
  Efficiency  
  •  
Transaction Time
Fast
Fast
Moderate
  •  
Block Confirmation Time
TBD
Varies
Fast
  Development  
  •  
Proprietary Codebase
Open source with proprietary applications
Open Source
Open source but goverened by the TRON organization
  General  
  •  
Blockchain / DLT type
Permissioned Network, Public Architecture
Federated / Consortium, Permissioned Network
Public
  •  
Modularity
Yes
Modular Architecture. Incorporates IoT Sensors that can broaden the use case.
Similar to Ethereum:
Generic, with DApp and Smart Contract support for wider applications
  •  
Scalability
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.
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
Large
Varies
Varies
TCO expand
0%
0%
0%
  Utilities  
  •  
Energy Consumption
Low
Low
Low - Moderate
  Change Management  
  •  
Ease of Integration in Legacy Systems
Easy
Varies
Hard
  •  
Difficulty to Use
Easy
Easy
Moderate
  Maintenance  
  •  
Required ongoing Support
Low
Yes
Yes
  Pricing  
  •  
Cost to Use
Varies
Low-Moderate
Low
Integration expand
0%
0%
0%
  Licensing  
  •  
Licensing
ISC
Apache 2.0
GPL
  industry focus  
  •  
Industry
Financial Services
Cross-industry
Entertainment Industry. Focused on consumer dApps.
  Developers  
  •  
Development Environment (Languages/SDKs)
C/C++, Java, node.js , Go
Python, JavaScript, Go, C++, Java
Java, Scala, C++, Python, Go
  Third Party Support  
  •  
API Support
Yes
Yes
In Development
Market Presence expand
0%
0%
0%
  Engagements  
  •  
% share of engagements
0.04
No data
no data
  Uses  
  •  
Number of Use Cases / Implementations
Large
Moderate
Moderate
  Industry Focus  
  •  
Retail
No
Yes
No
  •  
Finance
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Logistics
No
Yes
No
  •  
Health Care
No
Yes
No
  •  
Government
Yes
Yes
No
  •  
Agriculture
No
Yes
No
  •  
Entertainment
No
No
Yes
  •  
Automotive
No
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