Writing
Writing
Asset Assessments
Asset Assessments
A Comparative Layer 2 Platform Primer:
Polkadot vS. Cosmos
Similarities:
Beginning with the similarities shared by Polkadot and Cosmos, both are proof-of-stake blockchains created on the grounds of enabling greater interoperability between other blockchain projects referred to as parachains on Polkadot and standalone projects on Cosmos. On both networks, sub-chain transactions occur using their respective ecosystem’s tokens rather than the networks’ core tokens; DOT on Polkadot and ATOM on Cosmos. These two inflationary assets are both used as part of the staking and governance processes that orchestrate their specific environments.
Visualizing the layout of both networks, Polkadot serves as a framework for underlying parachains that cross-communicate via a single base platform known as the ‘Relay Chain’ much in the same way that Cosmos presents itself as a hub for interoperability between the independent blockchains utilizing its network.
While both platforms do not support application functionality outside of enabling cross-chain interoperability, and the provision of a framework for consensus, finality, and voting logic, Polkadot adds to this list by ensuring security across its network. Currently, Cosmos does not provide inter-chain security like Polkadot but updates slated for late 2022 aim to incorporate this feature as well.
Differences:
Some comparative differences between both blockchains lie in key metrics including transactions per second (tps) and the scale of their validator pools. Polkadot is capable of performing 1,000 tps secured by up to 1,000 validators while Cosmos can process up to 10,000 tps under the security of 150 validators. The scaling differences between both blockchains extend beyond their tps stats when considering the number of sub-chains each can potentially support. Polkadot for instance can support up to 100 parachains with slots determined by DOT-denominated auctions for new slots while Cosmos theoretically does not have a limit.
The differentiation in the scale of projects supported is made more glaring by the fact that Polkadot has yet to truly activate its cross-chain communication features. Despite the edge Cosmos holds in both expandability and max transactions per second stats, from a price analysis standpoint, Q1 reports issued by Messari for 2022 demonstrate a greater degree of institutional interest in Polkadot based on reported holdings.
Published: September 7, 2022
A Comparative Layer 2 Platform Primer: Polkadot vS. Cosmos
Similarities:
Beginning with the similarities shared by Polkadot and Cosmos, both are proof-of-stake blockchains created on the grounds of enabling greater interoperability between other blockchain projects referred to as parachains on Polkadot and standalone projects on Cosmos. On both networks, sub-chain transactions occur using their respective ecosystem’s tokens rather than the networks’ core tokens; DOT on Polkadot and ATOM on Cosmos. These two inflationary assets are both used as part of the staking and governance processes that orchestrate their specific environments.
Visualizing the layout of both networks, Polkadot serves as a framework for underlying parachains that cross-communicate via a single base platform known as the ‘Relay Chain’ much in the same way that Cosmos presents itself as a hub for interoperability between the independent blockchains utilizing its network.
While both platforms do not support application functionality outside of enabling cross-chain interoperability, and the provision of a framework for consensus, finality, and voting logic, Polkadot adds to this list by ensuring security across its network. Currently, Cosmos does not provide inter-chain security like Polkadot but updates slated for late 2022 aim to incorporate this feature as well.
Differences:
Some comparative differences between both blockchains lie in key metrics including transactions per second (tps) and the scale of their validator pools. Polkadot is capable of performing 1,000 tps secured by up to 1,000 validators while Cosmos can process up to 10,000 tps under the security of 150 validators. The scaling differences between both blockchains extend beyond their tps stats when considering the number of sub-chains each can potentially support. Polkadot for instance can support up to 100 parachains with slots determined by DOT-denominated auctions for new slots while Cosmos theoretically does not have a limit.
The differentiation in the scale of projects supported is made more glaring by the fact that Polkadot has yet to truly activate its cross-chain communication features. Despite the edge Cosmos holds in both expandability and max transactions per second stats, from a price analysis standpoint, Q1 reports issued by Messari for 2022 demonstrate a greater degree of institutional interest in Polkadot based on reported holdings.
Published: September 7, 2022