Please check out latest news, expert comments and industry insights from Coinspeaker's contributors.
Due to the way its consensus protocol operates, EOS is considered far more centralized than Ethereum.
On the surface, Ethereum and EOS.IO appear similar: they both serve the purpose of executing smart contracts, in the form of transaction protocols and dApps. However, this is where their similarities end, as the two platforms are vastly different in the way they function.
The smart contracts on EOS are usually programmed in C++, though any other language that compiles into WebAssembly would work. Ethereum, meanwhile, depends solely on Solidity – its own purpose-designed language that programmers would need to learn in order to use the platform. From a developer’s perspective without dedicated blockchain experience, creating smart contracts would be easier on EOS.
In terms of the platforms’ native cryptos, ETH is far more accessible – as the second most popular cryptocurrency, it’s supported by the vast majority of crypto wallets and exchanges.
EOS, meanwhile, is a relative newcomer and fairly difficult to integrate into an existing application, hence most multi-asset hot wallets don’t support it. However, there are exceptions: OWNR Wallet has recently succeeded in adding EOS to the list of supported coins, bringing the total number to eleven. It’s also possible to purchase EOS with fiat directly through the OWNR app or website, using a Visa, MasterCard, UnionPay, or SEPA.
Efficiency and Scalability
Currently, Ethereum can handle an estimated 15 to 30 transactions per second (TPS), with an average transaction confirmation time of around 20 seconds. As far as transaction processing speed goes in general, that’s fairly slow: for comparison, Visa averages 1,700 TPS.
Meanwhile, EOS promises a massive 10,000 TPS. Although in reality, this number is actually closer to 4,000, this is still a major edge over Ethereum. Well aware of its scalability issues, Ethereum recently announced a major update – Ethereum 2.0, due in November – intended to improve the platform’s efficiency.
The main reason for such a significant TPS difference between Ethereum and EOS is that the two platforms use different consensus protocols.
Security and Costs
Ethereum uses a Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus protocol, in which each of the several thousand nodes has to confirm a transaction. Although slow and difficult to scale, this consensus model is considered to be fully decentralized and entirely secure. The large amount of processing power needed to complete validation in this model is responsible for the high fees on the platform – something the 2.0 update aims to address.
EOS chose a different route, opting for the Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) protocol. DPoS involves just 21 validating nodes, out of which only 15 need to reach consensus in order for a transaction to be processed. This grants EOS the ability to process thousands of transactions per second, technically without any fees: users stake their tokens and regain possession of them once they’ve stopped using the platform’s resources.
However. favorably EOS appears to compare with Ethereum, the former’s superior scalability comes at the cost of decreased security. Due to the way its consensus protocol operates, EOS is considered far more centralized than Ethereum – and therefore, less secure and somewhat at odds with the concept of decentralization and anonymity that underpins blockchain as a whole.