Compare Waterfall vs Polygon

Waterfall vs Polygon Scalability

Real-time TPS (1H)

Waterfall TPS is 99.99% lower than Polygon TPS

Waterfall logo
0.0014 tx/s
Polygon logo
56.25 tx/s

Data from Chainspect

Max TPS (100 blocks)

Waterfall max TPS is 76X higher than Polygon max TPS

Waterfall logo
32,434 tx/s
Polygon logo
429.1 tx/s

Data from Chainspect

Max Theoretical TPS

Waterfall max theoretical TPS is 58X higher than Polygon max theoretical TPS

Waterfall logo
41,666 tx/s
Polygon logo
714.3 tx/s

Data from Chainspect

Transaction Volume (1H)

Waterfall transaction volume is 99.99% lower than Polygon transaction volume

Waterfall logo
5 txns
Polygon logo
203K txns

Data from Chainspect

Block Time (1H)

Waterfall block time is 452X longer than Polygon block time

Waterfall logo
15m 4s
Polygon logo
2s

Data from Chainspect

Finality

Waterfall finality is 4.8X longer than Polygon finality

Waterfall logo
24s
Polygon logo
5s

Data from Chainspect

Type

Waterfall is a layer 1 blockchain, while Polygon is a sidechain

Waterfall logo
Layer 1 blockchain
Polygon logo
Sidechain

Data from Chainspect

New

Total Transactions

Waterfall has 99.61% fewer total transactions than Polygon

Waterfall logo
22.9M txns
Polygon logo
5.88B txns

Data from Chainspect

Launch Date

Waterfall was launched 4 years after Polygon

Waterfall logo
Jul 17, 2024
Polygon logo
May 30, 2020

Data from Chainspect

Waterfall vs Polygon Decentralization

Nakamoto Coefficient

Waterfall has no data, while Polygon Nakamoto Coefficient is 5

Waterfall logo
—
Polygon logo
5

Data from Chainspect

Validators

Waterfall has 1,097X more validators than Polygon

Waterfall logo
114,100
Polygon logo
104

Data from Chainspect

Stake

Waterfall stake is 99.85% lower than Polygon stake

Waterfall logo
$884.9K
Polygon logo
$601.3M

Data from Chainspect

Consensus Mechanism

Waterfall and Polygon are both PoS

Waterfall logo
Proof of Stake (PoS)
Polygon logo
Proof of Stake (PoS)

Data from Chainspect

Governance

Waterfall council governance is worse than Polygon off-chain governance

Waterfall logo
Council
Polygon logo
Off-chain

Data from Chainspect

Waterfall vs Polygon Developer Activity

Developers

Waterfall has 99.22% fewer developers than Polygon

Waterfall logo
13
Polygon logo
1,686

Data from Chainspect

Repos

Waterfall has 94.73% fewer repos than Polygon

Waterfall logo
8
Polygon logo
152

Data from Chainspect

Commits

Waterfall has 99.61% fewer commits than Polygon

Waterfall logo
242
Polygon logo
62,687

Data from Chainspect

Stars

Waterfall has 99.96% fewer stars than Polygon

Waterfall logo
3
Polygon logo
9,260

Data from Chainspect

Watchers

Waterfall has 99.88% fewer watchers than Polygon

Waterfall logo
2
Polygon logo
1,735

Data from Chainspect

Waterfall vs Polygon Financials New

Chain Revenue

Waterfall chain revenue is 99.99% lower than Polygon chain revenue

Waterfall logo
$0.009219
Polygon logo
$38.8K

Data from Chainspect

Average Transaction Fee

Waterfall average transaction fee is 99.98% lower than Polygon average transaction fee

Waterfall logo
$0.0000008086
Polygon logo
$0.007426

Data from Chainspect

Price

Waterfall price is 99.85% lower than Polygon price

Waterfall logo
$0.0002449
Polygon logo
$0.1737

Data from Chainspect

Market Cap

Waterfall has no data, while Polygon market cap is $1.83B

Waterfall logo
—
Polygon logo
$1.83B

Data from Chainspect

Waterfall vs Polygon Real-Time TPS Chart

Loading Data

Other Comparisons

About Blockchains

About Waterfall

Waterfall is a highly scalable and decentralized BlockDAG EVM-compatible Layer 1 protocol. Low transaction fees and EVM compatibility make Waterfall the platform of choice for Dapps.

About Polygon

Polygon, formerly Matic Network, is a blockchain platform designed to establish a multi-chain system compatible with Ethereum. It employs a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism similar to Ethereum for on-chain transactions, with its native token being POL. Functioning as a "layer two" or "sidechain" scaling solution alongside Ethereum, Polygon facilitates quicker transactions and lower fees. Its inception aimed to tackle Ethereum's major challenges, including high fees, subpar user experience, and limited transaction throughput, aspiring to create an "Ethereum's internet of blockchains" or a multi-chain ecosystem of Ethereum-compatible blockchains.

Blockchains Socials

Waterfall Socials

Polygon Socials