Hyperledger vs Corda R3 vs Ethereum is a comparison that outlines the magnitude and proficiency of the Distributed ledger technologies. While the three frameworks showcase the benefits and applications of distributed ledger technologies, they differ a great deal when it comes to vision as well as a possible field of application.
Hyperledger and Ethereum come with different concrete use case, whereas Corda R3 derives most of its applications in the financial services industry. In this brief analysis, we will try to demystify the three blockchain applications as they continue to take the various sectors by storm given their diverse applications.
What is Ethereum?
Before demystifying what stands out in the Hyperledger vs. ethereum battle of supremacy, it would be better to try and understand what the three distributed ledger technologies stand for.
A brainchild of Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum is an open software application based on blockchain technology that seeks to provide a framework for developers to come up with decentralized applications. Ethereum blockchain runs the programming code upon which decentralized applications are created’.
A decentralized application is a special type of application that runs on a peer-to-peer network rather than a single computer as is the case with many applications. In addition, they are a unique set of software applications designed to exist on the internet and not controlled by a single entity.
Ethereum boasts of the second largest market cap in the cryptocurrency world which explains its edge in the Hyperledger vs. ethereum battle. The blockchain project continues to elicit strong interest from investors in part because of its application in powering decentralized applications.
Ethereum has continued to grow in popularity in part because it enables developers to come up with smart contracts that execute tasks when certain conditions are met’. A developer could configure a smart contract such that it can pay $20 when a writer submits an article on say Blockchain technology after a set period.
Ether is Ethereum’s project native currency that serves two key purposes. The cryptocurrency compensates people for full mining nodes that power the network. The crypto is also used’ to pay people under smart contract conditions.
Blockchain database does not have a central server for keeping track of every transaction and exchange that takes place. All cryptocurrencies including ethereum native currency Ether and decentralized applications run on some application of blockchain technology.
Ethereum seeks to empower humans to come up with secure digital agreements as well as have full control of their money while harnessing the full benefits of cryptography. The blockchain project should change the way people build things in the future as well as communicate and execute various functions and tasks online.
Benefits of Ethereum DApp Platform
Decentralized applications built on top of Ethereum blockchain offer the following synergies
- Immutability: No one can make changes to data inserted in ethereum blockchain applications such as decentralized applications.
- Tamper Proof: apps on the ethereum network are formed on the principle of consensus which makes censorship impossible.
- Security: There is no central point that calls the shots. Applications built on top of Ethereum blockchain are well protected’ against hacking or other fraudulent activities
- Zero Downtime: Apps can never experience downtime online as any central server does not host them
What is Hyperledger?
Before delving into Hyperledger vs. Ethereum battle, it would be wise first to have a basic idea of what Hyperledger is all about.
Contrary to perception, Hyperledger is neither a company nor a cryptocurrency nor a blockchain. Instead, it is an open source hub, which seeks to support industrial blockchain development. One can think of it as an open source collective effort initiated to accelerate the development of cross-industry blockchain technologies.
Hyperledger is also a worldwide coordinated effort pioneered for saving money, enhancing Internet of Things, production network as well as innovation. Three sets of people fund the association: Chief individuals who pay $250k a year, general individuals who pay between $5k and $50 k year as well as associate individuals who make donations.
Linux Foundation hosts the open source blockchain hub which brings together leaders in finance as well as banking, internet of things and other emerging technologies. Hyperledger main objective is to advance cross-industry collaboration when it comes to the creation of blockchains and distributed ledgers, with the focus being on improving their performance and reliability.
Hyperledger is to integrate independent open protocols and standards for use-specific modules. The team behind the project has made it clear that they won’t build a native cryptocurrency for the project. The project began accepting proposals for incubation as well as other technologies and core elements in 2016.
The Linux Foundation is an association that brings together some of the world’s best engineers and organizations with a view of opening innovation advancement. The foundation is financed’ by charging open participation charges. Hyperledger is thus, but a subset of numerous undertakings run by the Linux Foundation.
Rather than endorse one single blockchain standard, the Linux Foundation encourages a more collaborative approach for developing blockchain technologies as part of Hyperledger.
Fabric 1.0 Hyperledger project is simply an establishment for the creation of blockchain disseminated record applications. Just like other blockchain technologies, it comes with a ledger and uses smart contracts allowing it to act as a system in which people can manage transactions.
The announcement of production ledger, Hyperledger fabric, in July of 2017 marked a significant milestone as one of the most critical Hyperledger projects. The project went on to gain steam in the Initial Coin offering market.
Hyperledger Fabric also comes with multiple pluggable options. For instance, it allows ledger data to be stored in multiple formats. Creation of channels also allows participants to create a separate ledger of transactions.
In addition to Fabric Sawtooth, Indy, And Iroha and Burrow are other Hyperledger most high profile projects. Given the amount of projects that Hyperledger currently supports, the Linux Foundation continues to underscore its commitment to collaborating independent efforts with the aim of advancing open protocols and standards.
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum Differences
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum debate becomes much clear when one takes a closer look at the intent behind the two projects. Ethereum seeks to make it easy for developers to come up with smart contracts for performing various tasks. Hyperledger, on the other hand, is an open-source collaborative project leveraging blockchain technology to support multiple implementations of components.
Ethereum blockchain works with generalized protocol allowing everything to run on the network. Hyperledger on its part acts as a software whereby people can develop personalized blockchains for tending to various needs.
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum won’t be complete without first scrutinizing the confidentiality levels of the two projects. Hyperledger takes privacy and confidentiality to another level as only people involved in a given project can access data in a network.
Hyperledger thus gives businesses and individuals the flexibility to make transactions visible to only a select subgroup by using encryption keys.
Ethereum, on the other hand, is a transparent blockchain project whereby every transaction or details of a project are kept’ in the public domain for everyone to see in a network. All transactions carried out on an ethereum blockchain are visible for everyone to see
Ethereum can be both private and public, whereby anyone can participate in the network at any given time. Hyperledger on its part comes with a predefined community of participants, allowed access to a network. What this means is that one requires permission which can come in the form of encryption keys to access data in the network.
Ethereum being a transparent blockchain project essentially means everyone in the project takes part in decision making. For a transaction to be complete in the network, all people in the blockchain must reach consensus, irrespective of a node being part of the transaction.
Ethereum achieves consensus by means of Proof of Stake algorithm whereby all nodes must agree, and all of them must have access to entries recorded.
Hyperledger comes with a different type of consensus whereby nodes are allowed’ to choose between no consensus needed and an agreement protocol. In this case, two or more parties can agree and have a significant influence on the outcome. For example, Hyperledger Fabric is using PBFT. Read more about the different consensus algorithms, here.
Another critical difference in the Hyperledger vs. Ethereum battle of supremacy comes down to the programming language used by the two frameworks.
Ethereum smart contracts rely on high-level oriented programming language dubbed Solidity. Hyperledger on its part relies on ‘chaincode’ which is a synonym for intelligent contract and handles business logic agreed by members in the network. The chain codes are written in a programming language developed by Google called Golang.
The Linux Foundation has already made clear, and it is not open to the idea of developing a cryptocurrency to power the network, hence no requirement for mining. The lack of a native currency also allows for scalable consensus algorithm whereby the network can process at high transaction rates.
Ether digital currency on the other hand powers the Ethereum blockchain used to finance transactions on the network.
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum: Comparison
|Use Case||Popular with generalized applications and mostly used for Businesses to consumer operations||A preferred platform for business 2 business operations, mainly used in enterprises|
|Confidentially||Transparent||Highly Private thus Confidential transactions|
|Mode of Peer Participation||Can be both private and public thus a permission-less network||Being a Private Network Permission is needed to access network content|
|Consensus Mechanism||Proof of Stake algorithm as consensus is achieved through mining||Relies on Pluggable Consensus Algorithm On a Lack of Mining|
|Programming Language||Smart contracts powered by Solidity programming language||Relies On Google’s Golang Programming Language|
|Cryptocurrency||Powered by Ether native currency.||Does not an have an Inbuilt native Cryptocurrency|
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum Bottom Line
Ethereum is a unique blockchain project for people who wish to come up with decentralized applications as well as smart contracts for performing various tasks. It is thus a generic platform for any kind of application. The project, however, continues to struggle with issues of scalability as well as privacy given the underlying permission less mode of operation.
Hyperledger, on the other hand, is an ideal project for organizations and enterprises who wish to avoid scalability and privacy issues in the blockchain space. The permissioned mode of operation essentially brings about high levels of privacy due to fine-grained access control.
What is Corda?
Hyperledger vs. Corda is another battle that is taking shape given that both projects are making good use of blockchain technology in trying to revolutionize various industries.
Corda is an open source blockchain platform that enables easy management of legal contracts and other shared data between mutually trusting organizations. The platform makes it possible for a diverse range of applications to interoperate on a single network.
A brainchild of R3, a distributed database company, Corda began as a platform for enabling services in the financial sector. Upgrades and evolution of the platform have seen its capabilities and functions become of great importance in various industries.
However, the platform continues to make a name for itself in the financial sector in part because it captures the benefits of blockchain systems. When it comes to application in the financial industry, Corda has an edge over Hyperledger in the Hyperledger vs. Corda debate
Corda is mostly geared’ towards handling complex transactions in addition to restricting access to highly sensitive data. Even though the platform is inspired’ by blockchain databases and comes with many benefits of blockchain’s it is not in any way a blockchain.
Corda Use Case
To better understand Hyperledger vs. R3 it would be essential to take note of the latter’s use case.
Corda main aim is to provide people with a platform with common services while ensuring that any service built on top, is compatible with network participants. The Corda code was open-sourced in 2016 and may soon find its way into the Hyperledger project.
Corda seeks to eradicate a good number of issues that stifle transactions between businesses, by making it possible for businesses to transact via smart contracts. The use of smart contracts makes it possible for the platform to execute tasks as soon as set conditions are achieved’ without any lag time.
Corda also adheres to the highest standards of privacy and security, which explains why it continues to gain a foothold in the financial industry. In an era where the need to protect people’s data is vital, the use of blockchain solutions such as Corda continues to grow in prominence.
R3, the company behind, Corda platform has already unveiled, Corda Enterprise a commercial distribution version of Corda that meets all the demands of modern day businesses when it comes transactions.
In addition to making it easy for businesses to complete transactions, the commercial distribution platform also comes with unique features such as corporate firewalls as well as features for 24/7 support. Users can also take advantage of predictable release schedules as well as product management features.
R3 Corda Basics
To understand how Hyperledger vs. R3 differ, it would be essential to understand the Corda’s basics.
Corda architecture is one that seeks to create a global logical ledger in which all economic actors can interact and manage agreements.
The architecture includes three major visions:
Only actors with legitimate interests can access records in a Corda platform
Behavior of agreements managed by the system are described’ by a computer code, that enables legitimacy.
For widespread adoption in various industries, portions of the system is to be made open source.
Corda Key Features
- Corda prevents any unnecessary sharing of data on the blockchain as only people with legitimate need and access have access to a network.
- Corda platform enables the sharing of data in a network without the need for a central controller.
- Consensus is achieved’ at the level of individuals transacting, rather than the entire system at large
- Corda’s design comes with regulatory and supervisory observer nodes.
- Corda blockchain platforms supports a wide variety of consensus mechanism.
- Built on industry-standard tools
- Does not have a native currency.
When it comes to governance, Corda envisions itself as a permissioned blockchain that gives control of governance to R3.
Smart Contract Support
Smart contracts in Corda platform are essentially agreements whose execution is carried by computer codes working with human input. The smart contracts link business logic and business data to an associated legal process, with the aim of ensuring that financial agreements are rooted firmly in law.
The Corda platform also executes business logic through smart contract code constructed as a pure function for accepting or rejecting transactions.
Corda comes with two type of consensus:
Transaction validity. In this case, parties must reach certainty by first checking all associated contract code and come with all the required signatures.
Transaction Uniqueness. Parties must reach certainty that a transaction in question is a unique consumer of all input stated. This process involves verifying no other transaction consumes any of the agreed states.
Corda does not come with any native currency as is the case with Ethereum.
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum vs. Corda R3 Differences
The three distributed ledger technologies differ a great deal when it comes to use case as well as vision. Corda derives most of its uses cases from the financial service industry whereas Hyperledger Fabric seeks to provide a modular, extendable architecture in various industries. Ethereum, on the other hand, casts itself independent of any specific field of application.
When it comes to participation consensus in the three digital ledger technologies, two modes of operation are evident. In case anyone is allowed’ access to data or anything in the network then peer participation, in this case, is envisioned as permission-less. This mode is true with Ethereum blockchain.
However if participants in a network are chosen in advance, then the node is permissioned which is the case with Corda and Hyperledger.
When it comes to consensus, Ethereum differs from the other two. In an ethereum blockchain, all participants in a network must reach an agreement for a transaction to go through irrespective of whether a participant is part of the transaction or not.
When it comes to Fabric and Corda, consensus is more refined in that not all nodes in a network must take part in the consensus process.
Ethereum is the only one among the emerging digital ledger technologies that comes with a native cryptocurrency in the name of ether: The cryptocurrency is commonly used to pay for rewards or nodes that reach consensus.
Fabric and Corda, on the other hand, don’t need a cryptocurrency since consensus is not reached via mining. However, Fabric Hyperledger has a provision of coming up with an underlying token with Chaincode. R3 has however downplayed suggestion that it could come up with a native currency for the Corda platform.
Hyperledger vs. Ethereum vs. Corda R3: Comparison Infographic
Hyperledger vs. Corda vs. Ethereum is a comparison that should continue to gather pace with the evolution of blockchain technology as well as emergence of new applications for the emerging technology. However, it is important to note that the three digital ledger technologies differ a great deal especially on vision and use case.