Aptos VS. Fantom: Which One is Better?
Published May 20th,2023
Whether you're a seasoned investor, a tech-savvy individual, or simply curious about the potential of these digital assets, this blog aims to provide you with valuable insights to help you assess which of the two may hold the key to your crypto ambitions.
But first, we aim to provide you with a nuanced perspective that will empower you to make an informed decision regarding which crypto holds greater potential in this intriguing battle of Aptos vs Fantom.
So, get ready to unravel the intricacies of these cryptocurrencies and what makes Aptos and Fantom different from one another.
In comparing Aptos and Fantom, several key differences and similarities emerge. Aptos showcases a more sophisticated consensus algorithm, resulting in a significantly higher transaction throughput of 160k max TPS compared to Fantom's 7k TPS. Additionally, Aptos operates more validator nodes, but Fantom boasts lower transaction fees. Technologically, Aptos offers advanced features like the Jellyfish Merkle tree and the Block-STM parallel execution engine, while Fantom is EVM compatible, enabling interoperability with multiple blockchain networks. In terms of decentralization, Aptos has more validators online, while Fantom experienced a 7-hour outage. Lastly, from a tokenomics perspective, Fantom demonstrates more favorable traits, including a higher circulating supply of total supply percentage, lower inflation rate, and significant coin burning mechanisms.
Short Summary About Aptos and Fantom
Aptos
Aptos emerged as a novel blockchain platform in October 2022, aiming to mitigate scalability and energy consumption challenges commonly associated with other blockchain counterparts.
Distinguishing itself, Aptos harnesses the power of the Move programming language, developed by Facebook's Diem blockchain team, offering a secure and reliable framework for crafting intelligent contracts.
Notably, Aptos employs its own optimized block-STM data structure, streamlining the speed of block propagation and storage efficiency.
The block-STM execution engine, purpose-built for the Aptos blockchain platform, plays a pivotal role in enhancing overall performance and practicality. Its design focuses on bolstering efficiency and sustainability, positioning Aptos as an appealing choice for an array of use cases, including decentralized finance (DeFi) and non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
While still in its nascent stage, with wider adoption yet to unfold, Aptos captivates the ever-evolving blockchain landscape with its distinctive attributes and forward-thinking methodology, warranting close observation.
Fantom
Andre Cronje, a prominent figure in the blockchain space, played a pivotal role in the creation of Fantom. With his expertise and innovative approach, Fantom has emerged as a robust and scalable blockchain platform.
Fantom is built upon a unique technology known as the Fantom Opera Chain, which utilizes a directed acyclic graph (DAG) consensus mechanism. This DAG-based approach enables rapid transaction processing and high throughput, making it ideal for applications requiring quick and efficient operations. Additionally, Fantom incorporates smart contract functionality, allowing developers to create decentralized applications (dApps) with ease.
Fantom aims to address the scalability limitations of traditional blockchain networks, offering a platform that can handle a large number of transactions per second without compromising security. The network also features low fees and fast confirmation times, enhancing the overall user experience.
With its focus on providing a robust infrastructure for decentralized finance (DeFi) applications, Fantom has gained traction in the crypto community and continues to evolve as a promising player in the blockchain ecosystem.
Technological Showdown: Aptos Vs Fantom
Technology is important when it comes to blockchain networks. Often times networks with innovative technologies are easier to use. For example, Solana became very valuable because of its technology.
In this passage, we compare the technologies of Aptos and Fantom to figure out which network has better technology. There are certain metrics that we use in order to see the full picture of both cryptocurrencies.
| Technological Foundation: Aptos VS Fantom | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparison | Aptos | Fantom |
| Consensus Algorithm | Proof of Stake + BFTv4 + Bullshark | PoS + Lachesis(aBFT) |
| Max Theoretical Throughput (TPS) | 160k TPS | Over 7,000 TPS |
| Total Validators online | 108 | 64 |
| Avg. basic Transaction Fee | 0.000585 APT Or about $0.00604305 |
0.00207446 FTM or $0.0006845718 |
| Main Smart Contract Language | Move - Core | Solidity |
| Block Production Time | 0.33 Seconds | 2 seconds |
| Transaction Confirmation Time | 500 Milliseconds | 1-2 seconds |
| On-Chain Governance? | Yes | Yes |
| Other Features? |
|
|
| Modular Blockchain Architecture? | Yes | Yes |
| Minimum Required to Run a Validator | 1,000,000 APT | 500,000 FTM |
| Virtual Machine | Move Virtual Machine (MVM) | Fantom Virtual Machine (FVM) |
| Downtime History | None | 7 hrs: 2/25/2021 |
| EVM Compatibility | No | Yes |
Analysis
Now is the time to analyze Fantom and Aptos to see which is more advanced when it comes to technological capabilities and traits.
The first noticeable difference between Aptos and Fantom is the consensus algorithm. At its core, Both Aptos and Fantom have PoS consensus algorithms. However, They differ in that the consensus algorithm is also party BFT. Aptos and Fantom use different variations of Byzantine Fault Tolerance. Aptos also uses the Bullshark consensus algorithm in conjunction with BFT and PoS.
All in all, we can see that Aptos has a more sophisticated consensus algorithm, it’s comprised of 3 different sub algorithms. This is more obvious when we see the resulting max TPS.
When it comes to transaction throughput, Aptos is clearly superior to Fantom, processing 160k max TPS. Whereas Fantom processes a little more than 7k TPS.
Interestingly enough, Aptos is also running more validator nodes than Fantom. This is pretty peculiar, given the fact that it costs much less to run a fantom validator in terms of dollars.
Fantom absolutely dominates the transaction fee comparison, since it has lower TX fees than Aptos.
When it comes to technology, it is clear that Aptos is ahead of Fantom, since Aptos also produces blocks about 6 times as fast as Fantom. Its transaction confirmation time is also twice as fast.
Aptos also has other sophisticated technologies such as the Jellyfish Merkle tree that boasts throughput and the Block-STM parallel execution engine. The Block-STM engine allows Aptos to process smart-contracts and transactions in a parallel manner, allowing it to reach tremendously high throughput.
Furthermore, there is one advantage that Fantom has, that Aptos doesn’t. This is because Fantom is EVM compatible. Aptos’s use of the next-generation smart-contract language MOVE is a double-edged sword.
Simply because now, it isn’t interoperable with other blockchain networks. The main advantage of Fantom is that it is interoperable with 20+ blockchain networks since it is EVM compatible.
Developers can deploy apps on Ethereum, and other popular networks and then relaunch them on Fantom with some minimal modifications.
Decentralization Battle: Comparing Aptos and Fantom
As we further venture into the captivating realm of cryptocurrencies, it becomes vital to explore the principle of decentralization and examine how it is implemented across various digital assets. Decentralization serves as the foundation of blockchain technology, providing guarantees of transparency, security, and robustness.
Continuing our examination of two notable cryptocurrencies, Aptos and Fantom, we now shift our focus to the pivotal element of decentralization and its manifestation within these ecosystems.
| Decentralization Compared: Aptos vs. Fantom | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparison | Aptos | Fantom |
| Number of Validators Online | 108 | 64 |
| Capital Required to run a Validator | 1,000,000 APT | 500,000 FTM |
| Capital Required to run a Validator(In USD)(As of May 2023) | $8,444,000 | $160,000 |
| Offline Time | None | 7 hrs: 2/25/2021 |
| Governance Model |
On-chain governance
|
On Chain Governance
|
| Consensus Mechanism | PoS + AptosBFTv4 + Bullshark | PoS + Lachesis(aBFT) |
| Active Developers | 63 | 7 |
Analysis
In our exploration of the captivating world of cryptocurrencies, we turn our attention to the pivotal element of decentralization and its implementation in two notable digital assets, Aptos and Fantom.
Decentralization serves as the foundation of blockchain technology, ensuring transparency, security, and robustness. By comparing the metrics related to decentralization, we can gain insights into which network exhibits a higher degree of decentralization.
Looking at the number of validators online, we observe that Aptos has 108 validators compared to Fantom's 64. This indicates a higher level of decentralization for Aptos in terms of the number of participants securing the network.
When considering the capital required to run a validator, Aptos requires 1,000,000 APT tokens, whereas Fantom requires 500,000 FTM tokens. The higher capital requirement of Aptos suggests a greater commitment from validators, potentially contributing to a more decentralized network.
Examining the offline time, Aptos has reported no instances of downtime, while Fantom experienced a 7-hour outage on February 25, 2021. This indicates that Aptos has demonstrated better network availability, enhancing its decentralization aspect.
The governance models of Aptos and Fantom differ slightly. Aptos employs an on-chain governance model where the community can vote on proposals and submit Aptos Improvement Proposals (AIPs).
Similarly, Fantom has on-chain governance where the community can vote on proposals by staking FTM tokens. Additionally, in the absence of staker votes, validators can vote with delegated stakes. Although both networks embrace decentralization in their governance models, the specific mechanisms vary.
In terms of consensus mechanisms, Aptos utilizes a combination of Proof of Stake (PoS), Aptos Byzantine Fault Tolerance version 4 (AptosBFTv4), and Bullshark, while Fantom combines PoS with Lachesis, an asynchronous Byzantine Fault Tolerant (aBFT) algorithm. Both mechanisms contribute to decentralized decision-making and network security.
Finally, the number of active developers working on the projects reveals a notable disparity. Aptos boasts 63 active developers, whereas Fantom has 7. A higher number of active developers suggests a more vibrant and diverse development community, potentially fostering a greater degree of decentralization through widespread contributions.
Based on the metrics analyzed, Aptos appears to exhibit a higher level of decentralization compared to Fantom.
Value Metrics: Which is More Undervalued Aptos or Fantom?
When it comes to current valuation, there are certain metrics that we can employ to see which cryptocurrency is more undervalued relative to each other. These metrics are derived from how much they are being used by people. The more used they are, the more likely they are to appreciate in price.
In the next table, we present value metrics for Aptos and Fantom. We compare these metrics in the analysis afterward.
| Aptos VS Fantom: Value Metrics of Adoption | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparison | Aptos | Fantom |
| Current Marketcap(As of June 2023) | $1.688 Billion | $914 Million |
| Current Fully Diluted MC(As of June 2023) | $8.81 Billion | $1.04 Billion |
| Total Value Locked (As of June 2023)(TVL) | $50.5 Million | $319 Million |
| TVL to MC ratio [Higher is better] | 0.0299 | 0.349 |
| TVL to Fully Diluted MC ratio [Higher is better] | 0.0057 | 0.3067 |
| DEX volume (24h)(As of June 2023) | $971k | $6.2 Million |
Analysis
In the comparison of cryptocurrencies, we turn our attention to the value metric comparison that results from the adoption of cryptocurrencies. If a cryptocurrency is undervalued, there are metrics that will show this undervalue such as the TVL and MC ratios, etc. Let’s analyze the table above to get a better understanding of the value of Aptos and Fantom.
From the table above, we can see that Fantom is undervalued currently when we compare the TVL to MC ratio. A higher ratio indicates that people are locked up their assets in a certain network, while that network’s native current isn’t appreciating currently. This can only mean one thing: That the network is yet to appreciate as a result of further adoption.
Even when we compare the TVL to fully Diluted MC ratio, Fantom is still more undervalued when we compare it to Aptos. Assuming that all coins are released into circulation by Fantom and Aptos, People would still lock up more valued assets in Fantom than in Aptos. This indicates that People are using Fantom more than Aptos, the appreciation of Fantom is likelier since it is undervalued.
When we have gross valuations such as $1.688 Billion for Aptos, while Aptos has $971k In total DEX volume, we can come to a certain conclusion. This is that People are buying Aptos for one reason: Speculation, and not fundamental value, unlike Fantom.
In other words, Fantom has fundamental value, and Aptos doesn’t.
Tokenomic Perspective: Which has Better Tokenomics, Aptos or Fantom?
The one feature that is important when it comes to investing in cryptocurrencies is Tokenomics, also known as token economics. These are the traits that cryptocurrencies embody that allow them to perform better when it comes to price.
A coin can have the best technology, and best usability, but it if has terrible tokenomics, it will hurt retail investors. The point is that tokenomics matters. We can compare Aptos and Fantom to see which cryptocurrency has better tokenomic traits. We can compare these two to see which coin is likely to appreciate in the future.
In the next table, we review certain tokenomic traits that influence the price of Aptos and Fantom. We then analyze these features to see if Fantom or Aptos has better tokenomic traits.
| Aptos vs. Fantom: A Comprehensive Comparison of Tokenomics | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparison | Aptos | Fantom |
| Circulating Supply(As of June 2023) | 197 Million | 2.79 Billion |
| Total Supply (As of June 2023) | 1,035,264,901 | 3.175 Billion |
| Circulating Supply of Total Supply Percentage(CSTSP) [Higher is better] | 19% | 87.89% |
| Inflation Rate (as a result of Coin Minting in 2023) | 7% | 1.848% |
| Circulating Supply Inflation Rate(2023) | 41.53% | 1.848% |
| Points of Demand |
|
|
| Does The Network Burn Coins? | Yes, All Transaction fees | Yes, 20% of all TX Fees are burnt |
| Total Coins Burnt Yearly (If Any) or All time | 100-250 APT Yearly at the current rates | 10,021,067 total FTM burnt as of June 2023 |
| AVG Total Account Growth Monthly | 240-250k | 19 Million |
| Projected Circulating Supply Inflation Rate (2024) | 117.93% | 1.815% |
| Projected Circulating Supply Inflation Rate (2025) | 36.65% | 1.7827% |
| Projected Circulating Supply Inflation Rate (2026) | 22.6% | 1.75147 |
Note: by circulating supply inflation rate, we mean the circulating supply is inflated as a result of tokens being unlocked by investors, the team, and other parties and general inflation.
Analysis
Let’s analyze the tokenomics of Aptos and compare them to Fantom. It is better to acquire assets that are more prone to keep their value. There are many tokenomic traits that influence price performance.
The first one is Circulating Supply of Total Supply Percentage(CSTSP). This metric measures how much total supply has been released as a percentage of the total supply. Many projects vest large portions of their coins so that they don’t get dumped on the market immediately. Tokens are slowly unlocked by various parties, like the foundations, founders, community, and investors.
When the tokens get unlocked, they end up making their way into the markets creating sell side pressure. This unequivocally causes the price of the coins to go down or if it’s in a bull market, not perform as well.
Henceforth, a higher circulating supply as a percentage of the total supply is better. Since Fantom has a higher CSTSP, it has this more favorable tokenomic trait as opposed to Aptos.
We can also see this percentage play out in the circulating supply inflation rate. Since Aptos has a small circulating supply to total supply %, the supply eventually has to get released causing a large circulating supply inflation rate.
The next metric that is important is inflation. The lower the inflation, the better since higher inflation results in diluting the circulating supply. Fantom has superior tokenomics than Aptos when it comes to inflation since it has a much lower inflation rate.
In general, Aptos and Fantom both have the same coin use-cases. Meaning that people need the native currencies to perform the same functions. The only difference is that running a validator on Fantom may be easier than running a validator or Aptos simply because it costs less.
This can cause more demand for Fantom tokens. Aptos doesn’t have the same demand when it comes to people wanting to buy the coins to run validators themselves.
However, people can stake Aptos and Fantom. For people wanting to earn passive income by staking, they have to buy Aptos and Fantom.
By Having the possibility for people to earn yields through delegation staking, an extra venue of demand is created for Aptos and Fantom.
Related: Stake Aptos on Ledger hardware Wallets
The last metric of tokenomics is coin burning mechanisms. Both Aptos and Fantom burn coins, though Fantom has burnt more coins since it’s been online longer and because more people are using it. Moreover, 20% of all transaction fees are burnt in fantom. Aptos burns a higher percentage of fees than Fantom(100% of all transaction fees are burnt).
In conclusion, when examining the tokenomics of Aptos and Fantom, it becomes evident that Fantom exhibits more favorable tokenomic traits such as a higher circulating supply of total supply percentage, lower inflation rate, and significant coin burning mechanisms, positioning it as a potentially more attractive choice in terms of value preservation and market demand.
Key Differences and Similarities: Aptos and Fantom
In our quest to understand the intricacies of cryptocurrencies, we arrive at the juncture where we examine two prominent digital assets: Aptos and Fantom.
Before we dive into the specifics, let us first explore the key differences and similarities between these two cryptocurrencies, which will be summarized in the accompanying infographic below.
Another key difference between Fantom and Aptos is that Fantom has many more DApps and wallets integrated into their ecosystem than Aptos. About 20+ Wallets that have been created to accept and store Fantom. In Contrast, only about 10 accept Aptos. Fantom and Aptos still have pretty good wallets. This includes Metamask, Trust Wallet, or Exodus for Fantom. Aptos has some decent wallets have been created such as Pontem and Fewcha.
Our Conclusion: Which is Better, Aptos or Fantom?
Aptos and Fantom have significant differences in technological capabilities. Aptos is more technologically advanced with a sophisticated consensus algorithm, higher transaction throughput, faster block production, and advanced technologies. On the other hand, Fantom has an advantage in EVM compatibility, allowing interoperability with multiple blockchain networks.
Analyzing decentralization, Aptos demonstrates a higher level of decentralization in terms of validators, capital requirements, network availability, governance models, consensus mechanisms, and an active developer community.
Analyzing decentralization, Aptos demonstrates a higher level of decentralization in terms of validators, capital requirements, network availability, governance models, consensus mechanisms, and an active developer community.