How to Choose the Right Blockchain Network for Your Dapp Development
Along with technology improvement and wider recognition, more companies think of entering the blockchain market. However, due to a list of existing solutions, it might be a challenge to select a blockchain development platform the most suitable for your business.
In this piece, we have gathered knowledge from our 4 years of experience in decentralized projects’ building to help you define the type of needed project and crucial criteria for selecting a blockchain platform for it. We will also review and analyze the best blockchain networks for dApp development.
Establish project scope
Nowadays, there is a really huge amount of creative and innovative ideas circulating on the blockchain market. Yet, just a few of them have proven their usability and got a positive ROI after launch.
This happens because such a competitive market as blockchain or DeFi does not need just some new, creative solutions, yet a very thoughtful business idea that can bring a real profit to the users and provide a more cost-effective solution to the market.
Thus, before choosing the right blockchain platform, we often prepare business analysis and idea validation of the client’s thoughts. Analysis preparation helps us to understand which process a client wants to implement and how those processes will act in a decentralized environment. This is a very important step for deciding which blockchain platform to use.
See how Blaize team provides business analysis for our clients while developing a DeFi project.
Due to a thorough analysis during the discovery stage, our specialists are able to define the right tokenomics strategy and turn your idea into a real beneficial business case!
Establish the type of your decentralized project
Before answering the questions like how to choose the right blockchain network for your decentralized app, we need to take into account a few crucial points. Well-performed business analysis of customer case helps to define the future project scope and especially the type of client’s project.
Blaize define further types of blockchain-based projects:
1.Developing an entire blockchain ecosystem from scratch
The first type of blockchain-based solutions relies on the fact that your business processes lay entirely on the blockchain. In this case, you will need to develop your own decentralized solution from the beginning. We have concentrated on this type of development in the previous article on how to find a reliable blockchain company.
2.Create a bridge or a 2-layer solution
This type of project is applicable when the blockchain is already chosen, and there is a need of building a 2-layer solution for it (like Ethereum Plasma). In this case, your business case has to lay entirely on the blockchain as well.
The other way is when the creation of a bridge between two or more blockchains or dApps is needed. We expect a high demand for this type of solution along with Polkadot wider adoption.
The first two types are less common and are more likely to be developed by in-house teams and do not require any consideration regarding the right blockchain choice difficulties.
Therefore, we want to take your attention to the next two approaches which need a deep look into the architecture of blockchain framework before starting the development.
3.Empowering your current solution with blockchain
The fourth type of project development approach concentrates on the adoption of any crypto payment system to your current solution. In further explanation, it means either to integrate an existing blockchain to a client’s solution or to fork a chosen crypto currency and adapt it to the customer requirements.
See how Blaize performed such development in the Remme use case.
Though, there are situations when your case does not demand the development upon Ethereum (or another) network but still requires smart-contracts. In such a case it will be better to create your own network based on a ready solution (for example fork Parity node) but with necessary features implemented.
As one of the main challenges here, we can define the problem of correct adaptation and adjustment to the client’s needs. Because making a fork is not an issue, but ensuring smooth work after that is.
4.Development of decentralized app
This type corresponds to many current requests. It is applicable in case your business processes need to be somehow connected to the blockchain. Any of the existing dApps (Uniswap, Augur, Polymarket, Opensea) can be an example of using this approach. This is also the best solution for any DeFi project.
The development of the decentralized application is the most challenging in terms of selecting the right blockchain for such a dApp. This mainly because the developers need to take into account a number of factors for the future smart contract development for this solution. In this case, the broadened knowledge of the best blockchain frameworks is a must.
As far as choosing a blockchain platform for dApp building is one of the most difficult tasks, we propose to concentrate on this approach in the next parts of this article.
Which is the best Blockchain platform for dApp development?
As soon as you define the type of your project, start to look for the most suitable blockchain solution for it. Well, how many blockchain platforms are there? In terms of dApp development, we mark Near, EOS, Solana, Ethereum, and Polkadot as the most promising blockchain frameworks.
Due to their wide lists of functionalities and unique possibilities Blaize experts establish them as the best blockchain platforms for developing a decentralized application.
Let’s go through their main characteristics and define pros and cons of each.
This platform is one of the pioneers on the market and therefore a popular choice while selecting a blockchain platform for project development. Additionally, the Ethereum network has already become a home for a long list of dApps.
The unique input of Ethereum was the contribution to an EVM invention and therefore wide application of smart contracts. Ethereum smart contracts require a strong knowledge of Solidity or Vyper.
Pros of Ethereum
- the most actively used and commonly known blockchain framework
- provision of a large kit of developer tools, ready-made models and functionalities
- a large community that maintain the network (recently, the amount of active nodes has beaten the amount of Bitcoin nodes)
- accumulated reliability (the more blockchain exists, the more trust it get from users)
Cons of Ethereum
- quite a low transaction speed
- high transaction and deployment costs
- Ethereum still uses PoW consensus which considerably slower operational processes and TPS
- not that scalable – the layer-2 solution (Plasma) has not still proven its effectiveness and the transfer to PoS is in its initial phase
Ethereum is a good solution when developing a multi-chain ecosystem. It has a large toolset and a lot of ready-made solutions which can help to build your solution easier and quickly. Additionally, Ethereum is a worldwide known and trustable blockchain, which can help to gain more credit from users in terms of delivering a new product to the market.
However, it is worth noting that the glorified toolset is quite difficult to maintain and update. Moreover, market fluctuations in gas prices very often create inconvenient conditions for active use.
As for now, Ethereum blockchain is a complete leader for building DeFi dApps. Uniswap, Compound, Synthetix, Maker, Curve, AAVE, etc. are hosted within the Ethereum network. Therefore, in case of creating the next DeFi giant we recommend considering Ethereum as a prior, in terms of future smooth integration with other DeFis.
Near network is aimed to be a way more scalable blockchain then everything we have had before. This is a next-generation proof-of-stake blockchain that is a serious competitor to the emerging Ethereum 2.0.
Near is highly scalable, shards supported public blockchain. While using its custom TxFlow consensus model (another type of PoS) it provides a highly secure, trustless, and hacking resistant environment.
Its ecosystem is recently being compared a lot to the upcoming Ethereum 2.0. But unlike other new-generation blockchains, the state sharding approach of Near allows for the creation of such small nodes that can be stored even on mobile devices. Additionally, Near had started “shards” implementation from its very beginning with no need for additional translations.
Near blockchain uses Rust. It is a cutting-edge language for system programming that allows for building advanced algorithms in a more secure way with higher performance.
Pros of Near
- the forkless environment due to TxFlow consensus model
- highly scalable due to implementation of shards
- low transaction costs
- a very flexible interface which allows for a quick dApps building
Cons of Near
- it already has its mainnet, but the blockchain is still quite young
- less-experienced blockchain developers might face difficulties with the new type of PoS
- as far as the system is quite new, there is a lack of dev tutorials explaining some of the distinctive features
Near blockchain is a 1-layer protocol that can host any dApp on top of it. Moreover, the scalability and level of performance it claims is very promising, as well as the fact, that Near is aimed to enable blockchain access even from mobile phones.
Therefore, if you are thinking of creating a technologically advanced solution then Near protocol flexibility, Rust adoption and a modern approach to development is a good fit for your project.
So if you want users to benefit from “progressive UX” and mobile adaptation while ensuring fork and hacking-resistant environment consider Near blockchain when selecting the best blockchain platform for developing a decentralized application.
EOS is a way faster blockchain than Ethereum (was and still remains). It can produce around 100 transactions per second due to the usage of dPoS consensus mechanism. EOS is a quite known blockchain ecosystem, so it also provides a large set of tutorials and toolkits to ease developers’ work.
EOS as well as Ethereum enables smart contracts running. But smart contracts here are written in C++, so it is quite easier to find a developer with a good knowledge of this language.
Pros of EOS
- fast transaction speed
- no transaction fees (the one just need to stake a certain amount of EOS tokens to be able to deploy a contract)
- staking and voting processes allow for higher users engagement and a lower possibility of hacking attack
- the adoption of C++ enables building of more complex algorithms
- parallel processing technology (for ex. parallel smart contract running)
Cons of EOS
- staking and validating system might be difficult even for experienced developers
- entangled account creation
- limited amount of validators may increase the centralization of the network
Choosing EOS blockchain framework is a very reasonable choice in terms of the low transaction and contract deployment costs. Projects with tight budgeting or small to middle solutions may significantly benefit from this.
The free transaction is critical if you want to build a scalable, popular, and publicly accessible environment. Additionally, low and predictable transaction fees are helpful in terms of dApp testing during the pre-launch phase.
We recommend using EOS if your project needs to run many smart contracts at once along with fast crypto payments. In addition, with the help of EOS, you can create a perfect untrusted environment for managing and operating various IoT devices.
Solana represents a lightning-fast, high-performance blockchain network. Due to Gulf Stream usage it has the ability to process over 50 thousands transactions per second while providing a highly secured environment for its users.
Solana blockchain has introduced the new consensus model called Proof-of-History. PoH checks the historical records of blockchain transactions before including them into the distributed ledger. It helps to prove the transaction has really happened and therefore makes the system more decentralized.
Solana is purely built on Rust. It gives a wide list of unique and very helpful features like a conditional compilation or moves semantics which creates a very developer-friendly environment.
Pros of Solana
- enormous TPS
- scalability (due to the usage of Cloudbreak)
- parallel (and therefore more efficient) smart contracts running (Sealevel)
- possibility of writing smart contracts in any language compiled to WASM
Cons of Solana
- the new and not well-known consensus mechanism
- the network community is still growing
- “greedy-for-resources” node
Solana is known for its lightning-fast transaction speed. This feature has been proven by numerous well-known projects (Chainlink, Serum, Tether, etc.) who are partnering with Solana.
Such a high TPS along with scalability are very needed in terms of creating DeFi projects like decentralized exchanges or staking platforms. Its unique PoH consensus ensures a highly secured environment which is a must if you deal with a huge amount of money.
Solana is not that commonly known as Ethereum, and for now, has a smaller community and a few nodes to run the network. Therefore, we recommend using Solana for small to medium-sized projects with limited required features.
See how Blaize experts did a smart contract-based game within the Solana ecosystem in this use case.
Polkadot is one of the most prominent projects of upcoming years. Its name says multichain because Polkadot is a hosting environment for a number of other blockchains that can be easily connected to it. Polkadot is built on Substrate and uses Rust as the prior programming language.
In order to connect or build your own blockchain within this ecosystem, one needs to link to Relay Chain which is a mother blockchain of Polkadot. All parachains act as completely separate actors with the ability to have their own tokenomics, consensus and governance layer.
See how you can launch on Polkadot and build your own parachain or dApp using Substrate.
Pros of Polkadot
- scalability the world has not seen before
- harmless upgradability without a hard fork
- easy adoption and creation of new parachains – any new chain can be written in any language until it shares the common parachain interface
Cons of Polkadot
- existing and already running blockchains (like Ethereum) which are not built with Substrate need to develop an additional bridge to connect
- a limited number of slots for parachains (for now)
- a few really qualified specialists who have a deep understanding of how the system works
Polkadot is a multichain ecosystem which is aimed to create a scalable and interoperable network of blockchains. Thus, if your projects need to have such features, so starting your dApp or even blockchain on Polkadot is the right choice.
Besides the initial Polkadot system that has not been released yet, there is a Kusama network that serves as a premier provider to the future multichain. Kusama allows for a very democratic transaction and deployment fees which is very needed in the case of startups or very young projects with limited resources.
In spite of being a young ecosystem, Polkadot, as well as Kusama, have thoroughly prepared documentation and a lot of dev tutorials to ease the work of programmers.
As one of the difficulties of building a dApp or bridge with Kusama and Polka, we can say that there are just a few use cases showing an example of this. Therefore, it might be challenging to find experienced blockchain specialists in this area.
There is a number of decentralized solutions so selecting a blockchain platform for project developing becomes a difficult task. That is why Blaize decided to provide this guide covering the pros and cons of blockchain platforms commonly known on the market.
Which is the best blockchain platform? As you can already see, the answer will strictly differ depending on project purpose and clients’ personal requirements. We have provided you with the examples showing the best fit for a certain project, yet, please note that listed blockchain are not limited to those.
We hope this guide will be useful for you!