A look at the top EVM-compatible blockchains and whether transaction fees have remained low as promised.
In the race to develop a cheaper, more efficient smart contract platform, more than a dozen contenders have started in the last few years. Many of them have promised incredibly cheap transaction fees – but how do they survive? Let’s take a look at the snapshot of the transaction fee exactly a year ago and now. While more congestion periods are not being fully utilized, users of these blockchains can expect fees to be higher than they were a year ago.
BNB Chain, still the most active EVM-compliant chain in terms of the number of daily transactions, has seen its average transaction fee decrease over the past year – from $ 0.36 to $ 0.3. This makes the avalanche the second most expensive EVM chain in terms of average tx fees. However, it is still the most popular online chain activity, handling more than 5M transactions of Avalanche, Fantom and Polygon combined every day.
Despite seeing a 50-fold increase in its daily transactions last year, Avalanche transaction fees have dropped by more than 40% over the same period – due to a series of ‘Apricot’ upgrades.
Apricot Phase Four is coming to Avalanche mainnet Weds. Sept 22, 5pm ET (9PM UTC).
This upgrade will bring on the following optimizations: Snowman++ and additional transaction fee reductions on C-Chain.
However, when the AVAX token reached its all-time high, the Avalanche transaction fee skyrocketed to over $ 10 last year amid heavy crowds. The average C-Chain tx fee is now just under $ 1 – this is the most expensive EVM compliant chain for transactions.
Fantom has seen the most significant increase in the number of absolute daily transactions over the past year. Swelling from less than 5,000 tx per day in March 2021 to 880,000 per day in March 2022, equivalent to more than 175 times the growth.
It has also seen the largest relative change in the average transaction fee, which has increased more than tenfold from $ 0.01 last year to $ 0.13 at present. It comes with significant improvements in its Defi landscape and DEXes such as Spooky Swap, Spirit Swap and recently launched Solidly Exchange activity.
Check out our deep dive at Soldley Exchange.
Over the past year, Polygon (MATIC) has retained its title as the cheapest EVM chain in terms of transaction fees, with an average fee of less than 2 0.02 – which is still higher than a year ago. Eight times more. Even during peak hours, due to the popular play-to-earn game – Sunflowerland, the fee can barely reach above $ 0.5. Polygon is now the second most active EVM chain behind BNB China, and now operates above 2.7M tx/day, a 15X improvement over the year.
Overall, China, which is compatible with every major EVM, still outperforms Ethereum (currently 1.2M tx/day processing) in terms of transaction fees, and both BNB Chain and Polygon do so by processing more transactions. While Avalanche and Fantom are hot on their heels. . However, with Ethereum layer-2 scaling solutions such as ZKSync, Optimism and StarkWare bringing low-cost transactions over the network, there is some stiff competition among EVM compatible chains.
Check out our guide on how to use Layer-2 rollups to avoid high gas charges on Ethereum.
This article contains links to third-party websites or other content for informational purposes only ("third-party sites"). Third-party sites are not controlled by Cryptogpt, and Cryptogpt is not responsible for the content of any third-party site, including any links to any third-party site, or any changes or updates to any third party. Party site. Cryptogpt is providing these links to you only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement, approval or recommendation of Cryptogpt or any association with its operators of the site. This article is for use and should be used for informational purposes only. It is important to do your own research and analysis before making any material decisions regarding the products or services described. This article is not intended to be financial advice and will not be considered. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author [of the company] and do not necessarily reflect those of Cryptogpt.