Ethereum Vs Stellar — A detailed comparison
Speed, Cost, Scalability
Recently, there has been a migration of crypto-projects away from Ethereum and towards the destination of Stellar Lumens. Steller has become users’ primary destination due to its better built-in capabilities. It is better able to easily generate dividends and can limit the number of people who hold tokens at a given time. It has better time-bound functions for transactions, and wonderful built-in token issuance capabilities which make it immensely easy for users to generate a token. This function of immediate liquidity and does not need you to involve third-party exchange. It is very hard to get on a major listing exchange unless you are acquainted with an insider to help you out. For this profound built-in system with decentralized exchange, Stellar reigns as a winning project compared to Ethereum.
For speed of transaction, Stellar reigns as advantageous over Ethereum. Five seconds is the average settlement time for a transaction using Stellar, when it takes three and a half minutes to do the same with Ethereum. Stellar’s transaction fees is also small compared to the network with Ethereum. It costs around 0.001% of the price users usually pay for Ethereum.
Advantages and Disadvantages of a Non-Turing Complete Programming Language
Stellar provides simple non-Turing complete contracts, which allow for only basic applications and simple functionalities. This means users can launch basic tokens and develop simple applications to enhance the speed, effectiveness and costs of their experience. There are a number of advantages to using Digital subscriber lines (DSLs) which are non-Turing complete, since these lines are usually designed with a limited scope anyway, and so non-universal languages can be more useful in that regard.
The downside is that for more complex applications, Turing system contracts are necessary, since they have greater capabilities of computation, for which Ethereum is more suitable. There are some things that non-Turing contracts can simply not compute.
Controlling Assets on Stellar Vs Ethereum
Stellar networks can accept deposits currencies such as BRL, USD, CNY etc. Through cash in-points or deposits performed at the bank, for which the user will receive digital tokens on Stellar networks. A downside to the Stellar system is that the token can be redeemed for the real-world assets that they represent.
In comparison, with Ethereum, the user can deposit their funds at an exchange and a wallet from the exchange will hold those funds. An equivalent value is sent to the user’s account through a database entry, and a centralized exchange system stores these funds. Centralized systems can lead to failure because funds are only safe via an access to the website, and this can be at risk of theft through third-party hackers or even restrictions on the user’s capacity to withdraw funds.
Decentralized Exchanges on Chain SDEX versus IDEX
Stellar DEX allows users to deposit their assets in whatever currency there like. This feature makes it very easy to perform cross asset payments when working with the Stellar network. The user is only required to exchange the cryptocurrency at the site of sale. The feature of cross-asset payment allows the user to find the best paths and conversion rates for their assets. Stellar DEX also has the advantage of zero withdrawal fees, which is one the main points that sets it apart in the market as the top crypto-exchange system.
Conversely IDEX is Ethereum’s first decentralized smart contract system, which allows real-time trading. It is built on smart contract which allows the users to submit a signed trade to Ethereum. This controls the way that transactions are processed, by controlling their order and by simultaneously assigning private keys which authorize the trade in the contract and prevent unauthorized access. But the system does not hold any of Steller’s advantages as mentioned above.
Distribution of Tokens
The contract structure and code of stellar is way simpler and safer compared with Ethereum. Although Stella does not offer Turing complete smart contracts which make Stellar less expressive, it also accounts for greater simplicity and auditability of the contract structure. Ethereum offers certain features in this regard that are not necessary for token distribution. We consider safer solutions to be more important than any other feature that could lead to vulnerabilities of the tokens that the issuers use when employing the Ethereum platform.
With Stellar, you can freeze tokens in potential events of misuse, which ensures that they remain safe and that there are no complex steps to sorting out compromised situations. However, with Ethereum, any irregularity needs to be dealt with through an agreement between the miners and validators of the transaction, which can cost time and effort, leading to unnecessary complications for the users.
