What Sets Avalanche Apart From Other Blockchains?

23 min readApr 30, 2021


This article is the contents of a series of tweet threads seen below discussing why Avalanche stands above the rest in terms of Security, Performance, Decentralisation, Customisability and Tokenomics, but in article form to make it easier to read.

1. Security

2/ Sybil Resistance — Avalanche uses Proof of Stake instead of Proof of Work, with nearly $10 Billion of staked value securing the network with an impressive 77.26% of the entire supply being staked, just 6 months after mainnet. It is currently the 3rd largest in staked value.

3/ Proof of Stake is not only more secure than Proof of Work as evident by the number of 51% attacks seen against POW Chains due to the ease of renting hash power compared to acquiring stake, but it’s also requires far less energy consumption.

4/ Sharding — For platforms that utilise sharding, validators and staked value are split between the number of shards. If you have 100 shards, then that $10 billion securing the entire network is now divided by 100 leaving just $100 million securing each shard.

5/ Whereas if you assumed up to 1/3 of the stake can be malicious in the entire network, as validators are now randomly split up and assigned to each shard, it’s now possible that an attacker can control more than 1/3 of the stake in a shard,

6/ whilst owning significantly less than 1/3 of the stake of the entire network. The more shards you have also the smaller the number of validators assigned to each shard out of the total validator set securing the network as well.

7/ This is the case for heterogenous sharding platforms such as Polkadot where the total number of validators in the relay chain is limited which are then split up so that as little as 14 validators are validating each of the parachains. Having skin in the game is important to..

8/ deter attacks, but with the combination of a limited number of validators, 0% commission and no min own stake required, then this can lead to potentially dangerous scenarios such as Zug Capital controlling 10% of stake in Polkadot when they themselves own less than $1k of DOT

9/ With Avalanche, all the chains including in the primary network are secured by the full staked value of the network. In additional Avalanche consensus is inclusive and not restricted to a small number of validators like other blockchains and can scale to millions of validators

10/ all securing the network and participating in consensus for every transaction. Committee Sizes — Other platforms use a very small committee size and to randomly select a sample of the entire validator set, which faces similar issues where it’s possible an attacker can

11/ control the majority of the committee size, but actually own significantly less % of the total stake of the entire network. As well as now relying on just a small number of nodes to validate the transaction compared to reaching consensus across the entire network.

12/ Transaction Security — Platforms such as Cardano use a consensus following the longest chain rule, where a leader is chosen that can add a block to the chain without first reaching consensus with other validators on the validity of the block.

13/ Subsequent leaders can then choose to either build on top of the previous block (confirming they believe it’s valid) or choose to fork the network. Transactions therefore start with very weak security backing which increases with the more subsequent blocks that get added.

14/ As leaders are randomly selected based off the stake their own it’s possible that an attacker controlling 10% of the network could be selected to produce 10 blocks in a row and so you have to wait a long time to be sure they are secure and valid.

15/ With 10% malicious nodes, Cardano calculated 15 blocks are required to achieve the same level of security as Bitcoin’s six block rule, which means finality of around 5 minutes. If a larger % is controlled by an attacker, then this increases significantly further.

16/ Other blockchains such as Solana also use a leader and follow longest chain rule, where they can add blocks to the blockchain without first reaching consensus on their validity. So even though it has 400ms block times, they can be reverted and offer weak security initially.

17/ With Finality on Solana lasting around 13 seconds. With Avalanche the entire network reaches consensus and transactions are irreversible and final within less than a second offering immediate transaction security of the entire network.

18/ Layer 2 solutions such as Optimistic Rollups provide their own security risks. All tokens within a rollup are locked into a smart contract. A smart contract bug / hack could result in those funds getting stolen or frozen.

19/Transactions are added optimistically in batches without having every Ethereum node run the compute and calculate the state and reach consensus, and instead relies on fraud proofs where verifiers run the computation and verify the state output afterwards (needing up to a week)

20/ If the sequencer is malicious and posts an incorrect resulting state root / tries to steal users funds, then as long as there is one verifier who has checked the validity of the transaction they can post a fraud proof and the batch is rolled back and the Sequencer is slashed

21/ Running a verifier costs money checking all the transactions, the higher the number of transactions added to the chain, the more resources they need to check them all = more costs incurred. You may go for long periods without finding any fraud and thus receive no reward

22/ This could then cause verifiers to drop out / reducing the security of the chain and making it more likely fraud would occur. This is a similar issue with fishermen with polkadot as mentioned in this article

23/ Even if a fraud proof is posted, a 51% on Ethereum main chain can censor it from being included on chain for the 7 days and thus able to steal the funds. Therefore, the amount of value locked in the rollup will also depend on how much it costs to 51% attack for 7 days.

24/Likewise, if there is a bug in the protocol used to detect fraud (and instead reports them incorrectly as being fine) then funds can also be lost as the transactions would go undetected. The more value secured in the smart contract the more attractive it becomes to an attacker

25/ Avalanche is not reliant on hoping someone checks every transaction afterwards, the entire network checks the validity of the transaction as part of consensus as it’s added to the chain, with sub second finality that can scale to millions of nodes offering incredible security

26/ whereas classical consensus protocols can withstand up to 1/3 +1 of the validators being malicious and nakomoto consensus protocols able to withstand up to 50% of the network being malicious, avalanche is secure with up to 60% of the network being malicious

27/ which can be paramaterised up to 80%. Unlike some blockchains which prioritise liveness over safety, avalanche rightly priorities safety over liveness.

2. Performance

2/ Classical consensus protocols are based on all-to-all voting and typically have a designated leader who initiates the decision process and a series of rounds of all-to-all communication to ensure that all correct nodes reach the same decision.

3/ They typically require quadratic communication overhead with all-to-all communication of O(n²). This means for each round if there is:

  • A network of 10 nodes = 100 messages
  • A network of 1,000 nodes = 1,000,000 messages
  • A network of 100,000 nodes = 10,000,000,000 messages

4/ So an easy way that many blockchains cut down on that overhead and achieve better performance is simply to sacrifice decentralisation and only run a small number of nodes.

5/ Binance Smart Chain is just a clone of Ethereum with only 20 validators and the use of a centralised Proof of Authority consensus and where the majority of nodes are controlled by Binance. Achieving better performance but completely centralised…

6/ Avalanche Consensus is the biggest breakthrough since Nakamoto. It uses repeated random sub-sampling of the entire network to quickly achieve consensus with minimal overhead per node for incredible performance. See this article for more details

7/ The number of messages each node has to handle per decision is O(k) and does not grow as the network scales up to millions of validators all participating in consensus to achieve truly global scale decentralisation for permissionless blockchain to take blockchain mass adoption

8/ Another easy way to achieve higher performance is to increase the hardware requirements for running a node, the more hardware resources, the higher the performance, but yet again at the expense of decentralisation.

9/ Solana recommends validators run hardware with 24 Cores, 128 GB Memory, 4 TB NVMe disks, Nvidia 2080 ti graphics cards (4000 cores) and very high bandwidth connections. This limits those capable of running a node though due to the expense, similar to Bitcoin ASIC mining rigs.

10/ Solana’s claimed tps numbers are also vastly inflated due to consensus voting messages being included on-chain. The more validators there are the more votes there will be, and fewer available for actual transactions.

11/ If Avalanche were to include consensus messages in its claimed tps then it would be capable of 1.3 Million tps for just for the primary network. Solana’s tps is achieved through being able to run parallel execution using the 4000 cores of the GPU.

12/ The problem with this though is that it works when you are processing the same computation simultaneously. Which is great if you have a blockchain with a few smart contracts as those smart contracts will be frequently run and can be used by the GPU to process them in parallel

13/ But as the ecosystem becomes diversified with lots of different smart contracts / computation then the GPU’s can’t be used and instead has to use the CPU’s instead for which there are far far fewer cores. The more diversified the ecosystem is, performance degrades drastically

14/ Avalanche is a platform of platforms where blockchains can be built on top. In the scenario above application specific blockchains, which are tailor made to meet the developer’s requirements can be used.

15/You can have a subnet which requires high validator requirements and as it’s specific to that Application, it can benefit from GPU processing without being slowed down. Whereas Solana is a single blockchain trying to cater for every use case and developers having to compromise

16/ With Avalanche there can effectively be many Solana type blockchains build on top of it, each benefiting from the full high tps that solana claims, whilst being specifically designed for their DAPP. Rather than 1 Solana which everyone uses, you effectively can have 1000's.

17/ Rather than forcing high validator requirements for everyone though, the primary network on Avalanche requires just 2 cores, 4 GB Memory and 32 GB Hard Drive space and yet can scale to 4500 tps per subnet. If you need more performance, then subnets can provide that.

18/ Other platforms also accumulate their tps over the number of shards, I.e. each shard can do 1000 tps and can scale to 100 shards, therefore 100,000 tps.. Avalanche can do 4500 tps on just 2 cores, 4 GB memory, whilst also able to scale to unlimited number of subnets.

19/ Speed isn’t everything though, what’s equally important is latency. It’s pointless to say you can process more transactions that VISA and take 60 seconds for the transaction to be final. Can you imagine buying an item at a store and waiting 60 seconds for the payment to clear

20/ Do you like waiting? Time it takes for a transaction to be considered final: Optimistic rollups: 1 week

  • Bitcoin: 60 mins
  • Ethereum 2.0: 6 mins
  • Cardano: 5 mins
  • Polkadot: 60 secs (60 mins to external chains)
  • Elrond: 51 secs
  • Solana: 13 secs
  • Avalanche: less than 1 second

21/ Everybody nowadays expects things to happen instantly, providing a superior user experience. With Avalanche that’s possible. It’s not just for payments but effects the user experience for all applications. Nobody likes waiting.

22/ Layer 2 solutions can provide additional performance but not without their disadvantages. What’s important is to have a scalable layer 1 solution to start with such as Avalanche from which layer 2 solutions are also compatible.

23/ Each Layer 2 solution fragments the network, (there are even multiple separate chains within each different layer 2 solution). Rather than start with a blockchain that does 14 tps (and even ETH 2.0 with 64 shards each are only capable of eth 1.0 speeds) you instead use a ..

24/ scalable Layer 1 solution which offers higher security guarantees, more decentralised and high performance of thousands of tps to begin with, then layer 2 solutions building on top of that are naturally going to offer far more tps with less fragmentation.

25/ Avalanche is a high performance blockchain, with 4500 tps per subnet (scale to far higher tps per subnet for those that require higher resources) supports an unlimited number of subnets, sub second finality and all without sacrificing decentralisation

26/ Why compromise on one single blockchain when you can have a platform with thousands of them? each dedicated to your specific requirements if you wish. Whilst also able enable regulatory compliant subnets for enterprises to build on, potentially supporting trillions in assets

3. Decentralisation

2/ Decentralisation is a key component to what sets blockchain apart from traditional solutions, it increases security, censorship resistance, enables trust and is more inclusive.

3/ However as many platforms seek higher performance, they are taking the easy route by sacrificing decentralisation. At one extreme you have Binance Smart Chain which is operated by just 20 validators of which the majority are controlled by Binance.

4/ They can do whatever they want with the platform at any point, whether that be delisting projects, censoring transactions, changing the history of the chain, it’s no different than traditional solutions. This also makes them a target for law enforcement to enforce any changes.

5/ CZ has termed the phrase “CeDeFi” for Centralised DeFi. You can’t have DeFi on a centralised blockchain There can be no trust / immutability / censorship resistance without decentralisation.

6/ Do you want the future of your project in complete control by a single entity? Or do you want to change the world and move away from the centralized systems we have today to a world which benefits all?

7/ There are platforms which not only have a small number of total nodes but an even smaller number of those holding the majority of stake. Polygon’s (Matic) side chain has a single node controlled by Binance with 36% of the stake.

8/As this uses classical consensus it means Binance has control to halt the chain at any point either maliciously (they do have a competing chain) or through issues with their node. Other examples of this was the recent outage on Fantom where 2 nodes went offline halted the chain

9/ As it’s classical consensus they can also take completely control the chain through a network partition, compromising the security of the chain. This is why it’s vital for users to choose carefully who they delegate to, particularly when limited to a small number of nodes.

10/ Other platforms select a small sample of the overall validator set to increase performance at the expense of decentralisation. Polkadot can have as little as 14 validators validating each parachain, with other examples including Algorand, Elrond and Near.

11/ Decentralisation can also be reduced through the distribution method. Rather than a distributed peer to peer model where nodes connect to each other, Algorand uses a central hub and spoke where all transactions have to pass through a permissioned set of relay nodes.

12/ Which performs signature verification / validity checks before forwarding them to nodes to vote. Leaving the potential for censorship of transactions flowing through the network. Whilst malicious nodes can’t compromise security of the network, they can cause it to halt.

13/ Layer 2 Solutions such as Optimism’s optimistic rollup will be a more centralised solution as initially everyone that is using the rollup sends their transactions to a single sequencer who then puts them into a batch and calculates the new state root to be posted on chain.

14/ The sequencer can choose to ignore transactions for a batch / include their own — to benefit from MEV / front running etc, , if however, they ignore it for a certain amount of time then the user can send it to the layer 1 chain.

15/ There is the potential that you could have just a single entity (maybe even nobody) checking the validity of a transaction by performing the computation offchain, whereas with Avalanche you have the full security of knowing its validated by everyone.

16/Whilst there are plans to introduce multiple sequencers in the future, the proposed plan is to do this with a MEV Auctions. MEV is a huge problem with $2.3 Million extracted through front running in the last 24 hours. See the below article for more info

17/ Avalanche Consensus is the biggest breakthrough since Nakamoto. It uses repeated random sub-sampling of the entire network to quickly achieve consensus with minimal overhead per node for incredible performance. See this article for more details

18/The number of messages each node has to handle per decision remains constant as the validator set increases, enabling it to be an inclusive consensus that can scale to millions of validators all participating in consensus to enable unparalleled levels of decentralisation.

19/ To prevent single nodes like Exchanges from getting too much control and avoiding scenarios like Polkadot below where validators can control a large part of the stake without taking any risk themselves / own stake, limits were put in place.

20/ The maximum delegation amount is limited to 4x the validators owned stake to ensure they always have skin in the game and that one node can’t take down the network There are currently 920 Block producing validators and importantly all participate in consensus on a decision.

21/ Hardware requirements are minimal compared to other blockchains with just 2 cores, 4 GB Memory and 32 GB Hard Drive enabling anyone to run one. The minimum stake amount is due to be reduced significantly once governance is implemented shortly.

22/ Being a leaderless blockchain, not limited to a small no. of validators, combined with sub second finality makes MEV pretty much a non-issue compared to other platforms. So not only do you benefit from cheap fees and a decentralised secure network but also don’t get front run

23/ The previous Rosetta Technical Lead at Coinbase deeply studied all Layer1s as part of his job and this thread linked

describes how Avalanche was the only solution that offered inclusive consensus. He has since joined the amazing team at Avalanche

24/ The Future is multi-chain, just as companies don’t restrict themselves to one country and being overcrowded, they expand across multiple regions attracting more users. Avalanche doesn’t take the easy route like others and compromise decentralisation.

25/ Projects built on Ethereum can expand their user base to a rapidly growing ecosystem with high throughput, sub second finality, low costs and crucially WITHOUT sacrificing decentralization! Easily build Decentralized APPs on multiple ecosystems with 100% compatibility $AVAX

4. Customisability

2/ Homogeneous blockchains offer very little in the way of customisation in the underlying platform, they offer a single solution using the same protocol. Examples include Ethereum, Solana, Near and Algorand. Whether it’s a single chain, sharded or side chains, it’s all the same.

3/ Each blockchain has their strengths and weaknesses through. A general purpose blockchain tries to cater for all requirements, but excels at none, resulting in developers having to compromise on a solution that best suits their overall needs rather than what is optimal.

4/ Avalanche is a heterogeneous platform of platforms ultimately consisting of thousands of subnets to form a heterogeneous interoperable network of many different blockchains, that takes advantage of the revolutionary Avalanche Consensus.

5// Like other heterogeneous platforms such as Cosmos and Polkadot, Avalanche abstracts the complexities of managing the network and consensus layers allowing developers to focus on the application layer, whilst also able to seamlessly interoperate with other blockchains.

6/ Rather than developers having to compromise on a single solution to try and meet all their needs, Avalanche enables the easy creation of application specific blockchains on the platform which can be tailor-made for that exact requirement.

7/ Want a blockchain that specialises in payments or the trading of assets? then a DAG with partial ordering provide the best performance with 4500 tps and sub second finality like the X-Chain. Want a blockchain that uses smart contracts? Then a totally ordered linear blockchain

8/ is best. Want a blockchain that’s focused on privacy? A privacy VM can be used. Your application may require a combination of all 3 of the examples each designed to perform optimally for each individual task whilst also enabling seamless interoperability between them.

9/ New blockchain platforms with their own smart contract language / virtual machine can take years to build the tooling comparable to what Ethereum has built up today and as a result adoption of the platform is much slower.

10/ Avalanche’s C-Chain is a smart contract chain that uses the EVM and is 100% compatible with existing Ethereum tooling. Everything you can do on Ethereum you can do on the C-Chain with the added benefit of high throughput, sub-second finality and low fees.

11/ Existing Ethereum DAPPs can easily be ported over and use all the existing tooling such as Metamask / Truffle etc making it easy for existing Ethereum developers to build on Avalanche from day one rather than wait years for the developer and tooling

12/ Avalanche goes far beyond other platforms by being able to implement any custom VM on top of the platform as well. You can use any VM from other popular blockchains enabling integration with their existing tooling and developers to easily build on the platform as well.

13/ It’s not limited to just the EVM and migrating DAPPs from Ethereum though, any custom VM can be used. Allowing projects from any blockchain to ultimately be easily ported over and benefit from the performance, decentralisation, low fees and customisation Avalanche offers.

14/ Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash subnets are planned to be created on Avalanche enabling the functionality of Bitcoin to be used in more than just a digital gold proposition but also an excellent payment system by providing high throughput, sub second finality, cheap fees, low energy

15/ consumption whilst even greater levels of decentralisation. It will feature the Bitcoin Virtual Machine providing the full functionality of Bitcoin, scripting language, segwit, integration with existing Bitcoin tooling

16/ Avalanche was built with serving financial markets in mind. It has native support for easily creating and trading digital smart assets with complex custom rule sets that define how the asset is handled and traded to ensure regulatory compliance.

17/ The assets could represent financial instruments such as equities, bonds, debt, real estate, or anything else. Offering the best place to build DeFi applications but also the traditional finance market, where the derivatives market alone is worth a staggering $1000+ trillion.

18/ These VMs can then be deployed on a custom blockchain network, called a subnet, which consist of a dynamic set of validators working together to achieve consensus on the state of a set of many blockchains where complex rulesets can be configured to meet regulatory compliance.

19/ Enterprises can choose to build a mix of permissioned and permissionless blockchains on Avalanche and interoperate between them without having to pay and hold huge amounts of a highly volatile asset whilst getting diluted 10% each year like with Polkadot.

20/ Regulatory compliance is going to be key to enable the thousands of trillions to migrate over. A subnet manages its own membership, and it may require that its validators have certain properties such as requiring them be located in a given country or holding a certain license

21/ So, you may have one subnet for validating a set of blockchains that deal with trading of securities in the US which requires validators be located in the US and hold certain licenses for example. Or located within the EU and comply with GRDP regulation etc.

22/ Avalanche offers an incredibly customisable platform that can cater for all requirements from DeFi to the 1000’s of trillions of dollars in the traditional finance world. It’s future proof by enabling the integration of any custom VM enabling rapid adoption by using the

23/ existing tooling and infrastructure of other platforms. DAPPs can easily be ported and benefit from the performance Avalanche offers without changes, enabling developers to expand across multiple blockchains without having to maintain two completely different repos.

24/ Whether developers want to build DAPPs on existing blockchains like the C-Chain, or create custom application specific blockchains, whether permissioned or permissionless, or the usage of any VM and smart contract language, Avalanche is the platform that enables all of that

25/ Whilst also offering incredible performance, sub second finality and unparalleled decentralisation with the revolutionary Avalanche consensus.

No need to compromise, Build Without Limits on Avalanche.

5. Tokenomics

2/ Unlike most other staking platforms which have an unlimited supply and continuously increase their supply at a compounded rate through high inflation, leading to dilution of existing token holders, Avalanche $AVAX has a fixed capped supply of 720 million, creating scarcity.

3/ 360 million tokens were minted at launch (with vesting periods between 1 and 10 years) whilst the other 360 mil are used for rewards for staking released over decades. As with Bitcoin, reward rates will decrease over time as it gets closer to the capped supply

4/ A completely meaningless comparison I see some people making is comparing the fully diluted cap of a fixed-cap asset such as AVAX to the diluted cap of a variable-cap asset. This makes no sense. You’re comparing the fully diluted cap that will take 50+ years to reach, to the..

5/ current total supply of a variable-cap asset which has unlimited supply and yearly compounded inflation rate, and that’s before you take into consideration the AVAX tokens which get burned.

6/ As an example, Polkadot is a non-fixed cap has a current total supply of 1 Billion and a 10% yearly inflation. After 50 years the total supply would have increased from 1 Billion to 117.3 Billion. Then let’s see how the favourably they compare.

7/ Based off current prices for AVAX and DOT: Avalanche Market Cap (worst possible scenario where every token is in circulation and completely ignoring the burned AVAX) is $15.5 Billion Polkadot Market Cap would be $3.4 Trillion! (and supply would continue increasing each year)

8/ ATOM is a commonly misunderstood token where people think it’s used for all of Cosmos. That’s not the case, it is only used for the Cosmos Hub, one of many hubs each with their own token. Cosmos can be a success without the use of the Cosmos hub at all.

9/ Even with the additional functionality they are hoping to add to it in the future such as a DEX, the Hub is limited in tps and so can never have all traffic flowing through it as it would be a bottleneck. Of those transactions that do, you don’t even need to use ATOM for fees

10/ Meanwhile the token supply continues to increase each year with inflation, diluting existing holders. Also like with other platforms transaction fees go to the small group of validators who then just sell them shortly after to cover their costs., not creating a lot of value.

11/In addition to having a limited supply like with Bitcoin, Avalanche goes further by burning AVAX tokens for fees for all sorts of operations on the network in the primary network such as transaction fees, subscription style fees for creating subnets and creation of blockchains

12/ thus increasing the scarcity of AVAX for all token holders, (rather than fees just going to a small group of validators) and creating deflationary pressure when the amount burnt exceeds the minting rewards. Potential for an excellent store of value as well as a payment system

13/Whereas Ethereum’s EIP 1559 proposal just burns part of the fee, Avalanche burns the entire fee. Avalanche’s fixed capped supply means there can never be more than 720 million AVAX, whereas there are no limits with the size of Ethereum’s supply.

14/ An Ethereum Genesis holder who bought $ETH at $0.3111 had hands of steel whilst the price soared to highs of $1433, a 4606x on their investment. Everyone has their limits though and sold a 1/3 of their ETH to participate in the $AVAX ICO (max allowed)


15/ Enterprise deployments such as permissioned forks of Ethereum or Enterprises building on permissioned side-chains on Algorand, don’t use the ETH or ALGO token and provide no utility. AVAX is one of very few projects where enterprise use provides utility for the token.

16/ All validators of any subnet have to validate the primary network and stake a minimum of 2000 AVAX. In addition, subnet and blockchain creation fees are paid in AVAX which are burned. Unlike the Cosmos Hub, the primary network and $AVAX is essential for the network.

17/Staking AVAX is incredibly lucrative, offering rates between 9.32% and 11.1%, especially when the price of $AVAX is likely to rise over time due to the above, making it an excellent long-term investment and no risk of slashing and losing your funds like other staking protocols

18/ Not only that, but you can receive rewards in other tokens validating various subnets in addition to the primary network. There are also plans to enable liquid staking where you will be able to use the staked AVAX for DeFi activities for the potential for even greater rewards

19/Avalanche has the scarcity properties of Bitcoin, the potential for utility to far exceed Ethereum with thousands of subnets building on top, creating incredible network effects. In addition to a capped supply, it has EIP 1559 on steriods where all the tranaction fee is burned

20/ not just for transaction fees on one chain but all the chains in the primary network as well as blockchain and subnet creation fees for other subnets, creating deflationary pressures.

21/ Avalanche makes an excellent payment platform, supporting a variety of assets with its revolutionary consensus engine, exceeding Visa-Level throughput with sub second finality whilst able to accommodate millions of validators.

22/ Rewards will reduce over time like with Bitcoin halving events, combined with the transaction fees being burned could lead to incredible price appreciation. It’s like mining Bitcoin in the early days and is going to get even more lucrative with subnets and liquidity staking.

23/ $AVAX has incredible tokenomics, capturing value from all that build on top. There has been rapid growth of the platform just 6 months since mainnet and this is going to continue to exponentially increase from here.

24/ Avalanche is creating the Internet of Finance, offering the best place to build DeFi applications but also the traditional finance market, where the derivatives market alone is worth a staggering $800 trillion and able to meet regulatory compliance and Enterprise adoption

25/ There’s so much to look forward to in the coming weeks and months with projects going live, new features being rolled out, listing on major exchanges, NFT marketplaces, new bridges, lending platforms and much more. This is just the very beginning.




DLT Enthusiast and Writer. Interoperability is key for DLT to achieve its true potential. Avalanche $AVAX