Category Overview
Final Ranking
Stablecoins
The five examined stablecoins are all pegged against the US-Dollar. Three of them are FIAT-backed, one is crypto-backed, and the remaining one is algorithmic-backed.
| Symbol | Name | Type | Points | Best Blockchain | Total | Ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 | Tether | FIAT | 22 | 57 (SOL) | 79 | 1 |
 | USD Coin | FIAT | 21 | 57 (SOL) | 78 | 2 |
 | Dai | Crypto | 18 | 57 (SOL) | 75 | 3 |
 | TerraUSD | Algorithmic | 15 | 57 (SOL) | 72 | 4 |
 | Binance USD | FIAT | 15 | 38 (ETH) | 53 | 5 |
USDT takes the top spot in the stablecoin ranking. The top 4 are all available on the best-rated Solana Blockchain.Cryptocurrencies
This ranking comprises 24 selected payment cryptocurrencies plus the upcoming upgrade of Ethereum to proof of stake as ETH2.
| Ticker | Name | Type | Consensus | Points | Ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 | Solana | Coin | Proof of History | 71 | 1 |
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo} | Ethereum 2.0 | Coin | PoS | 67 | 2 |
 | Fantom | Coin | PoS | 67 | 2 |
 | Avalanche | Coin | PoS | 64 | 3 |
 | XRP | Coin | XRP Consensus | 63 | 5 |
 | Polkadot | Coin | PoS | 63 | 5 |
 | Algorand | Coin | PoS | 63 | 5 |
 | Terra | Coin | dPoS | 62 | 8 |
 | EOS | Coin | dPoS | 62 | 8 |
 | Cosmos | Coin | PoS | 61 | 10 |
 | Bitcoin Cash | Coin | PoW | 61 | 10 |
 | Stellar | Coin | Stellar Consensus | 60 | 12 |
 | NEAR Protocol | Coin | PoS | 58 | 13 |
 | Bitcoin | Coin | PoW | 57 | 14 |
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo} | Ethereum | Coin | PoW | 57 | 14 |
 | TRON | Coin | dPoS | 57 | 14 |
 | Litecoin | Coin | PoW | 56 | 17 |
 | Elrond | Coin | PoS | 56 | 17 |
 | Cardano | Coin | PoS | 54 | 19 |
 | Harmony | Token | PoS | 53 | 20 |
 | Polygon | Token | PoS | 52 | 21 |
 | Binance Coin | Coin | dPoS-A | 50 | 22 |
 | Cronos | Coin | PoS | 50 | 22 |
 | Dash | Coin | Hybrid PoW & PoS | 50 | 22 |
 | Dogecoin | Coin | PoW | 47 | 25 |
SOL takes the top spot in the cryptocurrency ranking. According to the factors analyzed, Solana scored the most points and is thus the blockchain best suited for payments. Solana is one of the best-rated cryptocurrencies in all technical factors, lagging others only in availability and acceptance.
FTM, which has similar technical capabilities as Solana, and /w=3840,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
ETH2 share second place with 67 points. Ethereum 2.0 combines the points of one of the most established cryptocurrencies with the technical superiority of PoS over PoW regarding payments. It should be noted that Ethereum 2.0 is still under development but should serve as an excellent payment ecosystem in the future. Compared to Solana and Fantom, just the transaction speed is inferior.
/w=3840,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
ETH scores 57 points and highlights that the upgrade to PoS is beneficial for a payments ecosystem.Current Success
The current success of a cryptocurrency is measured by market capitalization, the transaction volume of the last 24 hours, the number of estimated users, and two third-party ratings. The first three metrics are related to the availability and accepting venues, which generally describe current ecosystem adaptation.
Furthermore, all three metrics indicate the levels of trust in a cryptocurrency and therefore confer legitimacy. The third-party ratings evaluate the current success with additional metrics.
| Ticker | Marketcap | Volume (24h) | Users | FCAS | TokenInsight | Success Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 666,077,264,476 € | 16,019,084,896 € | 40,923,100 | A- | AA | 5 |
| 302,697,809,541 € | 11,931,129,125 € | 175,000,000 | B+ | A | 5 |
 | 70,595,960,329 € | 43,457,313,386 € | 4,107,963 | B | 5 | |
| 18,460,010,435 € | 1,265,228,126 € | 2,300,000 | B | BBB | 4 |
| 55,414,142,441 € | 1,214,635,574 € | 5,871,293 | B+ | BBB | 4 |
| 5,357,425,928 € | 3,736,016,896 € | 22,095,000 | C+ | BB | 4 |
| 26,999,236,969 € | 1,036,840,552 € | 3,960,000 | C | BBB | 4 |
| 16,241,546,032 € | 1,304,314,809 € | 1,170,000 | B | BBB | 4 |
| 26,251,265,489 € | 1,737,295,687 € | 7,372,071 | B | BBB | 4 |
 | 47,287,255,537 € | 3,286,557,645 € | 1,393,975 | A | 4 | |
| 5,096,790,450 € | 200,699,890 € | 23,502,091 | B- | BB | 3 |
| 7,613,949,742 € | 967,786,556 € | 1,283,000 | B- | BBB | 3 |
 | 8,568,289,196 € | 203,698,320 € | 461,662 | BB | 3 | |
| 4,097,921,338 € | 947,669,828 € | 2,501,730 | B- | BB | 3 |
| 6,800,409,450 € | 716,480,031 € | 4,763,000 | BB | 3 | |
| 5,297,263,353 € | 357,882,884 € | 5,080,888 | BB | 3 | |
| 10,389,743,285 € | 851,440,985 € | 386,563 | B | BBB | 3 |
| 4,341,808,329 € | 251,150,686 € | 4,300,000 | C+ | BB | 3 |
| 26,175,888,343 € | 2,851,610,400 € | BBB | 3 | ||
| 5,384,997,357 € | 930,461,682 € | 1,749,000 | B- | 3 | |
| 32,461,679,830 € | 2,944,057,976 € | 3,682,355 | D | BBB | 3 |
 | 16,103,744,588 € | 3,686,284,601 € | 94,300 | 2 | ||
| 9,440,674,686 € | 85,035,192 € | 228,675 | BB | 2 | |
| 892,111,058 € | 132,285,822 € | 1,464,678 | B | BB | 2 |
| 15,105,591,737 € | 490,990,675 € | 4,221,700 | D | BB | 2 |
| 2,779,005,218 € | 173,051,704 € | 1,425,163 | C+ | 2 | |
| 1,904,140,383 € | 262,297,267 € | 4,961,754 | B- | BB | 2 |
| 1,641,917,911 € | 240,668,661 € | 1,079,000 | B- | BB | 2 |
 | 11,286,134,133 € | 441,339,630 € | 33,072 | 2 |
Security & Decentralization
Security is an essential requirement, but it does not matter which cryptocurrency is one security point better in the consumer decision. The systems themselves are considered secure, but users have to take on the responsibility to secure their holdings. The security of a cryptocurrency depends heavily on the consensus algorithm used.
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
| Ticker | Consensus | Staked Value | Hashrate | Security Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proof of History | 34,403,190,409 € | 5 | |
| dPoS | 26,605,518,088 € | 5 | |
| PoS | 25,226,762,357 € | 5 | |
| PoS | 20,341,880,754 € | 5 | |
| PoW | 153.967 EH/s | 5 | |
| PoS | 16,945,059,899 € | 4 | |
| PoS | 10,825,326,209 € | 4 | |
| dPoS-A | 7,006,391,754 € | 4 | |
| PoS | 5,131,985,867 € | 4 | |
| PoS | 4,256,099,319 € | 4 | |
| PoS | 3,873,745,463 € | 4 | |
| PoS | 3,613,539,884 € | 4 | |
| PoS | 2,489,692,501 € | 4 | |
| PoW | 1.39 EH/s | 4 | |
| PoW | 1.06 PH/s | 4 | |
| PoS | 808,647,179 € | 3 | |
| dPoS | 719,443,814 € | 3 | |
| Hybrid PoW & PoS | 416,270,592 € | 3.87 PH/s | 3 |
| PoS | 1,653,856,467 € | 3 | |
| PoS | 1,539,402,674 € | 3 | |
| dPoS | 1,241,022,717 € | 3 | |
| PoW | 494.68 TH/s | 2 | |
| PoW | 299.64 TH/s | 2 | |
| XRP Consensus | 1 | ||
| Stellar Consensus | 1 |
BTC, 
ADA, ETH2, SOL and 
LUNA are the most secure cryptocurrencies. All of them require an investment of at least 10 billion euros for a successful 51% attack, making an attack by a single entity almost impossible. Nevertheless, cryptocurrencies are inherently secured when there is enough computing power or stake on the network.
XLM and 
XRP use a different consensus and secure themselves with the reputation of publicly known nodes. However, there are only a handful of organizations validating transactions on the networks leading to concerns about concentrated attacks on specific nodes undermining the network. Therefore, both only receive only 1 point for security as well as for decentralization.
Transaction Costs and Throughput
Transaction costs and throughput are two essential factors for a cryptocurrency that vary widely across the sample. Both aspects are compared to the three established payment options Visa, Mastercard, and PayPal. These payment options are a vital benchmark as cryptocurrencies need to at least match these factors to become a suitable means of payment.
| Name | Transaction Fee | Throughput (TPS) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo} | 1.43% - 2.4% | 1,700 | Credit Card |
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo} | 1.55% - 2.6% | 5,000 | Credit Card |
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo} | 3.49% + 0.39€ | 193 | Payment Processor |
/w=3840,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
Visa operates at an average throughput of 1,700 transactions per second (TPS).
| Ticker | Transaction Fee ($) | Cost Points | Throughput (TPS) | Throughput Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 5 | 4,000 | 4 |
| 0.0000001 | 5 | 25,000 | 5 |
| 0.000004 | 5 | 4,500 | 4 |
| 0.00001 | 5 | 3,000 | 4 |
| 0.00001 | 5 | 100,000 | 4 |
| 0.0001 | 5 | 2,000 | 4 |
| 0.0002 | 5 | 1,000 | 3 |
| 0.0002 | 5 | 1,500 | 3 |
| 0.0002 | 5 | 50,000 | 4 |
| 0.00025 | 5 | 50,000 | 5 |
| 0.001 | 4 | 15,000 | 5 |
| 0.001 | 4 | 46,000 | 4 |
| 0.003 | 4 | 116 | 2 |
| 0.01 | 3 | 56 | 1 |
| 0.01 | 3 | 10,000 | 5 |
| 0.04 | 3 | 56 | 1 |
| 0.10 | 2 | 1,000 | 3 |
| 0.1 | 3 | 2,000 | 4 |
| 0.1%-1% | 2 | 10,000 | 5 |
| 0.23 | 2 | 33 | 1 |
| 0.35 | 2 | 160 | 2 |
| 0.41 | 2 | 7 | 1 |
| 1.55 | 1 | 5 | 1 |
| 6.00 | 1 | 15 | 1 |
| 1 | 100,000 | 4 |
ETH2, 
CRO, 
NEAR, and 
ALGO are all development goals and are not achieved yet. Also, the high numbers of most have not been reached in practice as there is not enough traffic yet. However, some of them, such as SOL, have already reached or exceeded the proclaimed numbers in test networks, which shows that they can achieve high throughput if required in the future. Therefore, high TPS numbers should be handled with care but ultimately show the aspirations and, to some extent, the speed of a blockchain.Transaction Speed
Measuring the speed of a cryptocurrency for a single transaction is done via blocktime marking the lowest possible transaction time on a blockchain. Points are mainly awarded for this metric. The number of recommended confirmations varies for every accepting entity. The more secure and trusted networks get over time, the lower the number of confirmations deemed safe. Time to finality multiplies the blocktime with the number of confirmations but can be understood as an upper limit decreasing over time.
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
Visa requires a 2.4-second confirmation time for the entire point-to-point path.| Ticker | Blocktime (s) | Recom. Confirmations | Time to Finality (s) | Speed Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.4 | 15 | 6 | 5 |
| 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| 1 | 12 | 12 | 4 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| 2 | 10 | 20 | 4 |
| 2 | 12 | 24 | 4 |
| 2 | 20 | 40 | 4 |
| 4 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
| 4 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
| 4 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
| 3 | 20 | 60 | 3 |
| 3 | 20 | 60 | 3 |
| 5.6 | 12 | 67 | 3 |
| 6 | 4 | 24 | 3 |
| 6 | 25 | 150 | 3 |
| 12 | 0 | 2 | |
| 13 | 12 | 156 | 2 |
| 20 | 10 | 200 | 2 |
| 60 | 40 | 2,400 | 1 |
| 150 | 2 | 300 | 1 |
| 150 | 12 | 1,800 | 1 |
| 600 | 3 | 1,800 | 1 |
| 600 | 15 | 9,000 | 1 |
Usability
Many factors influence the usability of a cryptocurrency. One of the directly influencing factors is the wallet used to store, send and receive cryptocurrencies as it manages the handling of the cryptographic keys. All wallets have this basic functionality, and the usability of one particular wallet for a particular cryptocurrency cannot be measured easily. However, the number of available wallets can be determined, which is also a factor in ecosystem adoption.
| Ticker | Wallet Providers | Mobile | Desktop | Native | Usability Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | 5 | |||
| 40 | 5 | |||
| 20 | 5 | |||
| 13 | 5 | |||
| 12 | 5 | |||
| 12 | 5 | |||
| 12 | 5 | |||
| 12 | 5 | |||
| 11 | 5 | |||
| 11 | 5 | |||
| 10 | 5 | |||
| 10 | 5 | |||
| 9 | 5 | |||
| 8 | 5 | |||
| 8 | 5 | |||
| 7 | 5 | |||
| 7 | 5 | |||
| 6 | 5 | |||
| 6 | 5 | |||
| 6 | 5 | |||
| 6 | 5 | |||
| 6 | 5 | |||
| 5 | 5 | |||
| 14 | 4 | |||
| 12 | 4 | |||
| 11 | 4 | |||
| 8 | 4 | |||
| 8 | 4 | |||
| 4 | 3 | |||
| 4 | 3 |
NEAR offers the advantage of human-readable wallet addresses instead of a public key hash. This results in a more straightforward user experience and shows how multifaceted usability aspects can be.Availability and Acceptance
The availability and number of accepting venues are critical factors in the adoption. Both factors heavily influence whether people or stores accept payments with cryptocurrency. The number of existing market pairs measures the availability of a cryptocurrency. As this metric contains a high proportion of pure cryptocurrency pairs, the number of Euro and Dollar FIAT markets is also included.
| Ticker | Markets | FIAT markets (USD / Euro) | Availability Points | Accepting Payment Gateways | Accepting Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 736 | >40 | 5 | 9 | 5 |
| 9,186 | >40 | 5 | 10 | 5 |
| 572 | >40 | 5 | 8 | 4 |
| 5,524 | >40 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| 5,524 | >40 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| 684 | >40 | 5 | 5 | 3 |
| 28,750 | >40 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| 452 | 32 | 4 | 7 | 4 |
| 3,128 | 25 | 4 | 5 | 3 |
| 328 | 21 | 4 | 5 | 3 |
| 369 | 25 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| 426 | 20 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| 314 | 27 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| 406 | 38 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| 571 | 29 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| 333 | 26 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
| 777 | 17 | 3 | 5 | 3 |
| 251 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 191 | 19 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 725 | 15 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 159 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 263 | 16 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 201 | 19 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| 241 | 18 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| 301 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 82 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 107 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 129 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 3,063 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 3 |
| 84 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Sustainability
The environmental sustainability of a cryptocurrency can be measured by its energy consumption and the hardware required for validating or mining. The environmental impact of energy consumption depends on the energy source. When energy is consumed from renewable sources, the environmental impact is limited but can never outweigh simply consuming less energy.
Another impacting factor is the equipment used. A lot of specialized, short-lived, and non-repurposable mining hardware is used for most PoW cryptocurrencies, such as BTC. This causes substantial electronic waste, including heavy metals and toxic chemicals, which is a significant environmental burden. However, ASIC-resistant PoW coins like
/w=48,quality=90,fit=scale-down){kind=logo}
Visa consumes 0.00358 kilowatt-hours per transaction.| Ticker | Consensus | Energy Consumption kWh/tx | Hardware Requirements | Sustainability Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stellar Consensus | 0.00022 | low | 5 |
| XRP Consensus | 0.0079 | low | 5 |
| Proof of History | 0.000166 | low | 5 |
| PoS | 0.00286 | low | 5 |
| PoS | 0.00000301 | low | 5 |
| PoS | 0.00476 | low | 5 |
| PoS | 0.00534 | low | 5 |
| PoS | 0.01742 | low | 4 |
| PoS | 0.05159 | low | 4 |
| dPoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoS | low | low | 4 |
| dPoS-A | low | low | 4 |
| dPoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoS | low | low | 4 |
| dPoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoS | low | low | 4 |
| PoW | 18.522 | High | 2 |
| PoW | 18.957 | High | 2 |
| PoW | 62.56 | Medium | 2 |
| Hybrid PoW & PoS | High | High | 2 |
| PoW | 565.57 | High | 1 |
| PoW | 707 | Extensive | 1 |
ALGO even pledges to be a sustainable carbon-negative blockchain.BTC’s total energy consumption matches whole countries like Portugal.Stablecoin Specific
Lastly, the only remaining factor is volatility. Volatility is the most mentioned adoption factor in the scientific community, as volatility is inherent to almost all cryptocurrencies. Stablecoins present an adequate solution to cope with this aspect and are therefore better suited for payments.
The top 5 stablecoins by market cap embody the dollar and include three FIAT-backed versions, one algorithmic, and one crypto-backed type. As all types solve the volatility issue, the type of stablecoin does not influence the points. Learn more: 
USDT and 
USDC are strong from a pure adaptation perspective and are leading the others in terms of market capitalization, volume, and users as seen in the success table.| Symbol | Type | Available Blockchains | Stablecoin Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| FIAT | ALGO, ETH, EOS, Liquid, OMNI, TRX, BCH, SOL | 5 |
| FIAT | ETH, ALGO, AVAX, HBAR, SOL, XLM, TRX, FLOW | 5 |
| Crypto | ETH, BNB, FTM, MATIC, AVAX, ONE, SOL | 5 |
| Algorithmic | LUNA, ATOM, SOL, MATIC, AVAX, BNB | 5 |
| FIAT | ETH, BNB | 4 |
As all listed stablecoins solve the volatility aspect, 5 points are awarded. One point is deducted from 
Pages
