TrueChain vs Credits vs ChainLink
What problem does this service solve?
TrueChain wants to improve blockchain performance with a hybrid consensus model. | Credits hopes to create a blockchain platform that will have faster transaction time and will handle larger volumes. | ChainLink wants to solve the connectivity problem facing smart decentralized applications. By connecting smart contracts to external data resources, many potential use cases for blockchain can be opened up. |
Token Stats
Company Description
TrueChain is developing a secure and scalable blockchain platform with a strong developer community. TrueChain hopes to improve upon current platforms with a hybrid consensus protocol called Minerva. This hybrid model will combine a consensus mechanism based on Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (pBFT) with a FruitChain-based Proof-of-Work protocol. Fruitchain is designed to minimize the incentives of mining pools by decreasing the variance of mining rewards; making the network more decentralized. | Credits is building a blockchain platform focused on speed and scalability. Credits' protocol uses a Delegated Proof-of-Stake (dPoS) consensus mechanism and will be powered by the CS coin. They hope to significantly improve transaction times and reduce fees. | ChainLink is developing the LINK Network, which will enable connected smart contracts. LINK will provide smart contracts with a variety of external data and access to APIs. ChainLink's goal is to solve the connectivity problem that plagues smart contract based systems, and discourages mass adoption. Many decentralized applications are unable to connect with important external data sources due to limitations involving their consensus protocols. The LINK network wants to connect their smart contracts with external systems and APIs by using secure middleware. |