OpenChainBench

Arbitrum vs Celo

Arbitrum leads on both live benchmarks. Arbitrum wins on Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery (25.85 s vs 44.29 s), Fastest Axelar GMP source chain by end-to-end delivery (20.6 min vs 25.0 min).

Read methodology Last measured Window: rolling 24h4 shared benchmarks
Arbitrum logo
Arbitrum

Optimistic rollup built on Nitro stack with a fast-finality sequencer. Sub-second block times (~250 ms) via a 250 ms default block interval, far below the 2 s OP Stack convention. 7-day fraud-proof window for L1 finality.

Celo logo
Celo

Side by side measurements

Frequently asked questions

Arbitrum vs Celo: which one is better?

Arbitrum and Celo are compared on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Arbitrum leads on Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is faster, Arbitrum or Celo?

On the Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery benchmark, Arbitrum leads at 25.85 s versus Celo at 44.29 s (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the Arbitrum vs Celo comparison measured?

Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.

Related comparisons

How this pair was selected

Auto-generated pairs require: both providers in the same benchmark for seven consecutive days, at least 1000 samples per provider, observable third-party search demand, and a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. Editorially curated pairs (like this one) may publish early when search demand is high and data is accruing — panels with fewer than 100 samples are shown as provisional. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo.

Live data refreshes via ISR within 60 seconds of a new run. Sources are the same Prometheus queries surfaced on the parent benchmark pages.