Fastest L1 blockchain finality, live across 11 chains
BlockchainsAvalanche
No data in window
Sui
No data in window
Split decision: Avalanche leads on Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery (40.29 s vs 45.00 s); Sui leads on Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency (3.40 s vs 4.58 s).
Primary Network runs the Snowman BFT consensus derived from Snow protocols. Sub-second deterministic finality with no chain reorganizations.
Move-based L1 using Mysticeti BFT consensus over a DAG. Owned-object transactions bypass consensus via Fast Path. Deterministic finality under one second.
Avalanche
No data in window
Sui
No data in window
Avalanche
Leads6.80 %
Sui
No data in window
Honest scope. (1) `net_yield = gross_apr × uptime`. NOT "yield net of MEV", Stakewiz `total_apy` already folds Jito MEV into gross, MEV is INCLUDED. `mev_share_bps` exists for transparency, not subtraction. (2) Solana median is dragged by ~42 vals at 0% APY (commission 100% or zero leader slots). (3) Hyperliquid: centralised sequencer, no separate MEV layer, ~30 vals only. (4) Ethereum: one network-average consensus-layer APR from the beacon spec formula, execution tips and MEV excluded.
Avalanche
Trails4.58 s
Sui
Leads3.40 s
Avalanche
Leads40.29 s
Sui
Trails45.00 s
Avalanche and Sui are compared on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Avalanche leads on Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery. Sui leads on Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency. See the live table on this page for every metric.
On the Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery benchmark, Avalanche leads at 40.29 s versus Sui at 45.00 s (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
On the Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency benchmark, Sui leads at 3.40 s versus Avalanche at 4.58 s (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
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.
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.