Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency
BridgesCelo
No data in window
Optimism
Trails17.5 min
- rank
- #11
- samples
- 1provisional
VAA finalization
Celon/aOptimismn/a
Celo vs Optimism
Celo leads on 1 of 3 shared benchmarks, Optimism on 2. Celo wins on Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery (44.06 s vs 2.3 min). Optimism wins on Fastest Axelar GMP source chain by end-to-end delivery (25.0 min vs 26.7 min), Bridged TVL by chain ($1.61B vs $17.26M). Data as of 2026-10-11 UTC.
Optimism
Optimistic rollup and the canonical OP Stack reference implementation. 2-second sequencer block time, 7-day fraud-proof window, anchored to Ethereum L1 via batch submissions to the Optimism Portal.
Side by side measurements
Fastest Chainlink CCIP source chain by end-to-end delivery latency
BridgesCelo
No data in window
Optimism
Trails17.9 min
- rank
- #9
- samples
- 16provisional
CCIP delivery
Celon/aOptimismn/a
Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery
BridgesCelo
Leads44.06 s
- rank
- #8
- samples
- 21provisional
Optimism
Trails2.3 min
- p99
- 39.7 min
- rank
- #14
- samples
- 362
LayerZero delivery
Celon/aOptimismn/a
Fastest Axelar GMP source chain by end-to-end delivery
BridgesCelo
Trails26.7 min
- rank
- #10
- samples
- 4provisional
Optimism
Leads25.0 min
- rank
- #8
- samples
- 9provisional
Axelar GMP delivery
Celon/aOptimismn/a
Bridged TVL by chain: how much of a chain's capital came from somewhere else
Blockchains| Provider | Bridged TVL | Bridged share | 7d change | 7d vs peers | Native | Canonical | External |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Celo | $17.26M | 6.46% | - | 1.59% | $250.02M | $2.39M | $14.87M |
| Optimism | $1.61B | 79.8% | 0.69% | 3.04% | $409.48M | $1.29B | $321.05M |
View
Celon/aOptimismn/a
Bridged TVL is value secured by the chain's bridge, not value locked in its DeFi protocols; a chain can rank high on one and low on the other. The split is L2Beat's: canonical is escrowed on the host chain by the chain's own contracts, external came through a third-party bridge, native was minted here. Rows are the chains L2Beat tracks in its scaling summary; a settled L1 has no row by construction, not by omission. Size is not quality: a large balance says capital came, not that it stayed.
Stablecoin flow by chain: where dollars actually moved over 30 days
Blockchains| Provider | 30d change | Stablecoin float | Net 7d | 7d change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Celo | - | $111.61M | - | - |
| Optimism | 31.6% | $632.96M | $63.26M | 11.1% |
View
Celon/aOptimismn/a
Stablecoin float is where dollars are parked, not what they do. A chain can take in a billion that sits idle, and lose float to a single issuer redeeming. The figure is DefiLlama's chain-wide pegged-USD aggregate, every issuer combined; it does not separate a bridge inflow from a native mint, and a dollar bridged to an L2 counts on both chains, so rows are not additive. Read the net dollars with the percentage beside them: the same $400M is a rounding error on Ethereum and a doubling elsewhere.
Frequently asked questions
Celo vs Optimism: which one is better?
Celo and Optimism are compared on 6 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Celo leads on Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery. Optimism leads on Fastest Axelar GMP source chain by end-to-end delivery. See the live table on this page for every metric.
Which is faster on layerzero delivery, Celo or Optimism?
On the Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery benchmark, Celo leads at 44.06 s (provisional) versus Optimism at 2.3 min. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
Which is faster on axelar gmp delivery, Celo or Optimism?
On the Fastest Axelar GMP source chain by end-to-end delivery benchmark, Optimism leads at 25.0 min (provisional) versus Celo at 26.7 min (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
How is the Celo vs Optimism 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.