Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency
BridgesInjective
No data in window
Mantle
No data in window
Injective vs Mantle
Injective vs Mantle on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks, awaiting live measurements.
Injective
Cosmos SDK L1 with a native onchain orderbook and EVM compatibility layer. CometBFT consensus, sub-second block time, deterministic finality per block. TokenFactory MsgCreateDenom carries a flat 0.1 INJ governance fee on top of gas.
Mantle
Modular OP Stack fork using EigenDA for data availability rather than Ethereum calldata, cutting L1 anchoring cost. 2-second sequencer block time, MNT token for gas (ETH-pegged).
Side by side measurements
Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery
BridgesInjective
No data in window
Mantle
Trails97.50 min
- p99
- 119.56 s
- rank
- #12
- samples
- 21
Fastest Hyperlane source chain by end-to-end message delivery
BridgesInjective
No data in window
Mantle
No data in window
Fastest Axelar GMP source chain by end-to-end delivery
BridgesInjective
No data in window
Mantle
No data in window
Frequently asked questions
Injective vs Mantle: which one is better?
Injective and Mantle are compared on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. See the live table on this page for every metric.
How is the Injective vs Mantle 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.
How this pair was selected
A pair is published when all four conditions hold. Both providers run in the same OpenChainBench benchmark for at least seven consecutive days. Each provider has at least 1000 samples in the measurement window. The head to head query has observable third party search demand. Both providers have a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo so the methodology is externally verifiable.