Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency
BridgesMonad
Leads3.47 s
- rank
- #2
- samples
- 45provisional
Solana
Trails12.58 s
- p99
- 19.07 s
- rank
- #7
- samples
- 8,458
Monad vs Solana
Monad leads on 2 of 3 shared benchmarks, Solana on 1. Monad wins on Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency (3.47 s vs 12.58 s), Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery (42.75 s vs 43.82 s). Solana wins on Fastest Chainlink CCIP source chain by end-to-end delivery latency (52.86 s vs 1.6 min).
Solana
Proof-of-History sequencing combined with Tower BFT consensus. Probabilistic finality at 32 confirmed slots. Slot time around 400 milliseconds.
Side by side measurements
Fastest Chainlink CCIP source chain by end-to-end delivery latency
BridgesMonad
Trails1.6 min
- rank
- #4
- samples
- 59provisional
Solana
Leads52.86 s
- rank
- #2
- samples
- 64provisional
Fastest LayerZero source chain by end-to-end message delivery
BridgesMonad
Leads42.75 s
- rank
- #7
- samples
- 76provisional
Solana
Trails43.82 s
- p99
- 2.0 min
- rank
- #8
- samples
- 406
Frequently asked questions
Monad vs Solana: which one is better?
Monad and Solana are compared on 3 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Monad leads on Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency. Solana leads on Fastest Chainlink CCIP source chain by end-to-end delivery latency. See the live table on this page for every metric.
Which is faster, Monad or Solana?
On the Fastest Wormhole VAA finalization by source chain, live latency benchmark, Monad leads at 3.47 s (provisional) versus Solana at 12.58 s. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
Which is faster, Monad or Solana?
On the Fastest Chainlink CCIP source chain by end-to-end delivery latency benchmark, Solana leads at 52.86 s (provisional) versus Monad at 1.6 min (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.
How is the Monad vs Solana 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.