In this guide, we will compare Cardano vs Solana vs Polkadot, three L1 networks that emerged during the most active period of development for decentralized activity. We will also make a blockchain scalability comparison, to determine the best layer 1 blockchain for 2025.
The creation of a L1 takes into account multiple factors, including hardware requirements, incentives for validators, as well as the network’s collection of active projects. Last but not least, each new L1 fights to build a community of users, token holders, and traders. The creation of a L1 is therefore not only a technical solution for speed or reliability, but a wider task of building a viable on-chain economy.
Why These Three Layer 1s Matter
The L1 chains listed in this guide emerged during a period of innovation and active price discovery. The networks faced unique challenges in solving the problem of speed, decentralization, and building a community of real users.
When making a chain scalability comparison, Cardano, Solana, and Polkadot show three key approaches to carrying enough transactions to support high-speed applications, trading, and fast token transfers.
Competing with Ethereum’s dominance
One of the reasons for the creation of additional L1 chains was the dominance of Ethereum. As the only chain for tokens, trading, NFTs and other apps, Ethereum immediately showed its flaws. Speed, consensus and low costs were key in the creation of new networks.
Ethereum carried the first wave of decentralized apps, and immediately showed the network’s flaws. Cardano, Solana, and Polkadot were first created to offer secure transactions without the need for mining. Ethereum still offered mining until September 2022, while other chains launched from the start with energy-efficient proof-of-stake.
Different visions for scalability and decentralization
Cardano, Polkadot, and Solana were created with different visions of scalability and decentralization. All chains avoided some of the pitfalls of Ethereum, doing away with mining from the start. All three networks chose some form of delegated proof of stake, with consensus between validators. However, the three chains offered a different experience both to app developers and end users.
2025 narrative: performance, interoperability, governance
In 2025, most of the older networks have gone through several updates. Cardano added full smart contract functionality and moved closer to launching Hydra protocol for instant scaling. Polkadot built the JAM network and added more capabilities to add parachains and side chains. Solana prepared for the Firedancer and Alpenglow updates to boost speed, block capacity, and finality. All chains worked toward faster performance, connection to other chains, and efficient governance.
Overview of Each Blockchain
The leading blockchains compete on multiple parameters, and offer a different experience. We will compare Cardano to Polkadot and Solana for their ability to carry decentralized traffic.
Cardano (ADA) — Academic, Formal, Slow but Secure
Cardano uses a formally approved consensus mechanism, which is relatively slow to achieve finality. The network relies on epochs, rewarding block finders after finalizing the network stake.
The network uses the Ouroboros proof-of-stake mechanism, which assigns a random validator into block producer slots. Validators hold ADA and compete in a random draw to become the slot leader and produce blocks. A higher amount of ADA brings a higher statistical probability of being selected for the block.
Cardano’s concept was the first to be built on the basis of peer-reviewed cryptography research. The chain also had a detailed roadmap to shift from a semi-centralized chain to full community governance, after the Voltaire hard fork.
The chain boasted a high level of security, although in November 2025, the chain split due to a malformed transaction sent by an inadvertent exploiter. The bug was patched and Cardano returned to consensus.
Cardano’s strengths come from its formal verification and consensus stability. The chain’s main flaws include few users and developers, slow growth, and limited DeFi liquidity.
Solana (SOL) — High Performance and Mass Adoption
Solana was built for mass adoption, combining proof-of-stake with a unique approach called proof-of-history. The blockchain generates unique, verifiable timestamps and validators can verify the transaction record without a central authority or coordinator.
Solana’s approach allows for a high transaction count on each block, with ultra-low fees for basic transactions. The Firedancer upgrade, launched partially in 2025, will further boost Solana’s speed.
The main strength of Solana is the ability to host production-ready apps with sufficient speed. Solana has been targeting end users with some of the most widely adopted apps. The chain still aims to mitigate partial centralization and to ensure there are no more consensus failures and network outages.
Polkadot (DOT) — Interoperability and Modular Chains
Polkadot’s main structure is that of a hub, where the relay chain connects to all parachains. In 2025, Polkadot expanded to 100 parachains, based on slots sold at an auction, with a two-year duration of the smart contract for each parachain.
The XCM protocol was also introduced not as a new platform, but as a messaging protocol. With this messaging standard, one chain can send intents to another, connecting the entire ecosystem. XCM was developed for Polkadot, but can be used as a universal format in any blockchain environment.
The Polkadot ecosystem allows an optimal mix of customized chains, which are interoperable, but rely on a common hub for their security. The setbacks include the need for auctions, technical complexity, and slower retail adoption.
Technical Architecture Comparison
Comparing Cardano vs Solana vs Polkadot, there is a common quality to all chains. The end goal is for transactions to be fast and seamless, close to the speed of Web2 apps. The main difference is between the consensus mechanism.
On Solana, proof of history and proof of stake combine to prove the validity of blocks. The Ouroboros of Cardano, also compatible with Polkadot, relies on holding a stake of tokens. Polkadot also uses Nominated proof of stake (NPoS), which selects multiple validators to secure a block.
Solana has significant validator requirements, with a 12-core 24 thread processor, 256 GB or more RAM, at least 1.5TB of disk space for accounts and ledger history. Cardano’s requirements are smaller, with only 24 GB RAM and just 150 GB of free storage as a minimum.
Polkadot is in the middle, with an eight-core processor, but a significant 2TB in storage space. Parachain handling also requires a high speed network connection.
Solana attracts Rust developers, while Cardano has been known to be the only chain project to use Haskell. Polkadot also uses Rust, with Polkadot SDK as its main toolset (formerly Substrate).
The Solana network is structured around clusters of validators, which have a leader and achieve consensus. Cardano uses a double-layer, with a basic consensus layer for ADA transfers, and an additional smart contract layer. On Polkadot, consensus happens on the relay chain, securing all other parachains.
Polkadot’s network uses parallel execution for its activity, while Cardano’s layered architecture uses hierarchical execution of transactions. Solana also uses hierarchical execution, with multiple instructions in more complex types of transactions.
Decentralization and Security
Cardano, with 1,500 reported validators, is the most decentralized network. Solana was down to 862 validators, though it had periods of up to 1,300 active nodes. The number of validators can vary within days, although for networks like Solana, the biggest validators are a permanent presence.
Solana’s higher requirements for validator hardware, as well as the influence of leading validators, is making the network more centralized. Solana also creates a barrier to entry, especially after a few years, when the leading validators have accumulated even larger SOL stakes.
Polkadot has chosen to be partially centralized through its Relay chain, offering more freedom to parachains. While parachains have more centralized security, their parameters are not constrained by Polkadot.
Decentralization makes the network more secure by spreading out the infrastructure geographically. Solana’s validators are still clustered in developer countries, with over 60% of nodes based in Europe. Cardano, on the other hand, has lighter hardware and offers more opportunities for global participation, as envisioned in its global node map.
Polkadot has chosen partial centralization, as its security depends on the Relay chain. On the other hand, individual projects are not constrained by the rules of one chain.
Ecosystem Growth & Developer Activity
The ecosystem of top chains contains diverse apps, often spreading across several chains. Solana has become the leader, arriving just in time for the Web3 boom in 2021. The platform has carried retail apps, NFTs, meme coin launchpads, and payment tools. Over time, Solana wallets evolved for access across multiple apps.
Cardano added a smaller number of apps, building an ecosystem with only a few connections to other platforms. Polkadot managed to attract developers and grow its tech, but parachains only attracted a limited number of users. Polkadot currently carries as low as 2,900 daily active wallets as of November 2025.
DeFi total value locked also varies across chains. Solana locked in between $12B and $9B in total value toward the end of 2025. Cardano’s DeFi sector only carried under $200M for a limited number of apps. Polkadot reporting for TVL is limited, especially for its smaller parachains.
Based on Developer Report, Solana has over 1,290 developers. Polkadot attracted 472 developers, and Cardano only around 230. Solana is the leader for popular apps, with Jupiter at the top covering the widest number of activities. Cardano relies on Minswap and Liqwid for a significant part of its DeFi activity. Polkadot’s apps are mostly distributed to parachains.
Real-world adoption is the strongest for Solana, which managed to displace other networks with robust SOL growth and good product-market fit. Cardano and Polkadot attempted to carry their native apps, only inviting a limited number of users.
Based on the Developer Report, a much smaller number of blockchain developers have multi-chain skills and knowledge. Most of the developers focus on one chain, making competition for exclusivity even more important. Developers tend to stick with one network, and each L1 tries to create a developer-friendly environment. Too big technical difficulties, or expenses in launching apps, may discourage app creators and developers.
Strengths and Weaknesses Summary
Cardano Strengths
Cardano’s consensus is carefully curated and based on academic research. The platform shifted to community governance, which successfully resolves issues. Cardano’s chain is the most decentralized based on validator counts. Hydra protocol is in advanced testing, offering off-chain scaling for high-speed apps.
Cardano Weaknesses
Cardano has invited criticism for spending years with no significant shipping, taking a long time to set up the chain before allowing real-world uses. As a result, Cardano lags with a smaller app ecosystem, and limited DeFi liquidity and traction.
Solana Strengths
Solana’s main strength is in settling fast transactions as a L1 chain. Due to wide community outreach, Solana built a successful consumer ecosystem, with relatively liquid NFT, memes, and DeFi. Low fees enable fun on-chain engagement and mass adoption. The Firedancer upgrade coming in 2026 is expected to make the chain even faster and more reliable.
Solana Weaknesses
Although Solana has spent years with no outages, the risk and stigma remain. Solana developers work extra hard to convince the community that outages are now even less probable. A diminishing number of validators is also raising concerns on decentralization. Solana is also used as long as liquidity remains high, and activity levels can shift.
Polkadot Strengths
Polkadot managed to build one of the best interoperability ecosystems. The project allowed parachains to customize their networks, while inviting a strong developer community. The shared security of the Relay chain decreased costs for all other projects.
Polkadot Weaknesses
Polkadot offered complex architecture and an involved launch project, requiring DOT ownership and auctions for parachain slots. Polkadot also has a weak presence with retail apps, and non-technical users can find the chain confusing compared to better-integrated networks like Solana.
Best Use Cases for Each L1
Solana’s product market fit is especially broad, as the chain hosts the most active apps. Solana and its wallets are serving as a payment gateway. The chain also holds consumer apps, especially trading and financial platforms. Solana’s speed means the chain carries orderbooks directly, or allows access to fast router and aggregator apps.
Cardano has been suited to governance, highly secure apps, and identity proofs. The chain has shown it can carry typical Web3 apps, though at a smaller scale.
Polkadot offers wide access to projects, deploying to custom parachains. The network offers interoperability and easier cross-chain transfers. Parachains offer enterprise-grade speed and security, as well as building with a modular chain structure and several layers of settlement.
Which Layer 1 Is Best in 2025?
Creating the perfect L1 network is an open-ended question. Over time, projects have focused on different features, each serving a specific purpose. For Vitalik Buterin, the creation of multiple competing chain is not a problem, but a challenge with the potential for multi-chain cooperation.
L1 usually find different niches based on their best features. Solana rose as the best platform for high performance and consumer apps. Cardano offers security features and identity verification, in addition to smart contract creaton. Polkadot is an interoperability hub with a growing list of cooperating projects.
L1 are indispensable for settlement, security, general transactions, and securing additional apps and layers. Task-specific L1 also become staples in crypto space, enduring short-term market fluctuations. Cardano, Solana, and Polkadot have proven their worth over multiple bull and bear markets, as well as various app trends.
Source: https://www.cryptopolitan.com/cardano-vs-solana-vs-polkadot-layer-1-comparison/
