Objective

This article provides a technical comparison between Ethereum, Bitcoin, and Lisk, focusing on consensus mechanisms, finality, fraud proof mechanisms, transaction fees, and scalability. A detailed transaction-level cost analysis is also included, particularly contrasting Ethereum and Lisk.

1. Architectural Overview

Metric Ethereum (Layer 1) Bitcoin Lisk (Optimistic Rollup)
Consensus Proof-of-Stake (PoS) Proof-of-Work (PoW) Optimistic Rollup (secured by Ethereum)
Time-to-Finality ~6.4 minutes per slot (~12.8 min full) ~60 minutes (6 block confirmations) Instant on L2, 7 days for L1 finality
Fraud Proofs Slashing for invalid block proposals None Fraud dispute period (7-day challenge window)
Average TX Cost ~$0.02 $1–10 (varies by congestion) ~$0.0073
Max Transactions/sec 15–30 ~7 ~2,000

Ethereum

  • PoS Consensus: Validators stake ETH to propose and validate blocks. Finality is achieved after two epochs (~12.8 minutes).
  • State Model: Utilizes Merkle Patricia Tries for secure, verifiable state transitions.
  • Fee Model: Transaction fees = gasUsed × gasPrice. Dynamic fee market introduced via EIP-1559.

Bitcoin

  • PoW Consensus: Miners solve cryptographic puzzles to append new blocks. Finality is probabilistic based on block confirmations.
  • Scripting Limitations: Bitcoin supports non-Turing complete scripts and lacks native smart contract functionality.

Lisk

  • Optimistic Rollup: Executes transactions off-chain and posts transaction data and state roots to Ethereum L1.
  • Key Stack Components:
    • op-geth: EVM-equivalent execution engine.
    • op-batcher: Compresses and submits L2 transaction batches to L1.
  • Fraud Proofs: Ensures validity by allowing challenges during a 7-day dispute window on Ethereum L1.

2. Transaction-Level Fee Analysis

Ethereum Example

  • Transaction Hash: 0x69b386f...
  • Type: Simple ETH transfer
  • Gas Usage:
    • gasUsed: 23,712
    • gasPrice: 0.480631108 Gwei
  • Total Fee: 
23,712 × 0.000000000480631108 ETH = 0.000011396 ETH ≈ $0.02

Lisk Example

  • Transaction Hash: 0x90910fd...
  • Type: Smart contract interaction (e.g., setBool)
  • L2 Execution Fee: 
gasUsed: 21,871 × 0.000000000001001014 ETH = 0.0000000219 ETH
  • L1 Data Submission Cost: 
gasUsed: 1,600 × 0.000000000480037695 ETH = 0.000000768 ETH
  • Total Cost: 
≈ 0.0000007899 ETH ≈ $0.0073

3. Why Ethereum Costs More: Key Gas Drivers

On-Chain vs. Off-Chain Execution

  • Ethereum processes every transaction directly on Layer 1, requiring consensus by all nodes.
  • Lisk, as a rollup, performs execution off-chain and uses Layer 1 mainly for data availability and fraud proof validation.

Gas Price Disparity

  • Ethereum's gasPrice: 0.48 Gwei
  • Lisk L2’s gasPrice: 0.001 Gwei
  • This ~480x difference significantly reduces Lisk’s operational costs.

Execution Model

  • Ethereum’s EVM executes all opcodes on-chain (e.g., SSTORE, CALL), incurring higher computational and storage costs.
  • Lisk’s EVM-equivalent runtime operates off-chain, pushing minimal calldata to L1 for verification.

4. Conclusion

Ethereum

  • Emphasizes decentralization and security by maintaining full execution on L1.
  • Trade-offs include higher fees and slower finality.

Lisk

  • Leverages Ethereum’s security via optimistic rollups while dramatically reducing costs and improving scalability.
  • Exemplifies Ethereum’s scaling roadmap, in which L1 becomes a data availability layer and L2 handles scalable computation.

Future Trends

As Ethereum moves toward proto-danksharding and full data availability sampling, rollups like Lisk will become central to its scaling ecosystem. These systems are already delivering >99% fee reductions and orders-of-magnitude improvements in throughput without compromising Ethereum’s security guarantees.