Dash is one of many cryptocurrencies (like bitcoin) but although they all share some common features, there are some they don’t. Unlike bitcoin, Dash can send transactions privately and instantly. Also, it’s network has the benefit of masternodes and runs on a hybrid Proof of Work (PoW) consensus model. Dash puts those masternodes to good use, powering anonymous and instantaneous payments. So, Bitcoin vs Dash—which one is the best?
Bitcoin first appeared in 2009. It was created by Satoshi Nakamoto—intriguingly, a person or persons unknown—and it offers a decentralized system and is open-sourced. This means that no one controls the network, not even governments. In contrast, Dash was invented by Evan Duffield (who is known) and it’s overseen by a decentralized autonomous organization. Dash came to market in 2014 and its developers wanted to create a new blockchain with no vulnerabilities, and they succeeded in creating a self-controlled and self-funding protocol. It’s the first blockchain in the world to offer this type of innovation, and with its instant payment and incentivized masternodes, it puts Dash ahead in the Bitcoin vs Dash debate.
It’s well known that Bitcoin transactions can take 10 minutes each to go through, and to make matters worse the fee for each transaction has gone up too. So, if you don’t have enough for the transaction fee it may go into the limbo of the unconfirmed transaction pool. In comparison, Dash transactions go through in just seconds and each one costs less compared to Bitcoin too.
Dash’s blockchain protocol is more advanced because it’s self-governed and self-funding. Dash also uses a public address for its transactions just as PayPal does. It’s always going to be better to use real names rather than long strings of numbers and letters because it’s harder to get them wrong when you’re routing a transaction. This is an important consideration because once a transaction has been initialized it can’t be revoked, so right first time is what users need!
Dash has masternodes which allow users to pay on a network that is not only secure but also includes extra functions like InstantSend. Operators invest 1000 dash to host a masternode, and for their investment, they receive 45% of every reward that comes from Dash block mining. This pays out about 7 Dash per month.
That InstantSend feature uses an InstantX masternode to authorize and send transactions in mere seconds. Bitcoin’s tardy 10-minute transaction times look painfully slow in comparison, and when you consider that they may even take up to an hour in the case of large transactions, it seems clear that Dash has the advantage here in the Bitcoin vs Dash debate.
Bitcoin transactions our potentially traceable too, but the PrivateSend feature gives Dash users the option of totally private transactions.
Dash’s blockchain is fully self-funded and it can be controlled by one vote from each masternode. Part of each block goes towards bolstering the network promotion and development budget, meaning that Dash developers and promoters get payments for their contributions, in contrast to Bitcoin where contributions are voluntary. It’s debatable whether this is a plus or a minus in the Bitcoin vs Dash debate.
Despite the fact that Dash improves on Bitcoin’s intrinsic flaws, it’s not clear whether this will be enough to boost its popularity. It does have a more innovative blockchain that seems geared towards future promotion and improvement, but Dash is still struggling to attract the kind of top-notch developers to improve the blockchain aftermarket infrastructure that would help it thrive—things like sales apps and creative user wallets. Still, Dash has only been on the market for four years, and yet its offering is intriguing. In the question of Bitcoin vs Dash, Dash definitely wins in terms of innovation, speed, convenience, and security. It just remains to be seen whether the general public will agree with this verdict by adopting it more widely.