COMPARE 2.1 · LIVE TECHNICAL MATCHUP

NEAR Protocol VS Centronium

Technical intelligence comes first. Market context remains a separate reference layer and never changes TBB Network Quality.

Technical History Market

#10

LEFT NETWORK

NEAR Protocol

NEAR · Proof of Stake / Doomslug

TBB NETWORK QUALITY70.70.0% 24h

Finality: 2.0s
Reliability: 99.80%
Evidence: 63%
Throughput: 100 TPS

Open NEAR Protocol profile →

VSTECHNICAL FIRST

RIGHT NETWORK

Centronium

CENTRO · Proof of Useful Work + Validator Attestation

TBB NETWORK QUALITY85.7+0.0% 24h

Finality: 60.0s
Reliability: 99.50%
Evidence: 100%
Throughput: 50 TPS

Open Centronium profile →

Technical matrix Trajectory Market context

TECHNICAL

TBB Network / Quality comparison 2.1

Shared methodology, current technical values, 24h score movement, and Evidence Coverage.

MetricNEAR ProtocolNEARCentroniumCENTROTBB Network Quality Score70.785.7Technical leaderTBB Rank#10#124h TBB Score Move0.00+0.01Evidence Coverage62.5% · Moderate100.0% · HighTechnical leaderSend Time2.00s · proxyTechnical leader2.00sTechnical leaderFinality2.00sTechnical leader60.00sThroughput100.00 TPSTechnical leader50.00 TPSObserved Activity—0.21 TPSTechnical leaderReliability99.80%Technical leader99.50%Block Cadence Health—82.22%Technical leaderAverage Fee0.0010 NEAR0.0010 CENTROEfficiency85.8/10098.0/100Technical leaderPerformance59.6/100Technical leader43.3/100Reliability Score96.2/100Technical leader90.2/100Security88.0/10090.0/100Technical leaderCost57.1/10099.0/100Technical leaderDecentralization75.0/10078.0/100Technical leaderAccessibility76.0/10098.0/100Technical leaderUseful Work0.0/100100.0/100Technical leader

HISTORY OVERLAY

Compare trajectories, not just snapshots

Overlay 2–4 networks across the same technical series and time window. Historical market data stays outside this technical chart.

NEAR ProtocolCentronium

MOBILE COMPARE

Technical comparison cards

TBB Network Quality Score

NEAR70.7

CENTRO85.7Technical leader

TBB Rank

NEAR#10

CENTRO#1

24h TBB Score Move

NEAR0.00

CENTRO+0.01

Evidence Coverage

NEAR62.5% · Moderate

CENTRO100.0% · HighTechnical leader

Send Time

NEAR2.00s · proxyTechnical leader

CENTRO2.00sTechnical leader

Finality

NEAR2.00sTechnical leader

CENTRO60.00s

Throughput

NEAR100.00 TPSTechnical leader

CENTRO50.00 TPS

Observed Activity

NEAR—

CENTRO0.21 TPSTechnical leader

Reliability

NEAR99.80%Technical leader

CENTRO99.50%

Block Cadence Health

NEAR—

CENTRO82.22%Technical leader

Average Fee

NEAR0.0010 NEAR

CENTRO0.0010 CENTRO

Efficiency

NEAR85.8/100

CENTRO98.0/100Technical leader

Performance

NEAR59.6/100Technical leader

CENTRO43.3/100

Reliability Score

NEAR96.2/100Technical leader

CENTRO90.2/100

Security

NEAR88.0/100

CENTRO90.0/100Technical leader

Cost

NEAR57.1/100

CENTRO99.0/100Technical leader

Decentralization

NEAR75.0/100

CENTRO78.0/100Technical leader

Accessibility

NEAR76.0/100

CENTRO98.0/100Technical leader

Useful Work

NEAR0.0/100

CENTRO100.0/100Technical leader

TWO DIFFERENT QUESTIONS

Network quality is not market popularity.

The technical matrix above measures the network. The market section below provides reference context only, and never changes the TBB score.

How TBB scoring works →

MARKET CONTEXT

Market comparison & context

Reference-only financial market data. These fields do not alter the technical comparison or TBB scoring.

MetricNEAR ProtocolCentroniumPrice$4.921.00 C24h change-2.19%—Market cap$6.43B—24h exchange volume$1.38B$88.25KCirculating supply1.31B NEAR8.37M CENTRO

SHAREABLE COMPARISON

Keep this exact comparison

Use the canonical 2–4 chain URL below. It works without local storage.

/compare/?chains=near,centronium