EVM vs. WASM: Comparing Ethereum and Polkadot’s Virtual Machines

The crypto ecosystem is now centered around smart contracts. That’s why Ethereum is the second-largest coin in the market, with many investors looking to trade USD to ETH. There are other top coins related to smart contracts and dApps — Polkadot is one of the most promising.

Central to these networks are virtual machines. A virtual machine, in short, is a virtual version of a computer. They act like regular CPUs, but there is no hardware involved: every process is handled digitally.

Since its introduction, Ethereum has used a virtual machine to run applications on many devices at the same time. But in recent years, there’s a new model called WASM, or WebAssembly, that aims to improve the scalability of the previous Ethereum Virtual Machine. In this article, we’ll learn about these technologies and their importance for investors.

What Is EVM and How Does It Work?

The EVM is the medium used by Ethereum to host and run smart contracts in its network. It enables clients and devices anywhere to interact with dApps, effectively enabling an open and decentralized ecosystem. Many other blockchains have adopted EVM, so users and developers can migrate and interconnect applications across different chains, thus achieving interoperability.

In a way, the EVM functions as a standard for all applications, similar to Android apps being written using the same language and following a similar framework. Applications in the EVM are written using Solidity, a language created by Gavin Wood, one of Ethereum’s creators.

What Is WASM and How Does It Differ from EVM?

WebAssembly, or WASM, is a type of virtual machine designed to be more efficient and easy to use. Unlike the EVM, developers can use well-known languages, like C, C++, C#, or Rust. The C family is one of the basic and oldest languages, so most developers know how to use them.

Rust is a more recent language, also popular among developers thanks to its efficiency. Despite all the benefits of the EVM, it lacks scalability potential and is too slow for current demand. WASM, on the other hand, is faster and can adapt to high levels of usage.

Polkadot was created by Ethereum co-creator Gavin Wood. Instead of using an EVM with Solidity, they decided to go for the WASM model. Unlike Ethereum, Polkadot allows users to create parachains — sidechains interconnected in the global Polkadot network. To process all transactions in dozens of parachains, it needs a scalable WASM.

3 Key Differences Between EVM and WASM Smart Contracts

Let’s take a closer look at the differences between these two technologies. By contrasting and comparing specific key points, we can better understand what sets them apart. The goal of both virtual machine models, in their blockchain implementation, is to enable the development of smart contracts. But, apart from this, there are more differences than similarities.

1. Performance and Execution Speed

Although the EVM is the most popular implementation, it is not the most efficient. Operations in this virtual machine are executed sequentially. It means that each must be completed before moving to the next one. And that applies to nodes validating transactions as well. Besides, it can’t process data smaller than 256 bits, so it demands the CPU to process these smaller operations.

WASM, on the other hand, works according to a binary format, which is more efficient in size and loading time. It executes operations at near-native speed, even faster than traditional processors like JavaScript. In a market where every second counts, like DeFi, this is a great advantage.

2. Programming Language Flexibility

Smart contracts in the EVM must be written using Solidity. It provides a safe framework, and it’s easy to fork and access libraries to build dApps. However, the language is relatively new, and not all developers know it.

WASM supports more established languages, making it more accessible to any developer, regardless of their experience. It also gives more flexibility, because there are more resources related to the C family and Rust.

3. Scalability and Gas Efficiency

Stemming from the first difference, WASM is also more scalable and gas-efficient. Gas, in Ethereum and related chains, is the operational cost of executing operations. It refers to the resources used by transactions, and are paid by users through the gas fee. Thanks to Polkadot parachains, parallel transaction processing reduces the cost and makes fees lower for the end user.

The EVM, instead, requires more resources to execute transactions one by one and maintain consensus among all nodes.

In terms of scalability, this same limitation at parallelization reduces the total throughput. That’s why Ethereum can only process up to 14 transactions per second, while Polkadot can go up to 1,000.

The Future of Blockchain Virtual Machines

The strength of the EVM can’t be understated, though. Despite its limitations, it is implemented and supported by the most popular blockchains in the ecosystem. In fact, even Polkadot introduced EVM compatibility.

However, we can’t deny that the ecosystem is likely to shift to a more efficient alternative at some point. Ethereum shows some progress in the development of EWASM, a version of this virtual machine for the Ethereum network. And we know this community isn’t afraid of implementing necessary upgrades, like switching from PoW to PoS.

This discussion is happening right now. There are no conclusions yet on whether EVM will continue to dominate, or if WASM will become the new standard. For investors and technology enthusiasts, it’s exciting to follow these developments, as they will shape the future of the crypto ecosystem.