PoW vs PoS: Understanding the Two Dominant Blockchain Consensus Mechanisms

Ready to put your knowledge into practice? start your trading journey TODAY.

lower transaction costs, real-time data and full control over investments

Imagine trying to run a massive, global operation where absolutely nobody is calling the shots, and you can't even rely on your partners—that's the challenge faced when coordinating groups across a dispersed system. This fundamental struggle to achieve widespread agreement without a central figure managing affairs is known as the Byzantine General’s Problem. To prevent a complete system breakdown, all actors must communicate and manage to settle on a singular, unified truth.

Systems that manage to pull off this tricky feat are recognised as Byzantine Fault Tolerant.

Building Trust Out of Mistrust

Blockchains tackle the Byzantine General’s Problem by allowing every participant on the network—which we refer to precisely as nodes—to validate the information themselves. In this completely decentralised setup, nodes are advised not to trust their peers. After all, you have no way of knowing if another node might turn malicious or perhaps simply pass along false information unintentionally.

To stop bad data from spreading, a blockchain is employed to line up all messages in the order they arrive. If a node wants to submit its own message (which, on the network, takes the form of a block), they must first demonstrate their commitment by putting in some required effort.

This required effort is the foundation of consensus mechanisms, which are the essential tools that allow all agents in the system to ultimately agree on the truth, even if some agents inevitably fail. Consensus mechanisms are absolutely critical for distributed systems to operate securely and function together.

The Original Cost of Commitment: Proof of Work (PoW)

Proof of Work (PoW) was the very first consensus mechanism to emerge, and it remains significant today. PoW is based on the simple premise that to submit a block, you must first do a significant amount of hard labour.

1. The Digital Scramble: PoW relies on a technique called hashing. The nodes—known as miners—hash the contents of the block they wish to broadcast. The goal is for the resulting hash to match specific requirements established by the blockchain.
2. The Chain Rule: Crucially, any new block submitted must also incorporate the hash of the block that immediately preceded it, meaning a block can only be created once the most recent one is complete.
3. The Effort: Finding that valid hash is often incredibly difficult. Miners use vast amounts of electricity and computational power to succeed. This resource-intensive process is what we call mining. Miners engage in this work specifically because they are trying to extract a reward from the protocol.

The Key Trade-Off: Expensive to Create, Cheap to Check

The genius behind this system lies in the economic incentive, often termed game theory: the blocks are expensive to produce, but cheap to verify.

Once a miner successfully finds a valid hash and shares the block, any other node can immediately check its validity by simply hashing it once. If the hash is correct, they also verify all the block's internal data, such as checking that it was built correctly upon the preceding block and that all the transactions are genuine. If a node tries to sneak an invalid block through, the others reject it instantly, leaving the dishonest miner "out of pocket" for all the wasted computational power.

PoS: The Evolution to Staked Interest

Despite PoW’s ability to provide a high level of security and deter system abuse, it has notable limitations. As the network expands, PoW demands high energy consumption and increasingly expensive equipment.

To overcome these constraints, alternative consensus mechanisms were introduced. The most prominent alternative is Proof of Stake (PoS), which first appeared back in 2011.

Instead of a resource-heavy calculation, PoS uses a kind of pseudo-random selection process to pick validators from the pool of nodes.

1. Committing Funds: These validators are required to stake the blockchain's native cryptocurrency to qualify for validating transactions. "Staking" is the act of validators committing their funds to the network.
2. Incentive and Security: These committed funds act as a type of collateral. If a validator acts maliciously, they run the high risk of losing their staked amount and being removed from the system. Conversely, honest validators are rewarded when new blocks are successfully created.
3. Odds of Selection: Typically, the more coins a node stakes, the higher the chance they have of being selected to validate a new block and consequently receive rewards.

While PoW and PoS are the two dominant mechanisms used today, other alternatives also exist, such as Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) and models that blend PoS and PoW (hybrid PoS/PoW).

Ready to put your knowledge into practice? start your trading journey TODAY.

With Biacoin, you'll benefit from 24/7 access to a wide range of assets from anywhere in the world, lower transaction costs than traditional brokers, real-time data and advanced tools to help you make informed decisions, and full control over your investments with instant execution and transparent tracking.

Start Now

Conclusion

Consensus mechanisms are critical to solving the long-standing computing challenge known as the Byzantine General’s Problem, ensuring that nodes in a distributed, decentralized system can communicate and agree on a single truth, thereby making the system Byzantine Fault Tolerant. The two dominant mechanisms used today are Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS). PoW was the first mechanism and requires nodes (miners) to use substantial computational power and electricity (mining) to produce a valid block hash, a process that is "expensive to produce, cheap to verify". To mitigate PoW's limitations, such as high energy usage and the need for expensive equipment, PoS was introduced. PoS selects validators pseudo-randomly who must stake (commit) the native cryptocurrency as collateral; honest validators receive rewards, while malicious ones risk losing their committed stake.