In conclusion, although NEAR protocol has been outperforming large-cap layer1 blockchains such as BSC and Avalanche in terms of network performance, it also has witnessed a larger portion of its transactions getting failed compared to the other blockchains. Ethereum, as the largest blockchain with a multi-hundred billion dollar market cap, has had the best overall performance among the analyzed blockchains. The data also showed that BSC has been active in a completely different region and area compared to other blockchains. On the other hand, NEAR and Avalanche have had quite similarities in all metrics and while one has been better in a particular metric, the other outperforms it in another one.

The analysis of the transactions heatmap of each network has indicated that while there are similarities between NEAR, Ethereum, and Avalanche, BSC has had a different trend. The former blockchains have been active on Mondays and Tuesdays, while BSC has been more active on Thursdays and Fridays. The hourly analysis of activity has demonstrated that the activity on Ethereum has been almost similar throughout the day. On the other hand, NEAR and Avalanche have seen an increase in the number of transactions between noon and evening each day. Besides these, BSC has been active during the early hours and late nights of each day. This indicates that the region where BSC is more used is completely different from the other three blockchains.

The required data for this analysis were selected from the transactions table of mdao_near schema and the fact_transactions tables of the core schema of ethereum, bsc, and avalanche databases. The number of transactions per minute, the number of transactions per block, and the number of blocks per minute were calculated as metrics indicating the performance of the network. Besides those, a heatmap demonstrating the distribution of transactions on different hours of different days of the week has been measured for each blockchain. Ultimately, the daily number of succeeded and failed transactions on each network has been calculated to be able to measure the percentage of failed transactions. For the first part of the analysis, all of the transactions on each blockchain were taken into account, regardless of their status.

NEAR Protocol is a Layer1 cloud computing blockchain that is run by the community and aims to achieve high transaction speeds, high throughput, and better interoperability. Ultimately, it wants to be the ideal environment for DApps and creates a developer and user-friendly platform. NEAR utilizes human-readable addresses instead of cryptographic addresses on Ethereum, BSC, and Avalanche. NEAR Protocol is developed by its community called the NEAR Collective which releases new updates to the platform. Its goal is to build a secure enough to manage high-value assets like money or identity and performant enough to make them useful for everyday people.

To analyze the performance of the NEAR protocol, it was compared with Ethereum, BSC, and Avalanche as three other large-cap Layer1 blockchains. Ethereum is the second largest blockchain after Bitcoin and has a dynamic and massive community. BSC has also embraced a vast ecosystem of developers and users with its ease of use. Avalanche, on the other hand, is another blockchain that aims to deliver high performance and throughput.

In this analysis, the performance of the aforementioned networks has been evaluated using the number of transactions and created blocks on their blockchains in the past 30 days.

The analysis of the number of transactions per minute (TPM) has demonstrated that although NEAR is a much smaller blockchain in terms of market cap compared to the other three, its TPM has been only second to Ethereum and higher compared to Avalanche and BSC. This data indicates that the NEAR network is a busy network capable of handling high throughput. The number of transactions per block and the number of blocks per minute are directly connected. Ethereum and BSC are designed to contain more transactions per block, resulting in a lower number of blocks per minute. On the other hand, Avalanche and NEAR are designed to contain a lower number of transactions per block, thus they produce more blocks per minute as a result.

In the end, the analysis of the success/failure rate of transactions on each chain has shown that while Ethereum has had the highest daily successful transactions, its percentage of failed transactions has been the lowest among the analyzed layer1s. NEAR, on the other hand, has had an acceptable number of successful transactions per day, they also had registered a substantial number of failed transactions which ultimately, resulted in the highest percentage of failed transactions with an amount of around 20%. Only around 10% of transactions on Avalanche have failed daily, while the number has been around 6% for BSC.