a. Algorand scales better than every ERC-20 token and possibly better than Ethereum. b. Algorand has had faster development times than most ERC tokens that have been available in the market for the past year or more; c. Algorand completes transaction finality faster than most every ERC-20 token; and reaches finality faster than Ethereum,currently.
That being said, I can justify in greater detail why Algorand should be resting at least at a position of #29 just below Aave. We can compare development cycle, available budget, latest developments, etc., and Algo would best ETC in almost every case.
a. Better than ETC which has undergone another successful hack yet again. b. Better than Cosmos as stated in my reply on another thread.
That brings it down to Monero’s level at #16. The question is which is likely to get greater adoption. Monero has privacy however that would run afoul of legislative efforts in many countries. Advantage: Algorand. Monero also is not as friendly with its UX as Algorand. Advantage, Algorand. Algorand also allows for staking and is more environmentally friendly. There are points to both but adoption leans in favor of Algorand pushing it into position #15.
That puts it up against Tron. I’ll state the obvious. Algorand has a better team hands down. Algorand should at least be in position #14.
Positions #12-14 are occupied by strong competitors (Stellar, EOS, Tezos, Cardano). I could argue against 3 of the 4 and could hold a decent line, and against the last, Cardano, I’d have to point out that Algorand does not fork, has finality faster (currently), Daedalus has issues right now, Algorand does not require stake pools, and Smart contracts are at layer 1. However, Cardano has better transparency, a better more active community, and when hydra is out it should scale to new heights.
I’m not really a fan of the EOS model, or the endless ICO so I’ll refrain from comments on that. So with that, Algo should be somewhere in the 12-14 range in my opinion.