Nic Carter, the co-founder of, an online resource for technical analysis of cryptocurrency prices, recently published a blog post in which he noted that we must consider “transaction capacity (tps)”, “typical transaction characteristics (transaction size)”, and “settlement assurances” – in order to assess the effectiveness of a “value transfer system.”

According to Carter, the “financial bandwidth” of a system during a given time period may be measured by looking at its transaction size and capacity. Meanwhile, the settlement assurances of a value transfer system help us assess whether or not we will receive a “chargeback” or be “defrauded”, Carter noted.

Bitcoin Is More Like A “Physical Settlements System”

Going on to explain how bitcoin (BTC) transactions work, Carter wrote that even though the flagship cryptocurrency is a digital form of money, it more closely resembles a “physical settlements system than a deferred-settlement system like credit cards.”

The Coinmetrics co-founder also pointed out that bitcoin can be considered a “virtual bearer instrument” – meaning that the owner of the private key associated with the crypto account (address) may “unlock unspent output.”

Possessing the private key linked to cryptoassets means ownership, and “you are entitled to do with them whatever you like”, Carter explained.

“No Recourse” If Cryptoassets´Are Lost

However, truly owning cryptocurrency may have its drawbacks as “there is no recourse if you lose your coins or send them to the wrong address.”

On the other hand, credit card users are able to dispute transactions – which can then be reversed in cases where the user’s account may have been overcharged or if there was fraudulent activity detected on it.

Although “recourse has its advantages in certain contexts”, Carter mentioned that “the costs of credit fraud and the remediation infrastructure are passed on to end users in the form of merchant fees.”

So, if we are going to compare “dissimilar value-transfer systems” such as bitcoin, Visa, Paypal, and physical cash, then we should look at the “average transaction size * the number of transactions”, Carter recommended.

TRX’s High Transaction Count Is Due To “Zero Value” Transactions 

Curiously, some crypto proponents use transaction volumes to assess which blockchains are performing better. As CryptoGlobe reported recently, the TRON (TRX) network’s transaction volume is now greater than that of bitcoin (BTC), bitcoin cash (BCH), XRP, and ether(ETH) combined. A closer examination, however, reveals that although TRX’s transaction count is increasing, its average transaction value (in USD) is considerably lower than most major cryptocurrencies.

CoinMetrics TRON.pngAverage Transaction Value, From CoinMetrics

Moreover, TRX’s high transaction count may be attributed to the large number of gambling DApps (decentralized applications) deployed on its blockchain – as DApps usually use “zero value” transactions in order to interact the game with a blockchain network.