ETHS vs ICP: Comparing Ethereum Staking and Internet Computer Protocol for Decentralized Applications

This article offers a comprehensive comparison between Ethereum Staking (ETHS) and Internet Computer Protocol (ICP) for decentralized applications, focusing on their investment values. It delves into price history, supply mechanisms, institutional adoption, and technological advancements, aiming to guide investors on which asset might be a better buy. The article is structured to address investor concerns, provide price predictions up to 2030, and suggest investment strategies based on risk tolerance. Key insights are the differences in market cap, application scenarios, and innovation potentials. Check real-time prices on Gate for accurate investment decisions.

Introduction: ETHS vs ICP Investment Comparison

In the cryptocurrency market, the comparison between ETHS and ICP has been an unavoidable topic for investors. The two not only show significant differences in market cap ranking, application scenarios, and price performance but also represent different positions in the crypto asset landscape.

ETHS (ETHS): Launched as the core asset of Facet, a decentralized Ethereum L1 scaling protocol recognized and funded by the Ethereum Foundation.

Internet Computer (ICP): Introduced in 2021 as a decentralized cloud blockchain, it has been hailed for its ability to host secure and resilient applications, websites, and enterprise systems.

This article will comprehensively analyze the investment value comparison between ETHS and ICP, focusing on historical price trends, supply mechanisms, institutional adoption, technological ecosystems, and future predictions, attempting to answer the question investors care about most:

"Which is the better buy right now?"

I. Price History Comparison and Current Market Status

  • 2024: ETHS reached its all-time high of $13.9 on January 5, 2024.
  • 2025: ETHS hit its all-time low of $0.079 on April 7, 2025.
  • Comparative Analysis: Over the past year, ETHS has experienced a significant decline, dropping 83.09% from its peak.

Current Market Situation (2025-11-23)

  • ETHS current price: $0.235
  • ICP current price: $4.082
  • 24-hour trading volume: ETHS $28,793.96 vs ICP $3,497,708.33
  • Market Sentiment Index (Fear & Greed Index): 11 (Extreme Fear)

Click to view real-time prices:

price_image1 price_image2

II. Key Factors Affecting Investment Value of ETHS vs ICP

Supply Mechanisms Comparison (Tokenomics)

  • ETHS: Fixed supply model with 120 million tokens in total; transition from PoW to PoS with ETH 2.0 has created deflationary pressure through token burning
  • ICP: Declining supply schedule with long-term release plans; utilizes cycles for computation with automatic burning mechanism in the network
  • 📌 Historical pattern: Fixed or deflationary supply models (like ETHS) tend to create upward price pressure during bull markets, while ICP's more complex tokenomics may create less immediate scarcity effects

Institutional Adoption and Market Applications

  • Institutional holdings: ETHS has gained significant institutional adoption through ETFs and corporate treasuries, while ICP has more limited institutional presence
  • Enterprise adoption: ETHS leads in DeFi infrastructure and payment systems; ICP focuses on enterprise web hosting and decentralized applications with its Internet Computer protocol
  • Regulatory attitudes: ETHS has clearer regulatory status in many jurisdictions; ICP faces more regulatory uncertainty due to its governance structure

Technology Development and Ecosystem Building

  • ETHS technical upgrades: ETH 2.0 transition improving scalability and reducing energy consumption; layer-2 solutions expanding transaction capacity
  • ICP technical development: Chain-key technology enabling web speed and unlimited capacity; reverse gas model where developers pay for users' computation
  • Ecosystem comparison: ETHS dominates in DeFi applications, NFT marketplaces, and has broader developer adoption; ICP offers unique fully on-chain applications but with smaller developer community

Macroeconomic Factors and Market Cycles

  • Performance during inflation: ETHS has demonstrated some store-of-value properties during inflation periods; ICP lacks sufficient historical data
  • Monetary policy effects: Both assets show sensitivity to interest rates and USD strength, with ETHS demonstrating more stable correlation patterns
  • Geopolitical factors: ETHS has more global distribution and trading volume, providing better liquidity during geopolitical uncertainty

III. 2025-2030 Price Prediction: ETHS vs ICP

Short-term Prediction (2025)

  • ETHS: Conservative $0.2254 - $0.2324 | Optimistic $0.2324 - $0.2858
  • ICP: Conservative $2.3461 - $4.1160 | Optimistic $4.1160 - $4.3630

Mid-term Prediction (2027)

  • ETHS may enter a growth phase, with an estimated price range of $0.1714 - $0.3968
  • ICP may enter a bullish market, with an estimated price range of $3.8976 - $6.5922
  • Key drivers: Institutional capital inflow, ETF, ecosystem development

Long-term Prediction (2030)

  • ETHS: Base scenario $0.3893 - $0.4580 | Optimistic scenario $0.4580 - $0.4946
  • ICP: Base scenario $5.0948 - $6.9792 | Optimistic scenario $6.9792 - $9.9803

View detailed price predictions for ETHS and ICP

Disclaimer: This analysis is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as financial advice. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile and unpredictable. Always conduct your own research before making any investment decisions.

ETHS:

年份 预测最高价 预测平均价格 预测最低价 涨跌幅
2025 0.2858397 0.23239 0.2254183 -1
2026 0.3757165325 0.25911485 0.1787892465 10
2027 0.3967696140625 0.31741569125 0.171404473275 35
2028 0.449936742346875 0.35709265265625 0.210684665067187 51
2029 0.512463665826984 0.403514697501562 0.282460288251093 71
2030 0.494628316197415 0.457989181664273 0.389290804414632 94

ICP:

年份 预测最高价 预测平均价格 预测最低价 涨跌幅
2025 4.36296 4.116 2.34612 0
2026 5.3841396 4.23948 2.6708724 3
2027 6.592179426 4.8118098 3.897565938 17
2028 5.93007439752 5.701994613 4.44755579814 39
2029 8.142448307364 5.81603450526 3.7222620833664 42
2030 9.98031521102616 6.979241406312 5.09484622660776 70

IV. Investment Strategy Comparison: ETHS vs ICP

Long-term vs Short-term Investment Strategies

  • ETHS: Suitable for investors focused on DeFi infrastructure and Ethereum ecosystem growth
  • ICP: Suitable for investors interested in decentralized cloud computing and enterprise blockchain solutions

Risk Management and Asset Allocation

  • Conservative investors: ETHS: 60% vs ICP: 40%
  • Aggressive investors: ETHS: 70% vs ICP: 30%
  • Hedging tools: Stablecoin allocation, options, cross-currency portfolios

V. Potential Risk Comparison

Market Risks

  • ETHS: High correlation with overall crypto market sentiment, susceptible to Ethereum ecosystem developments
  • ICP: Lower liquidity and higher volatility, potentially more affected by project-specific news

Technical Risks

  • ETHS: Scalability challenges, network congestion during high demand periods
  • ICP: Centralization concerns, potential security vulnerabilities in the Internet Computer protocol

Regulatory Risks

  • Global regulatory policies may have different impacts on both assets, with ETHS potentially facing more scrutiny due to its wider adoption

VI. Conclusion: Which Is the Better Buy?

📌 Investment Value Summary:

  • ETHS advantages: Established ecosystem, institutional adoption, deflationary mechanism
  • ICP advantages: Unique technology proposition, potential for enterprise adoption, scalability

✅ Investment Advice:

  • Novice investors: Consider a higher allocation to ETHS due to its more established market position
  • Experienced investors: Balanced portfolio with both ETHS and ICP, adjusting based on risk tolerance
  • Institutional investors: ETHS for more conservative positions, ICP for diversification and potential high growth

⚠️ Risk Warning: Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile. This article does not constitute investment advice. None

VII. FAQ

Q1: What are the main differences between ETHS and ICP? A: ETHS is the core asset of Facet, an Ethereum L1 scaling protocol, while ICP is a decentralized cloud blockchain. ETHS has a fixed supply of 120 million tokens and is more established in DeFi, while ICP has a declining supply schedule and focuses on enterprise web hosting and decentralized applications.

Q2: Which cryptocurrency has shown better price performance recently? A: Based on the current market data, ICP is trading at a higher price ($4.082) compared to ETHS ($0.235). However, ETHS has experienced a significant decline of 83.09% from its all-time high, while ICP's performance varies.

Q3: How do the supply mechanisms of ETHS and ICP differ? A: ETHS has a fixed supply model with 120 million tokens and uses a deflationary mechanism through token burning. ICP has a declining supply schedule with long-term release plans and uses an automatic burning mechanism tied to network computation.

Q4: Which cryptocurrency has better institutional adoption? A: ETHS has gained more significant institutional adoption through ETFs and corporate treasuries, while ICP has more limited institutional presence.

Q5: What are the key technological differences between ETHS and ICP? A: ETHS is undergoing the ETH 2.0 transition to improve scalability and reduce energy consumption. ICP uses chain-key technology enabling web speed and unlimited capacity, with a reverse gas model where developers pay for users' computation.

Q6: How do the long-term price predictions for ETHS and ICP compare? A: For 2030, ETHS is predicted to reach $0.3893 - $0.4946 in optimistic scenarios, while ICP is predicted to reach $5.0948 - $9.9803. However, these predictions are speculative and should be approached with caution.

Q7: What are the main risks associated with investing in ETHS and ICP? A: ETHS faces risks related to market sentiment, scalability challenges, and potential regulatory scrutiny. ICP risks include lower liquidity, higher volatility, centralization concerns, and potential security vulnerabilities in its protocol.

* The information is not intended to be and does not constitute financial advice or any other recommendation of any sort offered or endorsed by Gate.