<p>Both are implementations of the Bitcoin protocol, however they are customized to make it easier to develop with. They are able to do this by storing all transaction and blockchain data in a database for quick queries, and along with this comes large disk space requirements (200-300GB). </p>

<p><strong>Bitcore</strong> (I have used)<br>
- NodeJS<br>
- 200+GB required for storage as it holds all transaction data.<br>
- Bitcore also has a library-only version (not a node), and a public API.<br>
- Add-ons available (Block explorer API, UI &amp; and Wallet Service)    </p>

<p><strong>Toshi</strong> (I have not used)<br>
- Ruby<br>
- 300+GB required for storage as it holds all transaction data.<br>
- Toshi has a public API. As far as I can tell it does not have a library-only version like bitcore.<br>
- A block explorer API and UI available. No wallet service, that has to go through coinbase which requires an application, credit check, etc.</p>

<p>As for your question about performance I can't really say since I haven't used Toshi, but Toshi's Github hasn't been worked on in over a year with only 200 commits. Bitcore is constantly being worked on with over 1,600 commits some as recent as 6 days ago.  </p>

<p>Also I'd say outside usage would be a good guide as to which one performs better. I'm not aware of any well-known service using Toshi. </p>

<p>Localbitcoins uses Bitcore for their explorer.  <a href="https://www.localbitcoinschain.com/" rel="nofollow">https://www.localbitcoinschain.com/</a><br>
Counterparty uses Bitcore <a href="http://counterparty.io/news/counterparty-uses-bitcores-insight/" rel="nofollow">http://counterparty.io/news/counterparty-uses-bitcores-insight/</a><br>
SatoshiLabs(TREZOR) uses Bitcore <a href="http://themerkle.com/satoshilabs-unveils-mytrezor-beta-and-switches-to-bitcore/" rel="nofollow">http://themerkle.com/satoshilabs-unveils-mytrezor-beta-and-switches-to-bitcore/</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T08:34:43.027Z
Implementations *of* Bitcoin Core? Bitcoin Core is a completely separate project.
Pieter Wuille
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T12:47:28.943Z
Corrected. @pieter
m1xolyd1an
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-11T02:37:17.570Z
2016-10-11T12:46:43.347Z
2016-10-11T12:46:43.347Z
m1xolyd1an
<p>I have been reading about both, BitPay's <a href="https://bitcore.io/">Bitcore</a> and Coinbase <a href="https://toshi.io/">Toshi</a>, and although they both claim to be highly scalable I could not find information in order to compare them in terms of performance and modularity. Does anybody knows about this?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-26T19:08:10.093Z
Toshi is closed.
mixdev
<full-node><performance><bitcore><toshi>
Performance and modularity of Bitcore vs Toshi
ntonnelier
# Performance and modularity of Bitcore vs Toshi

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-10-10)

I have been reading about both, BitPay's [Bitcore](https://bitcore.io/) and Coinbase [Toshi](https://toshi.io/), and although they both claim to be highly scalable I could not find information in order to compare them in terms of performance and modularity. Does anybody knows about this?

**Tags:** full-node, performance, bitcore, toshi

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Toshi is closed.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-10-11. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

Both are implementations of the Bitcoin protocol, however they are customized to make it easier to develop with. They are able to do this by storing all transaction and blockchain data in a database for quick queries, and along with this comes large disk space requirements (200-300GB).

**Bitcore** (I have used)  
- NodeJS  
- 200+GB required for storage as it holds all transaction data.  
- Bitcore also has a library-only version (not a node), and a public API.  
- Add-ons available (Block explorer API, UI & and Wallet Service)

**Toshi** (I have not used)  
- Ruby  
- 300+GB required for storage as it holds all transaction data.  
- Toshi has a public API. As far as I can tell it does not have a library-only version like bitcore.  
- A block explorer API and UI available. No wallet service, that has to go through coinbase which requires an application, credit check, etc.

As for your question about performance I can't really say since I haven't used Toshi, but Toshi's Github hasn't been worked on in over a year with only 200 commits. Bitcore is constantly being worked on with over 1,600 commits some as recent as 6 days ago.

Also I'd say outside usage would be a good guide as to which one performs better. I'm not aware of any well-known service using Toshi.

Localbitcoins uses Bitcore for their explorer. <https://www.localbitcoinschain.com/>  
Counterparty uses Bitcore <http://counterparty.io/news/counterparty-uses-bitcores-insight/>  
SatoshiLabs(TREZOR) uses Bitcore <http://themerkle.com/satoshilabs-unveils-mytrezor-beta-and-switches-to-bitcore/>

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Implementations *of* Bitcoin Core? Bitcoin Core is a completely separate project.  
> **username_2**: Corrected. @username_3  

---

