The impending Ethereum merge—transitioning from Proof-of-Work (PoW) to Proof-of-Stake (PoS)—has sparked widespread discussion across the crypto community. In a recent speech, Vitalik Buterin noted that those who still favor PoW can turn to Ethereum Classic (ETC), calling it a solid alternative blockchain. With Ethereum expected to complete its long-anticipated merge, miners relying on GPU-based PoW operations face an uncertain future. As Ethereum mining becomes obsolete, many are looking for viable alternatives—and ETC, which shares the same hashing algorithm, has emerged as a potential haven.
This shift has reignited interest in Ethereum Classic. But what does the Ethereum merge truly mean for ETC? Will it lead to sustainable growth, or is this just a temporary surge in attention? Let’s explore the history, differences, and future outlook of both blockchains to understand the implications.
The Origins of Ethereum and Ethereum Classic
Ethereum (ETH) ranks as the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization and hosts the most extensive ecosystem of decentralized applications (DApps). It's widely recognized, even among casual crypto enthusiasts.
In contrast, Ethereum Classic (ETC)—the original Ethereum chain—remains relatively obscure despite its historical significance. While both share a common origin, their paths diverged significantly after a critical event in 2016.
Vitalik Buterin initially developed Ethereum to expand on Bitcoin’s limitations by introducing smart contracts. This innovation enabled early DApp projects, most notably The DAO, a decentralized autonomous organization that allowed community-driven funding decisions through token voting.
However, The DAO was exploited due to a critical vulnerability. In June 2016, hackers siphoned off funds equivalent to $50 million in ETH, triggering a crisis within the community.
👉 Discover how blockchain networks evolve during critical events.
The Hard Fork That Split Ethereum
In response, the majority of the Ethereum community supported a hard fork to reverse the theft and return funds to affected users. This new chain retained the name Ethereum (ETH) and became the dominant version.
But a faction of users opposed this change on ideological grounds. They believed that blockchain should be immutable—unchanged under any circumstances—even in the face of exploitation. These users continued on the original chain, now known as Ethereum Classic (ETC).
Since the split, the two networks have followed vastly different trajectories. Ethereum evolved into a leading smart contract platform with a thriving DeFi and NFT ecosystem. ETC, however, remained a niche network with limited adoption and developer activity.
Key Similarities Between ETH and ETC
Despite their divergence, Ethereum and Ethereum Classic share some core technical traits:
- Both currently use Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus (though Ethereum has transitioned).
- Both support smart contracts and can host DApps.
- Both have similar theoretical transaction throughput, handling up to 15–20 transactions per second (TPS).
These similarities make ETC a technically compatible alternative for miners exiting Ethereum’s PoW system.
Major Differences Between ETH and ETC
Core Philosophy
The split was rooted in philosophy. ETC adheres to the principle of "code is law," rejecting any form of intervention—even to correct exploits. This immutability is seen as fundamental to decentralization.
Ethereum, on the other hand, embraces adaptability. The network views forks and upgrades as necessary tools for progress and security. The transition to PoS is a prime example of this forward-looking approach.
Security Track Record
Security remains a major concern for ETC. While the original DAO hack affected both chains pre-fork, ETC has suffered repeated 51% attacks post-split:
- January 2019: Major 51% attack.
- August 2020: Three separate 51% attacks within one month.
These incidents damaged ETC’s credibility, leading some exchanges to delist it temporarily. In contrast, Ethereum’s post-fork security model has proven robust despite being a high-value target.
Supply Mechanism
- ETH: No hard cap on supply; inflation is controlled dynamically. Current annual inflation rate: ~0.5%.
- ETC: Capped at 210,700,000 tokens, with periodic block reward reductions. However, its current inflation rate is around 5% annually—ten times higher than Ethereum’s.
Despite ETC’s capped supply, it behaves more like an inflationary asset in the short term due to higher issuance rates.
DApp and DeFi Ecosystem
This is where the gap is most evident:
- Ethereum: Over 3,000 active DApps, with Total Value Locked (TVL) in DeFi exceeding $123 billion.
- Ethereum Classic: Fewer than 100 DApps, with TVL around $112 million—over 1,000 times less than Ethereum.
The lack of developer momentum and user adoption limits ETC’s utility beyond mining.
Transaction Speed and Fees
Both networks share similar maximum TPS, but real-world performance differs drastically:
- Ethereum: Processes ~15 TPS (near capacity), with average fees at $41 (peak congestion).
- ETC: Processes ~1 TPS, with average fees less than $0.01.
👉 See how low-cost transactions can impact blockchain adoption.
While ETC offers cheaper transactions, this advantage stems largely from low usage rather than superior scalability.
How the Ethereum Merge Affects ETC
The merge eliminates Ethereum’s PoW mining, displacing thousands of miners. Many are turning to ETC due to algorithm compatibility (Ethash), potentially increasing hashrate and network security—at least temporarily.
This influx could bring:
- Short-term price volatility
- Higher mining difficulty
- Increased visibility and trading volume
However, without fundamental improvements—especially in security and ecosystem development—this surge may not lead to long-term value accrual.
FAQ: Common Questions About ETC Post-Merge
Q: Can Ethereum Classic replace Ethereum as a major smart contract platform?
A: Unlikely. ETC lacks the developer community, institutional support, and ecosystem depth needed to compete with Ethereum’s established dominance.
Q: Is ETC a good investment after the Ethereum merge?
A: High risk. While miner migration may boost short-term demand, long-term value depends on solving security issues and growing its DApp ecosystem—neither of which is guaranteed.
Q: Why do some miners prefer ETC after the merge?
A: Because it uses the same Ethash algorithm as pre-merge Ethereum, allowing seamless transition without new hardware investments.
Q: Will ETC become deflationary like ETH post-merge?
A: No. ETH’s deflationary mechanism comes from fee burning under EIP-1559 and reduced issuance in PoS. ETC has no such mechanisms and maintains a higher inflation rate.
Q: Could exchanges relist ETC if security improves?
A: Yes. Improved network stability and reduced attack risk could encourage exchanges to reinstate trading pairs.
Q: Does ETC have any real-world use cases today?
A: Limited. Most activity revolves around speculation and mining. There are few notable DeFi or enterprise applications built on ETC.
Final Outlook: Hype or Hope for ETC?
While the Ethereum merge brings temporary attention to Ethereum Classic, it doesn’t resolve its core challenges: poor security, minimal DApp activity, and weak developer engagement.
The influx of displaced miners may stabilize the network’s hashrate and increase trading volume, but sustainable growth requires more than just mining interest. For ETC to attract institutional capital or retail users long-term, it must address its vulnerability to 51% attacks and foster genuine ecosystem development.
Currently, ETC’s lower fees and ideological appeal attract niche users and investors betting on a “next ETH” narrative. But without substantial upgrades, this remains speculative.
👉 Explore secure and scalable blockchain platforms shaping the future.
In contrast, Ethereum’s transition to PoS enhances scalability, security, and sustainability—solidifying its position as the leading smart contract platform.
Conclusion
The Ethereum merge marks a pivotal moment in blockchain history. For Ethereum Classic, it presents both opportunity and scrutiny. While miner migration may provide a short-term boost, lasting relevance demands more than nostalgia or low fees.
For investors and developers alike, the lesson is clear: network security, ecosystem vitality, and adaptability determine long-term success—not just adherence to ideology.
As the crypto landscape evolves, only platforms that innovate while maintaining decentralization will thrive. Ethereum is making that leap. Whether Ethereum Classic can follow—or even wants to—remains an open question.
Core Keywords: Ethereum merge, Ethereum Classic (ETC), Proof-of-Work (PoW), Proof-of-Stake (PoS), blockchain security, DApp ecosystem, miner migration