Claiming "10k TPS" for Stripe Tempo…… actual usage is only 2.5 TPS

Stripe’s payment company launched Tempo with the selling point of a “blockchain much faster than Bitcoin(BTC),” but after going live on the mainnet, the actual processing speed did not meet expectations. On-chain data shows that Tempo’s actual throughput is about 2.5 TPS (transactions per second), below Bitcoin’s average of approximately 5 TPS.

Stripe previously recognized the issue of “insufficient capacity of existing public chains” to handle institutional payment processes and promoted the Tempo project. However, contrary to the advertised theoretical target of “10k TPS,” early operational data has begun to decline, leading the market to comment that “performance is a bigger challenge.”

The gap between confidence in ‘10k TPS’ and actual data

Stripe CEO Patrick Collison claimed last September that Tempo could “outperform” Bitcoin’s processing capacity (about 160 million transactions annually, averaging 5.1 TPS), and emphasized that it could scale to 10k TPS in the long term. Since Bitcoin miners continue to produce transactions at around 5 TPS, this comparison itself highlights Tempo’s advantages.

However, according to Token Terminal and Dune dashboards, Tempo’s recent transaction volume is about 2.5 TPS. The actual usage falls far short of promotional targets, putting the narrative of “a high-performance chain for institutional payments” to the test during the initial mainnet launch.

Week 5 metrics: users, fees, TVL all in ‘small scale’

Approximately five weeks after the mainnet opened (March 18), Tempo’s daily active users (DAU) were around 5,600. The 24-hour transaction fees amounted to $205, which, at an exchange rate of 1 USD = 1,480.40 KRW, is only about 300k KRW. The total value locked (TVL) is also only about $3 million (roughly 10k KRW), indicating a modest scale.

In comparison, Ethereum (ETH) during the same period had about $1.4 million in 24-hour fees and a TVL of approximately $450 billion, a significant gap. Analysts note that if Tempo’s goal is to expand “payment infrastructure,” it will be difficult to expect network effects before transaction activity and liquidity form a healthy cycle.

Wallets, contracts, DEX trading volume plummet… growth momentum faces challenges

Dashboard trends are even more apparent. The number of new wallets per day peaked at 7,629 on March 19 but dropped to 1,749 by April 21, a 77% decrease. Daily contract deployments fell from 3,060 on April 14 to 863 a week later, a 72% decline. Daily token transfers shrank from over $9 million in mid-March to about one-third of that level now.

Particularly, activity on stablecoin-based DEXs (decentralized exchanges) is minimal. Tempo DEX’s 24-hour trading volume is $56k, a 95% reduction from its peak, and nearly negligible compared to the global DEX volume. Industry observers note that despite Tempo attracting large investments (raising $500 million at a $5 billion valuation in October 2025), early on-chain indicators cooled rapidly. They believe future challenges will not be about speed competition but about acquiring applications and liquidity that “bring real usage.”

Summary by TokenPost.ai

🔎 Market interpretation - Tempo, promoted as a “faster-than-Bitcoin payment chain,” has an actual usage TPS of about 2.5 after mainnet launch, below the advertised “10k TPS” and Bitcoin’s average (~5 TPS) - Reaffirms that “actual adoption/activity” is more decisive for network competitiveness than theoretical “performance” - Early on-chain metrics (wallets/contracts/transfers/DEX) rapidly slowed, indicating delays in forming network effects as a payment infrastructure 💡 Strategic points - TPS comparisons should not only consider “potential performance” but also “actual usage demand,” as high-performance narratives may lose credibility before transaction demand materializes - Check usability indicators: DAU (~5600), 24h fees ($205), TVL ($3 million), DEX trading ($56k) are key signals of ecosystem self-sustainability - Risk management: Regardless of investment appeal and branding, new chains may experience initial traffic declines; intervention should be considered only after confirming liquidity (stablecoins/DEX), core applications (payments/settlement/B2B) are launched 📘 Terminology explanations - TPS (Transactions Per Second): the number of transactions processed per second; actual usage TPS is based on real transaction volume - Mainnet: the official network operating with real assets and transactions, not a testnet - DAU (Daily Active Users): the number of active users engaging with the network/application in one day - TVL (Total Value Locked): the total assets deposited in DeFi protocols, indicating ecosystem liquidity and trust - DEX (Decentralized Exchange): a trading platform without a central operator, executing trades via smart contracts

💡 FAQ (FAQ)

Q. What is the difference between Tempo’s advertised “10k TPS” and the “actual usage TPS of 2.5”? The “10k TPS” approaches the maximum theoretical capacity (or target) claimed by the network. The “actual usage TPS of 2.5” is calculated based on real transaction volume on the mainnet, indicating current demand (usage) is relatively low. Q. Why are Tempo’s early metrics (DAU, fees, TVL, DEX trading) important? For payment/DeFi chains, increasing users drives transaction volume and liquidity, which in turn strengthens services, forming a “network effect” that is crucial. The DAU of about 5600, 24-hour fees of $205, TVL of $3 million, and DEX trading volume of $56k suggest that the ecosystem has yet to form a healthy cycle. Q. What should investors or users focus on in the future? The core is actual adoption rather than speed competition, so it is recommended to prioritize checking: (1) whether there are “killer apps/partners” suitable for institutional payments, (2) the expansion of stablecoin liquidity and financial infrastructure like DEXes and cross-chain bridges, (3) whether new wallets, contract deployments, and transfer activities are recovering.

AI Notice: This summary is generated based on TokenPost.ai language model. It may omit key content from the main text or differ from actual facts.