Comparing Walrus with Arweave, Filecoin, Storj: The Decentralized Storage Race and Walrus's Position

As the blockchain increasingly expands into fields such as on-chain gaming, social, NFT, AI, and application data, a core issue gradually becomes apparent: blockchain is not designed to store large amounts of data. Blockchains excel at transaction and state verification but are extremely inefficient when it comes to handling media, files, datasets, or application history. Consequently, decentralized storage networks have emerged, serving as an external data layer (off-chain data layer) for transactions. Walrus, Arweave, Filecoin, and Storj all address this major challenge, but each network adopts a different design philosophy, leading to clear strengths and weaknesses. Walrus – Optimized Blob Storage Layer for Applications #Walrus is designed around a core concept: large-scale blob storage for Web3 applications. Instead of viewing data as “assets to be stored permanently,” @WalrusProtocol considers data as a continuous flow: written, read, updated, and needing quick recovery. Therefore, Walrus’s architecture focuses on: Breaking data into blobs Encoding with erasure coding instead of full replication Maintaining durability and recoverability even if multiple nodes fail Reducing storage costs compared to traditional replication models A key feature of Walrus is its Red Stuff encoding mechanism and epoch-based network organization, which help systematically manage large data volumes rather than allowing blob growth to become chaotic over time. This approach makes Walrus particularly suitable for: Media (video, images)Game assets Social data Datasets for AI Applications requiring frequent read-write operations and low latency Arweave – The Internet’s Permanent Storage Vault Arweave follows a completely different philosophy: permanent storage. With its famous “pay once, store forever” model, Arweave positions itself as a historical archive of the Internet. Once data is uploaded to Arweave, it is designed to last indefinitely, nearly impossible to modify or delete. This makes Arweave highly effective for cases such as: Public documents Records and evidence Historical content Data requiring high immutability However, this strength also imposes limitations. Not all data needs to be stored permanently. For continuously changing application data, uploading everything to Arweave can be inflexible and costly, forcing users to carefully categorize which data is worth “freezing permanently.” Filecoin – Storage Market with Commitment Mechanism Filecoin approaches storage as a service marketplace. Within the Filecoin ecosystem: Users create storage deals Providers compete on price, duration, and quality The network uses cryptographic proofs to verify that data is genuinely stored as promised This approach is suitable for: Businesses needing multiple provider options Cases requiring storage behavior verification Data with flexible storage durations However, Filecoin is not optimized for fast read-write experiences or continuously changing data. For real-time Web3 applications, reliance on deals and market mechanisms can add complexity. Storj – Decentralized Cloud Object Storage Storj is often viewed as the decentralized version of Web2 cloud storage. Storj’s system: Encrypts data on the client side Splits data into chunks Distributes chunks across multiple independent nodes Manages data via satellites responsible for metadata, auditing, and repair The biggest advantage of Storj is its familiar experience. Those accustomed to object storage, backups, or enterprise data storage can adopt Storj quickly without significant architectural changes. In return, Storj still retains many “cloud-style” features and was not designed to be a tightly integrated data layer with on-chain logic. Differences and Competitive Advantages of Walrus Walrus occupies a very unique position in this landscape. It does not pursue permanent storage like Arweave It does not operate as a complex deal marketplace like Filecoin It does not aim to fully emulate Web2 cloud like Storj Instead, Walrus focuses on the blob storage layer for Web3 applications, where: Large data volumes High read-write frequency Fast recovery requirements Seamless blockchain integration for logic processing As the ecosystem of applications such as gaming, social, and on-chain AI continues to grow, Walrus can benefit significantly from network effects, becoming the “default” data infrastructure behind many applications that end-users may not even realize. How to Choose the Right Storage Solution There is no “best” solution for all cases, only the most suitable one based on needs: Permanent, immutable storage → Arweave Market-based provider with verifiable commitments → Filecoin Familiar cloud experience, easy integration → Storj Flexible blob storage, large data, fast recovery for Web3 applications → Walrus Conclusion The decentralized storage race is not a one-size-fits-all game. Each network occupies a unique niche within the Web3 data stack. Walrus, with its focus on application-oriented blob storage, is paving a different path: becoming a quietly operational yet essential data layer for the next generation of Web3 applications. If Web3’s data explosion continues, Walrus could be one of the “less talked about but indispensable” infrastructures. $WAL