When people talk about blockchain, a type of distributed ledger that chains blocks of data together using cryptography. Also known as distributed ledger technology, it DLT, it’s often used as if they’re interchangeable. But that’s like calling a car a vehicle—true, but not the whole story. Not every distributed ledger is a blockchain. DLT, a broader category of systems that record data across multiple nodes without a central authority includes blockchains, but also hashgraphs, directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), and other structures that don’t use blocks or chains. The key difference? blockchain is one way to do DLT, not the only way.
Why does this matter? Because if you’re evaluating a project that claims to use "blockchain," you need to ask: Is it actually using a chain of blocks, or just a shared database? Projects like POAP and blockchain voting rely on blockchain’s immutability and public verification, which works because each block links to the last. But some financial institutions use DLT systems that don’t chain data—they just sync ledgers across banks for faster settlement. These systems are faster and cheaper, but they’re not tamper-proof in the same way. That’s why you’ll see crypto mining, the process of validating blockchain transactions through computational work in Bitcoin and Ethereum, but not in systems like R3’s Corda or Hyperledger Fabric, which use permissioned nodes and consensus algorithms that don’t need mining.
DLT gives you flexibility. Blockchain gives you transparency and decentralization. If you care about censorship resistance—like in North Korea crypto theft or Tornado Cash sanctions—you need a public, permissionless blockchain. If you’re a bank trying to reduce reconciliation errors, you might prefer a private DLT where only trusted parties can write data. The security tokens, digital representations of real-world assets like stocks or real estate on a ledger you see in trading platforms like KyberSwap or Ardor DEX? They can run on either. But if they’re built on Ethereum, they inherit its global audit trail. If they’re on a private DLT, they’re easier to regulate—but less open to public scrutiny.
And here’s the catch: most people don’t realize how many "blockchain" projects are really just DLT with a buzzword. Look at Franklin (FLY) or BSClaunch (BSL)—both claimed to be blockchain-based, but their lack of real decentralization, active nodes, or public verification makes them closer to private databases. That’s why you’ll find so many dead tokens in this collection. They weren’t built on blockchain—they were built on hype.
Understanding this distinction helps you spot real innovation from empty promises. Whether you’re looking at AI-enhanced blockchain, EU MiCA regulations, or crypto mixers, the underlying tech matters. If a system can’t be verified by anyone, it’s not truly decentralized. If it doesn’t use blocks, it’s not a blockchain. And if you’re storing value or proving ownership—like with NFT badges or security tokens—you need the guarantees that only a real blockchain can offer.
Below, you’ll find real-world examples of both. Some posts show how blockchain enables trustless systems. Others reveal how DLT is quietly reshaping finance, voting, and identity—without ever using a chain. You’ll learn what to look for, what to ignore, and how to tell the difference before you invest, trade, or even just click "connect wallet."
DLT and blockchain are often used interchangeably, but they're not the same. DLT is the broader category; blockchain is one type of DLT. Learn how they differ in structure, speed, use cases, and why enterprises are choosing non-blockchain DLTs.
