How Pubky Compares to Other Protocols
Understanding how Pubky differs from other decentralized and federated protocols.
Quick Comparison Table
| Feature | Pubky | Nostr | Bluesky | Farcaster | IPFS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identity Model | Self-sovereign keys (Ed25519) | Self-sovereign keys (Schnorr) | DIDs + handles | Ethereum addresses | Content-addressed |
| Storage | Homeservers (HTTP) | Relays (WebSocket) | Personal Data Servers | Hubs (P2P) | IPFS nodes (DHT) |
| Discovery | Mainline DHT (10M+ nodes) | Relay lists | DID directory (centralized) | On-chain registry | IPFS DHT |
| Data Mutability | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ❌ No (content-addressed) |
| Censorship Resistance | 🟢 High | 🟡 Medium | 🔴 Low | 🟡 Medium | 🟢 High |
| Blockchain Requirement | ❌ No | ❌ No | ❌ No | ✅ Yes (Optimism) | ❌ No |
| Transaction Fees | ❌ None | ❌ None | ❌ None | ✅ Gas fees | ❌ None |
| Always-Online Requirement | 🟡 Partial (homeservers) | 🟡 Partial (relays) | ❌ No (PDSs) | 🟡 Partial (hubs) | ✅ Yes (for hosting) |
| Mobile-Friendly | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | 🟡 Limited |
| Data Portability | ✅ Full | ✅ Full | 🟡 Partial | 🟡 Partial | ✅ Full |
| Maturity | 🚧 Beta | ✅ Production | ✅ Production | ✅ Production | ✅ Production |
Legend: ✅ Yes | ❌ No | 🟡 Partial | 🟢 High | 🔴 Low | 🚧 Work in Progress
Detailed Comparisons
Pubky vs Nostr
What They Have in Common:
- Self-sovereign cryptographic identity
- No blockchain or transaction fees
- Data portability through key ownership
- Open protocol and implementations
Key Differences:
| Aspect | Pubky | Nostr |
|---|---|---|
| Storage Model | Homeservers (HTTP/HTTPS) | Relays (WebSocket) |
| Discovery | Mainline DHT (15+ years proven) | Relay lists (client-configured) |
| Data Structure | Key-value store (files) | Event stream (signed messages) |
| Homeserver Discovery | Automatic via PKARR → DHT | Manual relay configuration |
| Always-Online | Not required (homeservers) | Relays must stay online |
| Semantic Tagging | Built-in (Semantic Social Graph) | Application-level |
| API Protocol | RESTful HTTP | WebSocket subscriptions |
| Scalability | Proven DHT infrastructure | Relay-dependent |
When to Choose Pubky:
- Need censorship-resistant discovery (DHT-based)
- Want familiar HTTP/REST APIs
- Building apps requiring mutable file storage
- Need semantic social graph features
When to Choose Nostr:
- Want real-time event streaming
- Prefer WebSocket-based architecture
- Ecosystem maturity matters (more clients/relays)
- Simpler relay model appeals to you
Pubky vs Bluesky (AT Protocol)
What They Have in Common:
- User data portability
- Federation-capable architecture
- Personal data servers
- Social media focus
Key Differences:
| Aspect | Pubky | Bluesky |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Public keys (truly self-sovereign) | DIDs + DNS handles (hybrid) |
| Discovery | Mainline DHT (decentralized) | DID directory (centralized) |
| Account Portability | Automatic (update PKARR) | Requires DID transfer |
| Handle System | Optional vanity names | DNS-based handles required |
| Infrastructure Control | User chooses homeserver | Bluesky PBC controls directory |
| Censorship Resistance | High (DHT-based) | Low (centralized components) |
| Data Format | Flexible key-value | Lexicon-based schemas |
| Current State | Beta | Production |
Key Concern with Bluesky:
- Centralization: DID directory (plc.directory) is controlled by Bluesky PBC
- Single point of failure: If the directory is compromised, identity resolution breaks
- Governance: Protocol changes controlled by one entity
When to Choose Pubky:
- True self-sovereignty is critical
- No dependence on centralized services
- Prefer proven DHT technology
- Building for censorship-resistant use cases
When to Choose Bluesky:
- Want production-ready ecosystem now
- Large existing user base matters
- Familiar with ActivityPub/federation
- DNS-based handles are important
Pubky vs Farcaster
What They Have in Common:
- Decentralized social protocol
- User-controlled data
- Multiple client support
Key Differences:
| Aspect | Pubky | Farcaster |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Off-chain (key pairs) | On-chain (Ethereum addresses) |
| Registration | Free (generate keys) | Paid (on-chain transaction) |
| Storage | Homeservers (HTTP) | Hubs (P2P gossip) |
| Fees | None | Gas fees on Optimism |
| Blockchain | None | Optimism L2 required |
| Scalability | HTTP server scale | Hub network scale |
| Discovery | Mainline DHT | On-chain registry |
| Complexity | Simpler (no chain) | More complex (chain + hubs) |
Trade-offs:
Pubky Advantages:
- No blockchain dependency
- No transaction fees
- Simpler architecture
- Faster onboarding (instant key generation)
Farcaster Advantages:
- On-chain identity verification
- Ethereum ecosystem integration
- Stronger identity guarantees
- Production maturity
When to Choose Pubky:
- Want to avoid blockchain complexity
- No transaction fees requirement
- Prefer HTTP-based architecture
- Need fastest possible onboarding
When to Choose Farcaster:
- Ethereum integration is valuable
- On-chain verification important
- Already in crypto ecosystem
- Production maturity required
Pubky vs IPFS
What They Have in Common:
- Decentralized data storage
- Content distribution
- No central authority
Key Differences:
| Aspect | Pubky | IPFS |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Focus | Mutable identity + data | Immutable content distribution |
| Addressing | Identity-first (public keys) | Content-first (CIDs) |
| Mutability | Native (update anytime) | Requires IPNS or external pointers |
| Use Case | Applications with identity | Content delivery and archival |
| Data Model | Key-value (per user) | Merkle DAG (content) |
| Discovery | Mainline DHT (identity) | IPFS DHT (content) |
| Always-Online | No (homeservers persist) | Yes (to host your content) |
| Update Mechanism | Direct (PUT/DELETE) | Republish with new CID |
Complementary Technologies: Pubky and IPFS can work together:
- Store large immutable content on IPFS
- Reference IPFS CIDs in Pubky homeserver data
- Use Pubky for identity, IPFS for content delivery
When to Choose Pubky:
- Building identity-centric applications
- Need mutable user data
- Want simple HTTP APIs
- Social/collaboration apps
When to Choose IPFS:
- Content immutability is critical
- Building CDN or archival system
- Deduplication important
- Large file distribution
Architecture Comparison
Data Flow Comparison
Pubky:
User Key → PKARR (DHT) → Homeserver → HTTP API → Apps
Nostr:
User Key → Relay List → Relays (WebSocket) → Apps
Bluesky:
DID → Directory → PDS → Lexicon API → Apps
Farcaster:
Ethereum Address → On-chain Registry → Hubs (P2P) → Apps
Trust Model Comparison
| Protocol | Trust Requirement |
|---|---|
| Pubky | Trust homeserver for availability (not integrity) |
| Nostr | Trust relays for availability (not integrity) |
| Bluesky | Trust Bluesky PBC for DID directory |
| Farcaster | Trust Optimism L2 and hub operators |
| IPFS | Trust no one (content-addressed) |
Migration Paths
Moving to Pubky From…
From Nostr:
- Export event history
- Convert to Pubky data format
- Publish to homeserver
- Update discovery to PKARR
From Bluesky:
- Export PDS data
- Generate Pubky keys
- Migrate posts/profile
- Publish PKARR record
From Centralized Platforms:
- Export data (if available)
- Create Pubky identity
- Import and republish content
- Announce migration
Ecosystem Maturity
| Protocol | Launch Year | Status | Notable Apps |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pubky | 2024 | Beta | Pubky App |
| Nostr | 2020 | Production | Damus, Amethyst, Primal |
| Bluesky | 2023 | Production | Bluesky Social |
| Farcaster | 2021 | Production | Warpcast |
| IPFS | 2015 | Production | Brave, Opera, many apps |
Common Misconceptions
”Pubky is just another Nostr”
False: While both use keys for identity, Pubky uses HTTP homeservers and Mainline DHT for discovery, not relays and manual configuration.
”Bluesky is decentralized like Pubky”
Partial: Bluesky has decentralized data servers but centralized identity (DID directory controlled by Bluesky PBC).
”Farcaster is more secure because it uses blockchain”
Nuanced: Blockchain provides different guarantees, not inherently more security. Pubky’s cryptographic signatures provide strong integrity without fees.
”IPFS can do everything Pubky does”
False: IPFS is content-addressed and immutable. Pubky is identity-addressed and mutable. Different use cases.
Bottom Line: Choose Based on Your Needs
Choose Pubky if:
- ✅ Self-sovereignty without compromise is critical
- ✅ Censorship resistance is a top priority
- ✅ You want proven, scalable infrastructure (Mainline DHT)
- ✅ No blockchain dependency is important
- ✅ HTTP/REST APIs are preferred
- ✅ Building social/collaborative applications
- ✅ Fast-growing ecosystem
Choose Nostr if:
- ✅ Real-time event streaming is core to your app
- ✅ Existing ecosystem maturity matters now
- ✅ WebSocket-based architecture fits your needs
- ✅ Want maximum client/relay options today
Choose Bluesky if:
- ✅ Need production-ready ecosystem immediately
- ✅ Federation model familiar from Mastodon
- ✅ DNS-based handles are important
- ✅ Okay with some centralized components
Choose Farcaster if:
- ✅ Ethereum ecosystem integration valuable
- ✅ On-chain verification important
- ✅ Transaction fees acceptable
- ✅ Already in crypto ecosystem
Choose IPFS if:
- ✅ Content immutability is required
- ✅ Building CDN or archival system
- ✅ Content-addressed data model fits
- ✅ Deduplication is valuable
See Also
- Main Documentation: Complete Pubky knowledge base
- Getting Started: Get started with Pubky
- FAQ: Frequently asked questions
- Vision: Why we’re building Pubky
- Pubky Core: Technical overview