IPFS vs Filecoin: Content Delivery Networks

Content-based addressing: Data is retrieved via a cryptographic hash (CID), not a server location. This ensures immutable, verifiable content and eliminates single points of failure. This matters for static website hosting (e.g., Uniswap frontend), NFT metadata permanence, and censorship-resistant publishing.

No paywall for retrieval: Anyone can fetch content from the IPFS network without paying, as nodes voluntarily host and serve data. This matters for public goods, open-source documentation, and prototyping where cost predictability is critical. Tools like Pinata and web3.storage simplify pinning.

No built-in incentive for storage: Data persists only as long as at least one node chooses to pin it ("pinning is not a contract"). This leads to content volatility and unpredictable availability. This matters for mission-critical dApp assets or long-term data archiving, where you cannot rely on altruism.

Cryptographic storage proofs: Miners must continuously prove they store your data via Proof-of-Replication and Proof-of-Spacetime. This provides contractual, long-term persistence. This matters for enterprise data backups, legal document archiving, and NFT asset storage where data loss is unacceptable.

Incentivized retrieval network: Miners compete to serve content quickly via the Filecoin Retrieval Market, enabling fast, paid CDN-like performance. This matters for high-traffic dApp frontends and streaming media where low-latency global delivery is required, bridging the gap to traditional CDNs.

Storage deals and FIL tokens: Users must create storage deals, manage FIL payments, and understand market dynamics. This introduces operational overhead and variable costs versus flat-rate cloud storage. This matters for small teams or applications needing simple, predictable "upload and forget" functionality.

Permanent, location-agnostic URLs: Content is addressed by its hash (CID), not server location. This ensures verifiable integrity and censorship resistance. This matters for archiving public datasets (e.g., Arweave mirroring) or serving immutable front-end assets for dApps.

Zero-cost pinning for public data: You can host content on your own nodes or use free public gateways (like ipfs.io). This matters for prototyping, open-source projects, or low-traffic static sites where upfront storage costs are a barrier. However, persistence relies on altruistic pinning.

Cryptoeconomic guarantees: Miners post collateral and are penalized (slashed) for failing to provide proofs of storage (PoRep/PoSt). This matters for mission-critical data requiring long-term, verifiable persistence, such as NFT metadata backups or enterprise compliance archives.

Paid, performant retrieval: A separate market incentivizes fast content delivery. Services like Filecoin Saturn and Boost create a decentralized CDN. This matters for high-traffic applications (e.g., video streaming, game assets) needing predictable low-latency global delivery.

'Garbage Collection' risk: Data not actively pinned by nodes (your own or a paid pinning service like Pinata) can disappear. This matters if you need guaranteed data availability without active management. Relying on public gateways introduces single points of failure.

Higher integration overhead: Requires managing storage deals, FIL payments, and retrieval contracts. Cold storage model: Retrieval can have higher latency vs. traditional CDNs unless using paid retrieval. This matters for real-time applications where simplicity and instant access are paramount.