Hashgraph technology is the consensus engine underneath the Hedera network, and it is the technical reason Eric Wade’s “No. 1 Crypto Play for 2025” pitch treats HBAR as different from the thousands of other tokens. Hashgraph is not a blockchain, and that distinction is the heart of the pitch’s technical argument. Here is what hashgraph is, how it works in plain terms, and why the difference matters.
Not a Blockchain
Most cryptocurrencies run on blockchains, which order transactions by grouping them into blocks and chaining those blocks together. Hashgraph takes a different path. Instead of blocks, it uses a data structure that records which events each network member saw and when. Every node gossips about what it knows, and the network builds a shared picture of the order in which events happened without ever forming a chain of blocks.
That difference produces practical results. Because hashgraph does not wait for blocks to fill or for a chain to extend, it can reach agreement on transactions faster than many blockchains. It also uses a different approach to achieving trust, one the Hedera project argues is more efficient than the proof-of-work mining that Bitcoin uses.
Gossip and Virtual Voting
Hashgraph’s method has two steps with memorable names. The first is “gossip about gossip,” where each node shares not just its own transactions but what it has heard from every other node. The second is “virtual voting,” where nodes compute what everyone else would have known and reach agreement without actually sending votes back and forth. The result is consensus that is fast and that the network claims is mathematically final, meaning transactions cannot be reversed once confirmed.
That finality is one of hashgraph’s selling points versus some blockchains, where a transaction can be rolled back if the chain reorganizes. For enterprise users who want certainty that a payment or record is permanent, that property matters. It is a genuine technical distinction, and it is part of why a council of large companies agreed to govern Hedera.
The Efficiency Claim
The efficiency numbers tied to hashgraph are striking, at least in the technical documentation. Hedera has described throughput on the order of 10,000 transactions per second and per-transaction energy use measured in tiny fractions of a kilowatt-hour, many orders of magnitude below Bitcoin. Those figures are the substance behind the pitch’s “better than Bitcoin” framing, and they are explored in our Hedera transactions article.
The caveat is that technical specifications and real-world adoption are different things. A network can be capable of 10,000 transactions per second while actually processing a small fraction of that because relatively few applications use it. The efficiency is real; the question is whether it translates into usage that creates demand for the token.
What It Means for the Pitch
Wade’s pitch leans on hashgraph to argue that HBAR is a fundamentally better technology than Bitcoin or Ethereum. That argument has merit on the specific metrics of speed, cost, and energy use. What it does not establish is that technical superiority guarantees token price appreciation, and history is full of technically elegant networks whose tokens went nowhere.
The token is still a token, priced on adoption rather than on the elegance of its consensus mechanism. Hashgraph explains why Hedera might attract users; it does not by itself make HBAR valuable. For how this plays out in the specific recommendation, see our No. 1 crypto play teardown.
Hashgraph Versus Proof of Stake
It helps to place hashgraph next to the other alternatives to Bitcoin’s mining. Many modern networks use proof of stake, where validators lock up tokens and are chosen to confirm transactions. Hedera’s staking model shares some of that flavor, but its consensus is built on the hashgraph algorithm rather than a standard proof-of-stake protocol, and the difference shows up in finality and ordering.
Hashgraph’s claim is that it reaches agreement on the full order of events quickly and with certainty, a property called asynchronous Byzantine fault tolerance. That is a strong guarantee, stronger than some blockchains provide, and it is why Hedera markets itself to enterprises that want transactions settled permanently. The nuance for investors is that these guarantees are about how the network runs, not about whether people use it, and the token’s value still depends on that second, harder question.
The Bottom Line
Hashgraph is a genuinely different consensus technology from blockchain, using gossip and virtual voting to reach fast, final agreement on transactions with far less energy than Bitcoin. It is the strongest technical argument in Hedera’s favor. But technology is only half the story for a token, and the other half, adoption and demand, is what ultimately decides whether HBAR is worth anything.
Ready to see the research? Click here to access Eric Wade’s report.
NewsletterVetter is an independent publication. We receive compensation from some of the services we review through affiliate links. Nothing on this site is investment advice. Always do your own research.