Skip to main content
Spark and Liquid Network are both Bitcoin Layer 2 solutions, but they take fundamentally different approaches to scaling. This comparison helps developers and users understand the tradeoffs.

Quick Comparison

FeatureSparkLiquid Network
Custody ModelSelf-custody (you hold keys)Federated (11-of-15 multisig)
Exit MechanismUnilateral (trustless)Requires federation cooperation
Settlement SpeedInstant (under 1 second)~2 minutes (2 block confirmations)
Transaction FeesZero (Spark-to-Spark)~0.1 sat/vbyte
Lightning SupportNative integrationVia submarine swaps
Token StandardBTKN (native)Issued Assets
Trust Assumption1-of-n honest operators11-of-15 federation honesty

Custody and Trust

Spark: True Self-Custody

On Spark, you always control your Bitcoin. The system uses a 1-of-n trust model where only one operator needs to behave honestly for your funds to remain secure. Most importantly, you can unilaterally exit to Bitcoin L1 at any time without anyone’s permission.
Your Bitcoin on Spark = Real Bitcoin you can exit anytime
Spark achieves this through pre-signed exit transactions created before you deposit. If operators disappear or become malicious, you broadcast your exit transaction to Bitcoin and reclaim your funds after a timelock expires.

Liquid: Federated Custody

Liquid uses a federated sidechain model. Your Bitcoin is held in a 11-of-15 multisig controlled by federation members (exchanges, financial institutions). To move Bitcoin back to L1, you need cooperation from at least 11 federation members.
Your L-BTC on Liquid = IOU from federation members
If the federation fails or refuses to process your withdrawal, you cannot unilaterally exit. This is a fundamentally different trust model than Spark.

Speed and Finality

Spark: Instant Finality

Spark transfers settle in under 1 second with immediate finality. There’s no block time, no confirmations to wait for. When you send Bitcoin on Spark, the recipient can spend it immediately.

Liquid: 2-Minute Blocks

Liquid has ~1 minute block times and requires 2 confirmations for finality, meaning ~2 minutes for settlement. While faster than Bitcoin L1, this is still orders of magnitude slower than Spark.

Fees

Spark: Zero Fees

Spark-to-Spark transfers are completely free. There are no gas fees, no per-transaction costs. You pay fees only when entering or exiting to L1 or Lightning.

Liquid: Transaction Fees

Liquid charges transaction fees (typically ~0.1 sat/vbyte). While low, these add up for high-frequency use cases like payments or micropayments.

Lightning Integration

Spark: Native Lightning

Spark has native Lightning Network integration. You can send and receive Lightning payments without running a node, managing channels, or worrying about liquidity. Lightning is a first-class citizen.

Liquid: Submarine Swaps

Liquid connects to Lightning through submarine swaps, which adds complexity, fees, and trust requirements. It’s not a native integration.

Token Issuance

Both platforms support token issuance, but with different approaches:

Spark: BTKN Standard

Spark’s BTKN token standard enables:
  • Instant, zero-fee token transfers
  • Built-in compliance controls (freeze/unfreeze)
  • No smart contracts required
  • Same self-custody guarantees as Bitcoin

Liquid: Issued Assets

Liquid Issued Assets allow token creation but inherit Liquid’s federated trust model and 2-minute settlement times.

When to Use Each

Choose Spark When You Need:

  • True self-custody with guaranteed exit rights
  • Instant settlements for payments or trading
  • Zero fees for high-frequency transactions
  • Lightning integration without running infrastructure
  • Regulated stablecoins with compliance controls

Choose Liquid When You Need:

  • Confidential transactions (amount hiding)
  • Established exchange integrations
  • Compatibility with existing Liquid infrastructure

The Bottom Line

Spark and Liquid solve Bitcoin scaling differently:
  • Spark prioritizes self-custody, instant finality, and zero fees. You never give up control of your Bitcoin.
  • Liquid prioritizes confidential transactions and exchange integrations, but requires trusting a federation.
For developers building payments, wallets, or stablecoin applications, Spark’s self-custody model and instant settlements typically provide a better foundation.

Learn More