Substrate and Polkadot Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for developers building blockchains with the Substrate SDK. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Which pallet would be good to manage native tokens? Is it Asset Pallet or Balance Pallet?
We can transfer funds against any token using Asset Pallet. But would it make sense to use Asset Pallet for transferring funds against native tokens? Is there any example?
For a native token on a Substrate chain you should use the Balances Pallet, not the Assets Pallet.
The balances pallet is specially optimized to minimize its computational and storage footprint. This means that when using the balances pallet, users will be paying the lowest possible fees and your chain will be using the least amount of weight per transaction.
Additionally, the Balances Pallet implements a number of core traits needed for a native token like ReservableCurrency, LockableCurrency, and supports things like vesting via the Vesting Pallet.
The Balance pallet is designed to handle a native token of a chain and would count towards existential deposit (if you choose to have that concept in your chain).
The asset pallet is designed to handle a multitude of tokens (these may be configured to not be sufficient and thus not count towards existential deposits).
(It is pretty common to use both in the same runtime. I'm not sure I have seen a chain that uses the asset pallet without also including the balance pallet.)
