| Execute and verify transactions|Yes|No|A full node will execute and verify all transactions while Gaia-lite won't.|
| Verify and save blocks|Yes|No|A full node will verify and save all blocks while Gaia-lite won't.|
| Consensus participation|Yes|No|Only when a full node is a validator will it participate in consensus. Lite nodes never participate in consensus.|
| Bandwidth cost|High|Low|A full node will receive all blocks. If bandwidth is limited, it will fall behind the main network. What's more, if it happens to be a validator, it will slow down the consensus process. Light clients require little bandwidth, only when serving local requests.|
| Computing resources|High|Low|A full node will execute all transactions and verify all blocks, which requires considerable computing resources.|
| Storage resources|High|Low|A full node will save all blocks and ABCI states. Gaia-lite just saves validator sets and some checkpoints.|
| Power consumption|High|Low|Full nodes must be deployed on machines which have high performance and will be running all the time. Gaia-lite can be deployed on the same machines as users' applications, or on independent machines but with lower performance. Light clients can be shut down anytime when necessary. Gaia-lite consumes very little power, so even mobile devices can meet the power requirements.|
| Provide APIs|All cosmos APIs|Modular APIs|A full node supports all Cosmos APIs. Gaia-lite provides modular APIs according to users' configuration.|
| Secuity level| High|High|A full node will verify all transactions and blocks by itself. A light client can't do this, but it can query data from other full nodes and verify the data independently. Therefore, both full nodes and light clients don't need to trust any third nodes and can achieve high security.|
According to the above table, Gaia-lite can meet many users' functionality and security requirements, but require little bandwidth, computing, storage, and power.