ZKsync vs Polygon
ZKsync vs Polygon Scalability
Real-time TPS
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon TPS is 31.64 tx/s
Max TPS (100 blocks)
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon max TPS is 429.1 tx/s
Max Theoretical TPS
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon max theoretical TPS is 714.3 tx/s
Transaction Volume
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon transaction volume is 113,904 txns
Block Time
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon block time is 2.16s
Finality
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon finality is 5s
Type
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon is a sidechain
Launch Date
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon was launched on May 30, 2020
ZKsync vs Polygon Decentralization
Nakamoto Coefficient
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon Nakamoto Coefficient is 5
Validators/Miners
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon has 104 validators
Stake/Hashrate
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon stake is $918.7M
Consensus Mechanism
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon is PoS
Governance
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon governance is off-chain
ZKsync vs Polygon Developer Activity New
Developers
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon has 1,652 developers
Repos
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon has 147 repos
Commits
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon has 61,311 commits
Stars
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon has 9,081 stars
Watchers
ZKsync has no data, while Polygon has 1,767 watchers
Other Comparisons
ZKsync Comparisons
About Blockchains
About ZKsync
ZKsync is a Layer-2 scaling solution that makes transactions on Ethereum cheaper and faster by utilizing zero-knowledge rollups (zk-rollups) and zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs).
About Polygon
Polygon, formerly Matic Network, is a blockchain platform designed to establish a multi-chain system compatible with Ethereum. It employs a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism similar to Ethereum for on-chain transactions, with its native token being POL. Functioning as a "layer two" or "sidechain" scaling solution alongside Ethereum, Polygon facilitates quicker transactions and lower fees. Its inception aimed to tackle Ethereum's major challenges, including high fees, subpar user experience, and limited transaction throughput, aspiring to create an "Ethereum's internet of blockchains" or a multi-chain ecosystem of Ethereum-compatible blockchains.