Since July, Circlerising has become the most named option for chain-agnostic wallets. Optimismfalling has dropped to being named occasionally for fair ordering and Proto-Danksharding growth.
Latest insights
Week of Sep 21–27 · Since Jul 5
Arbitrum Slipping: ArbitrumEther (ETH) overtook Arbitrum to lead Blockchain Platform and Payment Tokens
Ether (ETH) Gap between platforms: ChatGPT Search now mentions Ether (ETH) 20 points more often than Google AI Mode in Blockchain Platform and Payment Tokens, a narrowed gap
Chainlink Gaining: Chainlink moved up 1 place to rank #5 of 100 in Blockchain Platform and Payment Tokens
Chainlink Gaining: ChainlinkStarkNet now trails Chainlink in Blockchain Platform and Payment Tokens
Axelar Network Gap between platforms: Axelar Network's platform gap in Blockchain Platform and Payment Tokens narrowed: Google AI Mode 18.9%, ChatGPT Search 11.3%
30% of citations point at the ranked brands’ own sites. eco.com, binance.com, youtube.com are the most-cited sites outside the ranked brands’ own domains.
I'm a developer planning to deploy a complex dApp. Which Layer 2 token's network has the cheapest and most predictable gas fees for smart contract execution?
For a complex dApp, I’d evaluate Layer 2 networks on two separate criteria: the actual cost of smart contract execution and how predictable that cost remains under load. The cheapest network on a simple transfer benchmark isn't necessarily the cheapest for a dApp with complex contract calls, storage writes, and frequent user interactions.
The key distinction is that the L2 token, the network's fee mechanism, and the underlying Ethereum data-availability costs can all affect what users pay. Predictability matters just as much as the lowest average fee if you're planning a production deployment.
My recommendation: Base, with Arbitrum as the main alternative
1. Base
(Best starting point)
Why: Low transaction fees, EVM compatibility, and a developer-friendly ecosystem. Ethereum.org's network comparison lists an average transaction fee around $0.002, although actual contract calls vary.
Google AI Mode· Oct 13, 2026
When deploying a complex decentralized application (dApp) with intensive smart contract execution, choosing the right Layer 2 (L2) involves balancing execution cost (cheap) and variance protection (predictable).
I want to invest in a token that benefits directly from the growth of EIP-4844 (Proto-Danksharding).
For a user who wants to interact with multiple chains without switching networks, what's the best token for a chain-agnostic wallet?
For a user concerned with front-running, which Layer 2 token's network has the fairest transaction ordering system?
I believe the future is multi-chain. What's the best cryptocurrency to invest in that focuses on connecting different blockchains?
What is the best token that acts as a gas token for a privacy-focused ZK-rollup?
What is the best token whose network allows for the easy creation and deployment of custom Layer 2 rollups?
For a dApp that requires fast and frequent state changes, what is the best token for an "optimistic chain"?
I'm building a dApp that needs to be "multi-chain" from day one. Which token's network offers the best tools for cross-chain development?
I'm bullish on zero-knowledge technology. What's the best token for a ZK-Rollup project?
Gas token: ETH, not a native BASE token.
Best for: Consumer dApps, frequent user interactions, Solidity contracts, and applications where onboarding matters.
2. Arbitrum One
Why: Low fees, EVM compatibility, and a strong DeFi ecosystem. Ethereum.org lists an average transaction fee around $0.003.
Gas token: ETH. ARB is the governance token, not the gas token.
Best for: Complex DeFi protocols, liquidity-intensive applications, and contracts that benefit from an established DeFi ecosystem.
3. OP Mainnet
Why: Low-cost EVM execution and the broader OP Stack ecosystem. Its fee model includes both execution and Ethereum data-publication costs.
Gas token: ETH. OP is primarily a governance token.
Best for: Projects considering OP Stack infrastructure or future deployment across the Superchain ecosystem.
These average-fee figures are indicative network-wide benchmarks, not a controlled comparison of identical smart contract calls. They should not be treated as guaranteed deployment costs.
Which network has the most predictable fees?
The important caveat is that no major L2 guarantees a fixed USD cost for arbitrary smart contract execution. Fees can change with network demand, ETH's price, and the cost of publishing transaction data to Ethereum. OP Stack documentation explicitly describes separate execution and L1 data-cost components.
Criterion
My pick
Reason
Low fees and general-purpose Solidity
Base
Strong combination of low costs and EVM tooling
DeFi complexity and liquidity
Arbitrum One
Established DeFi ecosystem
OP Stack ecosystem flexibility
OP Mainnet
Relevant if cross-chain OP Stack deployment is planned
Stable, fixed USD fees
None by default
Market-driven costs remain variable
How I'd validate this before deploying
For a complex dApp, benchmark the same representative contract calls on Base and Arbitrum:
Measure eth_estimateGas and actual receipt.gasUsed for each operation.
Record the total transaction fee, including L2 execution and L1 data fees where applicable.
Test storage-heavy calls, batch transactions, peak-load periods, and reverted transactions.
Track median, 95th-percentile, and worst-case observed fees over several days.
If you need predictable user costs, consider sponsored transactions or account abstraction, with explicit per-user spending limits.
Bottom line: I'd start with Base for a general-purpose EVM dApp, then benchmark against Arbitrum One before committing. If by “token” you mean a tradable L2 cryptocurrency rather than the network itself, note that Base uses ETH for gas and has no planned native network token according to Coinbase's documentation.
Several blockchain projects have native tokens associated with zero-knowledge (ZK) rollups, a Layer 2 scaling approach that batches transactions off-chain and uses cryptographic validity proofs to help reduce the cost of settling transactions on Ethereum.
If you're researching tokens in this sector, these are some of the key projects to investigate.
Native tokens of ZK-rollup projects
1. ZKsync (ZK)
Focuses on Ethereum scaling through ZK technology and interoperable chains. The ZK token is used for governance, including voting on protocol decisions.
Ticker: ZK · Ecosystem governance
2. Starknet (STRK)
Uses STARK proofs and the Cairo programming environment to scale Ethereum applications. STRK supports network governance, staking and transaction fee payments.
Ticker: STRK · Fees, staking and governance
3. Scroll (SCR)
An Ethereum-compatible ZK-rollup designed to support lower-cost transactions and familiar Ethereum development workflows. SCR is its ecosystem token, associated with network governance and ecosystem participation.
Ticker: SCR · Governance and ecosystem
4. Polygon (POL)
Focuses on scaling and interoperability across blockchain networks, including ZK-powered infrastructure. POL is the Polygon ecosystem's native token, but it is important to distinguish it from a token dedicated exclusively to one ZK rollup.
Ticker: POL · Ecosystem utility and staking
5. Linea
Linea is another ZK-rollup focused on Ethereum compatibility, scalable applications and lower transaction costs. It is worth researching, but verify its current native-token status before treating it as a direct token investment candidate.
Token status: Verify current official announcements
How to compare these projects
Project
Main area of interest
Token
ZKsync
Interoperable ZK chains and governance
ZK
Starknet
STARK proofs, scalability and staking
STRK
Scroll
EVM-compatible ZK scaling
SCR
Polygon
One important distinction: a network's ability to reduce transaction fees does not automatically mean its token will appreciate in value. Some networks primarily charge transaction fees in ETH, while their own tokens serve governance or staking functions.
Also, Polygon's specific zkEVM Mainnet Beta was sunset on July 3, 2026, so POL should not be treated as a token for an active Polygon zkEVM rollup.
For further research, I'd prioritize comparing ZK, STRK and SCR on token utility, circulating supply, upcoming unlocks, network usage, and whether demand for the token grows as transaction volume increases. These are research candidates, not guaranteed investments.
(STRK) : is a validity rollup (ZK-rollup) operating as an L2 network over Ethereum, leveraging STARK proofs for computational integrity . The native token, , is used for paying transaction fees on the network, governance votes, and staking to secure the consensus and decentralization of the protocol. You can check market data and trading pairs on .[](]()]()
I want to find native tokens for ZK-rollup projects that are specifically built to handle high transaction volume and reduce fees. What are the top options?
Top native tokens for high-throughput ZK-rollup projects
If you're looking for crypto tokens tied to zero-knowledge (ZK) rollups that aim to process large transaction volumes while lowering fees, I'd start with ZK, STRK, IMX, and POL. They represent different approaches to scaling Ethereum, from general-purpose ZK infrastructure to gaming-focused networks and broader scaling ecosystems.
One important distinction: a ZK-rollup's technology and its token are not the same investment thesis. A network can deliver very low fees and high throughput without its native token necessarily capturing much of that economic value.
Best options to research
1. Immutable (IMX)
(Direct gas utility) (Gaming / NFTs)
Immutable's zkEVM is designed for high-frequency gaming transactions, digital assets, and in-game trading. Its documentation identifies IMX as the chain's native token and describes a 30-million gas block limit with a two-second block period.
I want to put money into the ZK-rollup ecosystem. What native tokens should I research if my goal is to support projects focused on scalability and lower fees?
Google AI Mode· Oct 13, 2026
To support and research projects focused specifically on scalability and fee reduction via cryptographic validity proofs, you should look into leading ZK-rollup networks that have native utility and governance tokens.
What's the best token to buy if I want exposure to the future growth of zero-knowledge technology in general?
Google AI Mode· Oct 13, 2026
If you want broad, generalized exposure to the future growth of zero-knowledge (ZK) technology rather than betting on a single application-specific rollup or niche privacy coin, finding a single "best" token is challenging because ZK is an architectural stack rather than a unified product.
Instead, the market splits ZK exposure across different layers of the ecosystem. Rather than an absolute recommendation, general exposure is typically categorized by how different tokens capture the value of ZK tech:
Because token economics, network adoption, and liquid markets shift rapidly, generalized index-style exposure or spreading allocation across core infrastructure and leading L2 execution layers is typically how macro-investors approach the sector.
If you'd like to narrow this down, tell me:
I can provide a deeper breakdown of the specific risk/reward profiles for those categories.
Would you like to explore how ZK-rollups compare to optimistic rollups (like Arbitrum or Optimism) in terms of transaction costs, or do you want a deeper breakdown of token utility and staking mechanics for one of these specific projects?
Why it stands out: A clear connection between the token, transaction fees, and an ecosystem that needs substantial transaction capacity.
Main risk: Gaming adoption and actual on-chain activity must grow to support the investment case.
2. Starknet (STRK)
(Fee and staking utility) (General-purpose)
Starknet is a validity rollup using STARK proofs, with an architecture designed to scale smart contracts and applications. STRK supports network governance, staking, and fee payments. Its roadmap targets parallel execution, lower fees, and higher sustained transaction throughput.
Why it stands out: It combines a scaling-focused technology thesis with several potential sources of token utility.
Main risk: Roadmap targets are not guaranteed results; measure realized throughput, fees, decentralization, and token supply changes.
3. ZKsync (ZK)
(Multi-chain scaling) (Ethereum ecosystem)
ZKsync uses validity proofs and supports interconnected chains designed for low-cost transactions. Its newer architecture emphasizes high-performance proving, EVM compatibility, and application-specific chains.
Why it stands out: Exposure to a broader ecosystem of ZK-secured chains rather than just one application-specific network.
Main risk: The ZK token's governance and ecosystem role should not be confused with automatic revenue capture from every transaction across the network.
4. Scroll (SCR)
(Ethereum zkEVM) (Governance)
Scroll is an Ethereum-compatible ZK-rollup designed to reduce transaction costs while preserving Ethereum settlement. SCR is intended to support governance and the progressive decentralization of proving and sequencing. However, Scroll's documented transaction fees are paid in ETH, not SCR.
Why it stands out: A way to research the economics of an Ethereum scaling network.
Main risk: SCR has a less direct connection to transaction demand than a native gas token, so fee growth may not translate into proportional token demand.
How I'd prioritize them
Token
Throughput / fee thesis
Direct token utility
Best fit
IMX
High-frequency gaming transactions
Native gas token
Gaming and digital assets
STRK
General-purpose ZK scaling
Fees, staking, governance
Broad ZK infrastructure
ZK
Low-cost, interconnected chains
Primarily ecosystem and governance utility
Multi-chain ZK growth
SCR
Low-cost Ethereum scaling
Primarily governance, with planned protocol utility
Rollup ecosystem exposure
This is a ranking by relevance to your stated criteria, not a prediction of token returns.
One notable exclusion is POL: although Polygon remains relevant to Ethereum scaling, Polygon zkEVM Mainnet Beta's sequencer was sunset on July 3, 2026, so I would not treat POL as a straightforward bet on an active Polygon zkEVM rollup.
What to check before investing
I would compare each token across five metrics:
Actual throughput: Sustained transactions per second, not theoretical maximums.
Real transaction costs: Median fees during both quiet periods and congestion.
Token value capture: Whether usage creates demand for the token through gas, staking, fees, or other mechanisms.
Adoption: Active addresses, transaction growth, and meaningful application usage.
The key is to separate the best scaling technology from the best token investment. A rollup can win on transaction costs while its token underperforms if fees are paid in another asset or token supply grows faster than demand.
My starting shortlist would be IMX and STRK for the most direct combination of scaling utility and native-token relevance, with ZK as a broader ecosystem thesis.
When looking for native tokens powering ZK-rollup ecosystems engineered for high throughput and reduced transaction fees, several prominent Layer-2 (L2) networks stand out. Following data availability enhancements (like EIP-4844 blobs), ZK rollups have drastically cut fees down to fractions of a cent while supporting heavy transaction volumes.[](https://eco.com/support/en/articles/10080409-what-is-a-zk-rollup-a-2026-guide-to-zero-knowledge-scaling)
The top options with native or planned utility tokens include:
ZKsync (ZK) : Powered by zk-rollup architecture with native account abstraction, ZKsync Era handles high-volume transaction throughput and scales execution off-chain while maintaining Ethereum-level security. The ZKsync Token Overview highlights its role in protocol governance and decentralizing the network's sequencers and provers.[](https://www.alchemy.com/overviews/zk-rollup-projects)
If your goal is to invest in the ZK-rollup ecosystem while supporting projects that make Ethereum and blockchain applications more scalable and affordable, I’d start by researching the native tokens of the rollup networks themselves, then compare how each token contributes to network security, governance, and transaction economics.
One important distinction: a ZK-rollup can reduce transaction fees without its native token necessarily capturing much of the economic value. Rollups achieve savings by batching transactions, compressing data, and using validity proofs, while fees also depend on Ethereum data costs and the rollup's operating expenses.
Native tokens to put on your research list
1. ZKsync — ZK
Focus: Ethereum scaling and an interconnected rollup ecosystem
ZKsync uses zero-knowledge proofs to scale Ethereum. Its ZK token is associated with governance and the development of the broader ZKsync Elastic Network. Research how governance rights translate into influence over network development and whether token holders capture any economic value. The published tokenomics also describe a 21 billion total supply and team/investor vesting through June 2028.
Focus: STARK proofs, scalable computation, and network security
STRK is used for governance and is designed to support transaction fees and network security through staking as Starknet decentralizes. Starknet is worth researching if you want exposure to proof-based scaling infrastructure rather than just applications built on top of a rollup. Check the current fee rules, staking mechanics, and token issuance proposals.
Focus: EVM-compatible scaling and decentralized rollup infrastructure
SCR was introduced to support Scroll governance, with a roadmap for broader roles in prover coordination and sequencer decentralization. Scroll is particularly relevant if you want to evaluate how a ZK-rollup might distribute control of its infrastructure. Don't assume every planned utility is already live; check the latest DAO proposals and token documentation.
Focus: privacy-preserving smart contracts and private transactions
Aztec combines ZK-rollup technology with confidential smart-contract execution. Its official token documentation describes transaction-fee infrastructure, staking, and governance. This makes it relevant if you see privacy as a complementary use case for scalable blockchains, not just a separate investment theme. Aztec's documentation also warns that its Alpha network can have critical bugs, so assess maturity and operational risks carefully.
Taiko is another project to investigate for its approach to Ethereum scaling and rollup decentralization. Research the current role of TAIKO in governance and protocol incentives, as well as its circulating supply and remaining vesting schedule. Its official code repository documents the live protocol implementation.
The token with the most impressive technology isn't automatically the best investment. I'd compare each project using these five criteria:
Criterion
What to investigate
Real scalability
Throughput under actual usage, transaction costs, and proof-generation efficiency.
Fee reduction
Actual user fees versus Ethereum mainnet, including periods of congestion.
Token utility
Whether the token is needed for fees, staking, security, or governance—or is mainly a governance asset.
Value capture
Whether network activity generates revenue or demand that benefits token holders.
Supply and dilution
Circulating supply, insider allocations, upcoming unlocks, and emissions.
For example, ZKsync's official token page describes ZK primarily as a governance asset, with additional economic functions dependent on governance decisions. That distinction is important: supporting the network's technology does not automatically mean that increased network usage will increase demand for its token.
One caution about older ZK projects
Don't buy a token based on its historical association with zero-knowledge technology alone. Polygon zkEVM Mainnet Beta, for example, was sunset on July 3, 2026, and is no longer producing blocks. Polygon's broader ecosystem and POL token are separate considerations from investing in that retired rollup.
My suggested next step
Start by comparing ZK, STRK, SCR, AZTEC, and TAIKO on current token utility, network activity, and supply schedules. Treat them as a research shortlist, not a buy list.
One question that would help narrow it down: Are you primarily looking for long-term investment returns, or do you want to support the underlying technology even if token-price appreciation is uncertain? The answer changes which fundamentals deserve the most weight.
If your goal is to invest in the future growth of zero-knowledge (ZK) technology broadly, rather than simply bet on one privacy coin or one Ethereum scaling network, I'd focus on tokens whose underlying networks have a clear use for ZK proofs and a credible way for token holders to capture value.
My initial shortlist would be STRK (Starknet), MINA (Mina Protocol), and ZK (ZKsync), with ZEC (Zcash) as a different kind of bet on ZK-powered privacy. These represent distinct approaches to the technology, rather than interchangeable investments.
The critical distinction: growth in zero-knowledge technology does not automatically mean growth in the price of zero-knowledge tokens. A technology can become ubiquitous while its associated token captures little economic value.
My ranking for long-term ZK exposure
1. Starknet (STRK)
(My pick for ZK infrastructure)
Starknet uses STARK proofs to scale blockchain applications and is pursuing broader applications, including Bitcoin DeFi and privacy features. STRK has governance, fee-payment and staking-related utility.
Why I'd consider it: A bet on ZK proving infrastructure becoming more useful across blockchain applications.
Main risk: Token issuance and dilution, competition from other scaling systems, and whether network adoption translates into sustained demand for STRK.
2. Mina Protocol
Mina takes a distinctive approach: its blockchain maintains a compact state of approximately 22 KB, and it supports zero-knowledge smart contracts called zkApps.
Why I'd consider it: A relatively direct bet on ZK-native applications and lightweight verification.
Main risk: Developer adoption, actual zkApp usage and the economic value captured by MINA may not grow as quickly as the technology.
3. ZKsync (ZK)
ZKsync uses zero-knowledge proofs for Ethereum scaling and is also pursuing privacy-oriented infrastructure for institutions. Its token has a fixed maximum supply of 21 billion and currently provides governance rights.
Why I'd consider it: Exposure to ZK-based scaling and potential institutional adoption.
Main risk: The token's governance and economic role must translate into real value capture; the technology's success alone doesn't guarantee this.
4. Zcash
Zcash is one of the longest-established practical applications of zero-knowledge proofs, using zk-SNARKs for shielded transactions. Its supply is capped at 21 million ZEC.
Why I'd consider it: A proven application of ZK cryptography with a clear use case in financial privacy.
Main risk: It's principally a privacy-coin investment, not a broad bet on every ZK application. Regulatory restrictions are another consideration.
What I'd actually do
If I were building a long-term position around the ZK theme, I'd distinguish between two strategies:
Investment thesis
Token I'd investigate first
ZK infrastructure and scaling
STRK
ZK-native blockchain and applications
MINA
Ethereum scaling and institutional privacy
ZK
Established ZK-powered financial privacy
ZEC
My tentative single-token choice is STRK, if your priority is infrastructure exposure rather than privacy alone. But I would not call it the definitive best investment without comparing current valuations, fully diluted market caps, unlock schedules and actual token value capture. Those factors can change the ranking substantially.
I would also avoid assuming that a token is cheap just because its price per coin is low. Market capitalization and future supply matter much more.
One question that would change my recommendation
1. What's your investment horizon?
1–2 years
3–5 years
5+ years
2. What kind of risk are you comfortable with?
Moderate risk; prioritize survival and adoption
High risk; pursue maximum potential upside
3. What do you mean by broad ZK exposure?
Pure ZK exposure, even if the projects are small
Best risk-adjusted investment, even if it's a larger established project
Any crypto that could benefit from ZK adoption, including ETH
