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.
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).
Following major Ethereum scaling upgrades (including EIP-4844 blob scaling and subsequent capacity expansions), L2 fees have dropped dramatically, but predictability remains tied to how a network handles congestion and L1 data posting costs.
Leading L2 network alternatives for cheap and predictable execution stack up as follows:
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 technology designed to improve scalability and reduce transaction costs by processing transactions off-chain and submitting cryptographic validity proofs to the underlying blockchain.
Here are some notable tokens to research as of October 2026, with a focus on projects building ZK-based scaling infrastructure.
Native tokens for ZK-rollup projects
1. ZKsync — ZK
Ticker: ZK
ZKsync Era uses zero-knowledge proofs to scale Ethereum while supporting smart contracts and decentralized applications. Its technology is designed to increase transaction throughput and reduce fees. The ZK token is associated with ecosystem governance and network development.
Starknet uses STARK proofs and its Cairo execution environment to scale Ethereum. Its network aims to support high transaction volumes with lower costs, while STRK is used for governance and participates in the network's fee and staking mechanisms.
Linea is an Ethereum-equivalent zkEVM designed to make decentralized applications more scalable while maintaining compatibility with Ethereum tooling. Its ecosystem has introduced a token associated with its network and token-economic design. Check current token utility and supply details before investing.
Scroll develops a zkEVM scaling network designed to execute Ethereum-compatible transactions and verify them using zero-knowledge proofs. It is relevant to the scalability theme, but confirm whether an official native token has launched before treating it as a token investment candidate.
Taiko is an Ethereum-equivalent rollup project focused on preserving Ethereum's execution environment while scaling transaction processing. Its token is associated with the project's ecosystem and governance. Its precise proof architecture and rollup design should be assessed separately from its token economics.
Network economics: Low transaction fees benefit users, but they do not automatically translate into higher token value.
Competition: Compare security, decentralization, liquidity and ecosystem growth.
For a starting shortlist, I would research ZK and STRK first, comparing their documented utility and network development, then evaluate LINEA and TAIKO using the same criteria. This is a research shortlist, not a prediction of returns.
ZK-rollup networks utilize cryptographic validity proofs off-chain to scale Ethereum and lower transaction fees, with several major projects issuing native tokens for governance, staking, and network utility.
Project Name
Native Token
Core Scaling & Utility Focus
Starknet
STRK
Uses STARK proofs for high throughput; token used for transaction fees, governance, and staking.
[0.5]
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?
Zero-Knowledge (ZK) rollups process transactions off-chain and batch them into a single cryptographic validity proof for Ethereum, dramatically lowering gas fees and boosting throughput.
The top options featuring native ecosystem tokens engineered around high transaction volume and fee reduction include:
ZKsync (ZK) – Operating via zkSync Era, this network uses an EVM-compatible zkEVM architecture designed for high-throughput decentralized applications. Its native ZK token governs the protocol and decentralization of its high-speed sequencing layer. You can track live market data on CoinGecko's ZKsync PageCoinGecko's ZKsync Page.
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.
Starknet (STRK) – Starknet leverages STARK proofs and its custom Cairo smart contract language to achieve massive scalability and high computational throughput. Protocol upgrades (such as high-capacity L2 gas blocks) continuously optimize execution efficiency. Explore token metrics via CoinGecko's Starknet Page.
Loopring (LRC) – Built specifically for high-frequency orderbook DEX trading and payment processing, Loopring's ZK-rollup architecture allows thousands of trades or transfers to settle with minimal transaction overhead and near-instant finality. Check market details on CoinMarketCap's Loopring PageCoinMarketCap's Loopring Page.
If you'd like, let me know:
Are you looking at these tokens from a developer/utility perspective or an investment/market cap perspective?
Do you prefer EVM-compatible networks (like ZKsync) or custom architectures (like Starknet)?
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 reducing fees, I'd start with STRK (Starknet), ZK (ZKsync), and SCR (Scroll).
One important distinction: a rollup's technology creates the potential for lower fees and higher throughput, but its token doesn't automatically capture the value created. The key is to evaluate both the network's technical capabilities and the token's actual utility.
Top projects to research
1. Starknet — STRK
(Strong utility candidate)
Starknet uses validity proofs and its Cairo execution environment to scale Ethereum applications. STRK has direct utility for transaction fees, staking and governance, connecting the token to network usage.
Why it stands out: A combination of fee demand and network security utility.
Watch: Actual transaction demand, fee revenue, token dilution and competition from EVM-compatible rollups.
2. ZKsync — ZK
(Multi-chain ecosystem)
ZKsync's rollup architecture batches state changes and uses validity proofs. Its ZK token has a fixed maximum supply of 21 billion and primarily serves governance today; the broader ZK Stack supports customizable chains and alternative fee tokens.
Why it stands out: Potential to benefit from growth across multiple ZKsync-based chains.
Watch: Whether network growth translates into meaningful demand for ZK. The token is not automatically required for every transaction on ZKsync Era.
3. Scroll — SCR
Scroll is an Ethereum scaling project built around zero-knowledge proofs and EVM compatibility, making it relevant for applications that need to move existing Ethereum smart contracts to a lower-cost execution environment.
Why it stands out: Exposure to the ZK-rollup ecosystem and Ethereum-compatible applications.
Watch: Verify the current role of SCR in network fees, sequencing, governance and incentives before treating it as a direct bet on transaction volume.
What matters most for high transaction volume and low fees?
Don't select a token based on theoretical transactions per second alone. I would assess these five metrics:
Sustained throughput: Real transactions processed under load, not just advertised maximum TPS.
Cost per transaction: Typical and peak fees, including the cost of publishing data to Ethereum.
Real adoption: Daily transactions, active users, and application activity that isn't primarily incentive-driven.
Token value capture: Whether fees, staking, sequencing, or other economic activity create actual demand for the token.
Supply and dilution: Unlock schedules, circulating supply, emissions, and investor allocations.
ZK-rollups reduce costs partly by batching transactions and spreading Ethereum settlement and data-publication costs across users. Fees can still rise when Ethereum data costs increase or network demand surges.
My shortlist
First to investigate: STRK, for its more direct connection to fees and network security.
Second: ZK, for exposure to the broader ZKsync chain ecosystem, with the caveat that token value capture remains a key question.
Third: SCR, as a governance and decentralization thesis rather than a straightforward transaction-fee token.
These are research priorities, not a ranking of expected investment returns. I haven't verified live token prices, current market capitalizations, or today's throughput figures, so I wouldn't use this shortlist alone to make a purchase.
One question to narrow the recommendations: Are you looking for tokens to invest in over the next 6–18 months, or are you choosing a network for building an application that needs high transaction throughput and low fees? The best options differ depending on your goal.
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
