Zero-knowledge (ZK) rollups achieve massive scalability and low transaction costs by bundling hundreds or thousands of transactions off-chain and posting cryptographic validity proofs back to Layer 1 (like Ethereum).[](https://arxiv.org/html/2506.00500v1)
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?
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.
If you'd like to narrow down your research, tell me:
I can provide a deeper technical breakdown of how their respective proof mechanisms handle fee markets.
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.
Other topics in Blockchain Platform and Payment Tokens
Ecosystem Role: A pioneering validity-rollup (ZK-rollup) utilizing STARK proofs to scale Ethereum.
Token Utility: Used for paying network transaction fees, participating in network consensus through staking, and voting on governance proposals regarding protocol upgrades.
Ecosystem Role: Built on the modular ZK Stack framework, ZKsync scales Ethereum via an elastic hyperchain network optimized for ultra-low fees and native account abstraction.
Token Utility: Functions as the core governance token managed via ZK Nation for voting on protocol upgrades, coordinating network expansion across multiple ZK chains, and supporting network fee abstractions.
Ecosystem Role: Powers Polygon’s broader aggregation ecosystem, which includes high-performance zero-knowledge architecture (such as Polygon zkEVM scaling components).
Token Utility: Designed as a hyperproductive token capable of securing multiple chains within the Polygon network, validating zero-knowledge proofs, and participating in decentralized governance.
Several blockchain projects use zero-knowledge (ZK) rollups to scale transactions, reduce congestion, and lower fees on Ethereum. Their associated native tokens can serve different purposes, including governance, network fees, staking, and ecosystem incentives.
A key distinction: a ZK-rollup's technology can reduce transaction costs, but owning its token does not necessarily mean you benefit directly from those savings.
Leading ZK-rollup projects and their tokens
1. ZKsync — ZK
Focus: Ethereum scaling and low-cost smart contracts
ZKsync Era batches transactions and uses cryptographic validity proofs to settle to Ethereum. The ZK token is used for protocol governance, including decisions about upgrades and fee structures.
Official site:
2. Starknet — STRK
Focus: High-throughput computation and scalability
Starknet uses STARK proofs and its Cairo execution environment to validate batches of transactions without requiring Ethereum to re-execute them individually. STRK supports the network's governance and staking mechanisms and can be used for transaction fees.
Official site:
3. Polygon — POL
Focus: Scaling infrastructure and ecosystem interoperability
POL is Polygon's native ecosystem token, associated with network staking and protocol functions. Important caveat: Polygon's original zkEVM rollup was shut down in 2026, so POL should not be treated as a direct investment in an active Polygon zkEVM rollup.
Official site:
4. Scroll — SCR
Focus: EVM compatibility and Ethereum scaling
Scroll is a ZK-rollup designed to support Ethereum-compatible applications while using validity proofs to establish transaction correctness. SCR is its ecosystem and governance token.
Official site:
5. Taiko — TAIKO
Focus: Ethereum-equivalent scaling and decentralization
Taiko aims to scale Ethereum while closely preserving its execution environment. Its design uses validity-proof technology, with the goal of making Ethereum-compatible applications cheaper to run. TAIKO is the project's governance and ecosystem token.
Official site:
Quick comparison
Token
Main role
Why it fits the theme
ZK
Governance
ZKsync scaling ecosystem
STRK
Fees, staking, governance
High-throughput validity rollup
SCR
Governance and ecosystem development
Ethereum-compatible ZK-rollup
Sources: official project documentation and Ethereum's scaling guide.
Which ones are worth researching first?
For a token with a direct transaction-fee role: STRK is worth investigating because Starknet supports paying network fees in STRK, as well as ETH.
For governance exposure to a ZK ecosystem: ZK and SCR are relevant candidates.
For an Ethereum-equivalent scaling approach: TAIKO is another project to investigate, with particular attention to adoption and token economics.
One important caveat: network growth does not automatically translate into token price appreciation. Before investing, compare circulating supply, token unlock schedules, market capitalization, actual network fees, usage, and how much value accrues to token holders.
These are research candidates, not a prediction of returns. Token utilities and project status can change, so verify the latest official documentation before making a decision.
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.
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
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.
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
TAIKO
Governance and ecosystem
Ethereum-equivalent rollup design
POL
Polygon ecosystem staking and protocol functions
Broader scaling infrastructure, not a direct zkEVM play
Low-cost, interconnected chains
Primarily ecosystem and governance utility
Multi-chain ZK growth
SCR
Low-cost Ethereum scaling
Primarily governance, with planned protocol utility
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.
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
