Scroll supports EVM and Solidity smart contract languages, and it naturally inherits the Solidity developer community and well-known dApps from the Ethereum ecosystem. With minor modifications to the existing code, one can deploy it onto the Scroll chain.
On the other hand, zkSync and Starknet are not compatible with Ethereum. To deploy contracts on zkSync and Starknet, one must first learn their bespoke, less popular languages to develop the contract code, which might present a high barrier to entry. Despite being in development for a long time, they still do not support Solidity. This is indeed problematic in the blockchain industry where EVM is dominant. While their smart contract languages might offer various benefits, it is tough to challenge the already massive EVM ecosystem with confidence and strength. It’s like building castles in the air—disregarding market needs and expecting a revolutionary breakthrough someday is overly optimistic. I am not very optimistic about this approach. It’s similar to how Polkadot, despite having superior technology in cross-chain, virtual machines, and parallel execution compared to Ethereum, failed to capture market demand and is now struggling to stay relevant.
In reality, Scroll indeed surpasses zkSync and Starknet in terms of TPS and TVL.
From this perspective, can we conclude that Scroll, which has been developed for just two years, is more formidable and has greater growth potential compared to zkSync/Starknet, which have been developed for five to six years?
A note before the response: Scroll is inferior to Starknet in both TPS and finality speed.
You might be confusing market demand with a chain’s tech and growth potential.
If we’re looking at blockchain performance, then Starknet arguably has a more “advanced” technology. After all, that’s the reason for making it a type 4 of EVM equivalence, while Scroll is a type 3. Being a type 3, it is only natural that Scroll would have a wider developer pool at the onset, as well as higher TVL - it is simply easier to spin up Solidity apps there, thus attracting users and their money.
But this does not necessarily mean that Scroll has higher growth potential, it just means that it had an easier time capturing market demand in the short term. You’ve given the example of Polkadot being less relevant because its TVL is not as high, but it can be argued it is one of the most relevant blockchains out there after Ethereum. You can see on the Developer Report website that Polkadot has the most full-time developers outside the Ethereum ecosystem. That means apps are being built on Polkadot, which naturally translates into growth potential. You may also note that Starknet has a similar number of full-time devs as Cardano, which has a much higher TVL, meaning that a similar amount of development is being done on both chains despite the TVL difference.
And this just goes to show that TVL doesn’t measure anything substantial, other than what the market, being full of uninformed individuals and gamblers, deems to be a project that might “make the number go up” the most in a certain time frame. You may look at a project from that angle if you’re judging it by how much it will pump your portfolio in the short-term, but don’t confuse that with judging a project by its fundamentals, which translates into its long-term potential.
Thank you very much for your response. I didn’t expect such a wonderful person would pay attention to my post.
StarkWare gives me the impression that it never has, and never will, focus on Ethereum for blockchain scaling. As a result, its programming language and virtual machine are incompatible with Ethereum. It was only when Ethereum’s scaling efforts began to gain momentum that StarkWare reluctantly joined the Ethereum ecosystem to gain attention and funding. However, its goals were never centered around Ethereum.
The whole purpose of Starknet is to be a scaling layer for Ethereum. I don’t know about StarkWare being reluctant to join Ethereum, I’m more inclined to think it was a common-sense decision for the company, given its goals.
Initially StarkWare made a business decision that it deemed prudent at the time, which was to be a separate blockchain. Later they realized that it’s even more prudent to enter a symbiotic relationship with Ethereum, inheriting its safety (and TVL) while focusing on scaling and provability.
Scroll is a zkEVM project, and the technology behind zk-rollups is similar across these projects in terms of offering higher throughput and lower costs. Scroll’s native EVM compatibility gives it a technological edge in the context of dApp migration and onboarding.
zkSync’s zk-rollup architecture offers high scalability and performance, and its zkSync Era is improving in terms of EVM compatibility. Its focus on security and performance also positions it as a strong competitor.
Starknet uses a zk-STARK-based approach (as opposed to zk-SNARKs), which is theoretically more scalable, as zk-STARKs can offer better computational efficiency and transparency (no trusted setup). However, the cost of adoption (learning Cairo) could limit its short-term growth potential.
Each blockchain has its own strengths and is suited for different purposes. StarkNet and zk-rollups like zkSync may come out on top in the long run due to their advantages in security and scalability. There are no bad blockchains, just different ones for different applications.
Scroll and Starknet both utilize zero-knowledge (zk) proofs but have different designs and goals. Scroll aims to be EVM-equivalent, making it easier for Ethereum developers to transition their dApps without major changes. Starknet, on the other hand, uses its own virtual machine (Cairo VM) for more flexibility and scalability. “More advanced” depends on the context—Scroll prioritizes compatibility, while Starknet focuses on customizability and long-term scalability.
Starknet uses the Cairo language, which, like Rust, uses Starkware’s STARKS technology.
Starknet’s strengths include scalability, security, and speed. Difficulties related to EVM compatible applications are being resolved by Kakarot zkEVM, so there is nothing to worry about.