The ZK Landscape

zkVMs vs zkEVMs: Comparing major projects and their approaches

25 min read
Last reviewed: January 2025
Intermediate

Market Overview

The ZK landscape has exploded with projects pursuing different visions for zero-knowledge computation. At the highest level, the space divides into two categories:

zkEVMs: Ethereum Compatibility First

zkEVMs replicate Ethereum's virtual machine with ZK proof generation. The goal: let developers deploy existing Solidity contracts with minimal changes while gaining the benefits of ZK rollups.

Key tradeoff: EVM compatibility makes proving more expensive. Different projects make different compromises on the compatibility-efficiency spectrum.

zkVMs: General-Purpose ZK Computation

zkVMs take a different approach: they let developers write programs in general-purpose languages (Rust, C++) and generate ZK proofs of correct execution. They're not bound to Ethereum's execution model.

Key tradeoff: More flexible and potentially more efficient, but developers must learn new paradigms and the ecosystem is less mature.

Dimension zkEVMs zkVMs
Primary Use Ethereum scaling General ZK computation
Languages Solidity, Vyper Rust, C++, Go
Compatibility Existing contracts work New development required
Efficiency Constrained by EVM design Can optimize for ZK
Ecosystem Mature Ethereum tooling Emerging tooling
Why Both Matter

zkEVMs enable near-term Ethereum scaling with familiar tooling. zkVMs enable a broader vision of provable computation across any application. Many teams are building both.

Major zkEVM Projects

zkEVMs are classified by their compatibility level with Ethereum:

  • Type 1 — Fully Ethereum-equivalent (proves the exact EVM)
  • Type 2 — Fully EVM-equivalent (same behavior, different implementation)
  • Type 3 — Almost EVM-equivalent (minor incompatibilities)
  • Type 4 — High-level language equivalent (Solidity compiles differently)
zk

zkSync Era

Matter Labs | Type 4 zkEVM

One of the first zkEVMs to launch on mainnet. Uses LLVM-based compiler that translates Solidity/Vyper to zkSync's custom assembly.

  • Native account abstraction (smart contract wallets by default)
  • Supports Solidity and Vyper, but bytecode differs from Ethereum
  • Active ecosystem with DeFi, NFTs, and gaming applications
  • ZK token launched, governance active
SN

StarkNet

StarkWare | STARK-based (not strictly zkEVM)

Uses STARKs (not SNARKs) and its own Cairo language. Not EVM-compatible by design—prioritizes ZK efficiency over compatibility.

  • No trusted setup required (STARK advantage)
  • Native account abstraction
  • Cairo 1.0 is Rust-like, more developer-friendly than Cairo 0
  • STRK token live, used for fees and staking
P

Polygon zkEVM

Polygon Labs | Type 2/3 zkEVM

Part of Polygon's multi-chain strategy. Focuses on EVM equivalence—most Ethereum contracts deploy without changes.

  • Strong EVM compatibility (same opcodes, same behavior)
  • Integrated with Polygon ecosystem and POL token
  • Sequencer currently centralized, decentralization roadmap in progress
  • Part of "Polygon 2.0" unified liquidity vision
S

Scroll

Scroll Foundation | Type 2 zkEVM

Aims for bytecode-level EVM equivalence. Contracts that work on Ethereum should work on Scroll with zero changes.

  • Highest compatibility focus among major zkEVMs
  • Open-source prover and verifier
  • Strong developer tooling compatibility
  • SCR token launched with community distribution
L

Linea

Consensys | Type 2 zkEVM

Built by Consensys, the company behind MetaMask and Infura. Deep integration with existing Ethereum developer tools.

  • Seamless MetaMask integration
  • Infura and other Consensys tools built-in
  • Focus on enterprise and developer experience
  • No token yet (as of early 2025)

Major zkVM Projects

zkVMs enable general-purpose provable computation, not limited to Ethereum's execution model.

R0

RISC Zero

RISC-V based zkVM

General-purpose zkVM based on the RISC-V instruction set. Write programs in Rust, get ZK proofs of correct execution.

  • Standard RISC-V means existing Rust code often works
  • Used to build Zeth (Ethereum block proving)
  • Continuations allow splitting large computations
  • Focus on developer experience and tooling
SP1

SP1 (Succinct)

Rust-native zkVM

High-performance zkVM designed for Rust developers. Emphasizes speed and developer experience.

  • Write standard Rust, compile to ZK proofs
  • Competitive proving times
  • Precompiles for common cryptographic operations
  • Powers multiple ZK applications and bridges
J

Jolt

a16z crypto | Simplified zkVM

Research-driven zkVM from a16z crypto. Focuses on simplicity and formal verification.

  • Novel approach using "lookup singularity"
  • Simpler implementation than traditional zkVMs
  • Easier to audit and formally verify
  • Open-source research project
Current State of zkVMs

zkVMs remain early-stage. Current prover overhead is 100,000x to 1,000,000x native execution speed. Security audits are ongoing, and many systems haven't been battle-tested with real value. Progress is rapid, but production deployment requires careful evaluation.

Deep Comparison PRO

Performance Benchmarks

Comparing proving times, verification costs, and throughput across major projects reveals significant differences in architecture and optimization priorities.

Security Maturity

Each project has different audit coverage, bug bounty programs, and formal verification status. Understanding these differences is critical for risk assessment.

Decentralization Progress

Most zkEVMs launched with centralized sequencers. Tracking decentralization roadmaps and current status helps evaluate long-term viability.

Ecosystem Strength

TVL, transaction volume, developer activity, and application diversity vary significantly across chains. Market share dynamics are evolving rapidly.

Get detailed project comparisons

Pro members get performance benchmarks, security assessments, and ecosystem analysis for all major ZK projects.

Upgrade to Pro — $29/mo

Evaluation Framework PRO

Technical Criteria

Proof system choice (SNARKs vs STARKs), compatibility level, prover efficiency, and verification costs all affect long-term competitiveness.

Economic Model

Token utility, fee structures, sequencer economics, and value accrual mechanisms determine sustainable economics.

Team and Execution

Track record, funding, roadmap progress, and community engagement indicate ability to deliver on promises.

Competitive Position

Network effects, developer mindshare, and strategic partnerships shape competitive dynamics in a crowded market.

Unlock the evaluation framework

Pro members get our complete framework for evaluating ZK projects across technical, economic, and competitive dimensions.

Upgrade to Pro — $29/mo

Investment Considerations PRO

Token Economics

How do zkSync's ZK, StarkNet's STRK, Polygon's POL, and Scroll's SCR differ in utility, distribution, and value accrual?

Catalysts and Risks

What events could drive adoption or create challenges? Mainnet launches, token unlocks, competitive dynamics, and technical risks.

Portfolio Positioning

How to think about ZK exposure: diversified vs concentrated bets, L1 vs L2 allocation, and timing considerations.

Valuation Framework

Metrics and comparables for assessing relative value across the ZK landscape.

Get investment analysis

Pro members get token economics breakdowns, catalyst analysis, and portfolio positioning guidance for the ZK sector.

Upgrade to Pro — $29/mo

Bottom Line

The ZK landscape is competitive and evolving rapidly. Key observations:

zkEVMs:

  • Multiple viable competitors with different tradeoffs
  • Compatibility vs efficiency spectrum continues to evolve
  • Network effects and ecosystem strength matter as much as tech
  • Decentralization timelines are key differentiator

zkVMs:

  • Earlier stage but rapidly improving
  • Broader vision beyond Ethereum scaling
  • Performance remains a significant constraint
  • Security maturity requires careful evaluation
Related Learning

For foundational understanding, see our guide on Zero-Knowledge Proofs Explained.

Disclaimer: This is educational content about technology and projects, not investment advice. The ZK landscape is highly competitive and rapidly evolving. Always do your own research.

Want the complete ZK analysis?

Pro members get detailed comparisons, investment frameworks, and ongoing coverage of the ZK landscape.

Upgrade to Pro — $29/mo

Related Research

Deep-dive analysis from TokenIntel Research

📊 Ethereum (ETH) →