Aragon excels at providing a modular, protocol-agnostic framework for complex DAO governance. Its Aragon OSx protocol is a smart contract foundation that can be deployed on Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, and Base, enabling custom governance models (e.g., multisig, token voting, dynamic quorums) via a plugin architecture. This modularity is evidenced by its use in high-value DAOs like Lido and Decentraland, which require bespoke, secure governance logic. However, this power comes with higher initial complexity and gas costs for deployment and operations.
LABS
Comparisons
Aragon vs DAOhaus: Multi-Chain DAO Deployment Frameworks
A technical comparison of Aragon and DAOhaus, two leading no-code/low-code platforms for deploying and managing DAOs with native multi-chain support. We analyze architecture, governance models, cost structures, and ecosystem support to inform infrastructure decisions.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Multi-Chain DAO Infrastructure Decision
Choosing a framework for multi-chain DAO deployment involves a fundamental trade-off between comprehensive modularity and gas-optimized simplicity.
DAOhaus takes a different approach by offering a suite of pre-built, gas-optimized Moloch V3-based contracts, prioritizing cost-effective deployment and operation on Ethereum, Polygon, and Gnosis Chain. Its "summon a DAO" process is streamlined, resulting in lower barrier to entry and predictable, often lower, transaction fees for proposals and voting. This focus on simplicity and gas efficiency has led to the deployment of over 4,000 DAOs, but it trades off the deep customizability of Aragon's plugin system for a more opinionated, albeit robust, framework.
The key trade-off: If your priority is custom, enterprise-grade governance with a modular architecture for future-proofing, choose Aragon. If you prioritize rapid, cost-effective deployment of a proven DAO model with a strong community focus, choose DAOhaus.
tldr-summary
Aragon vs DAOhaus: Multi-Chain DAO Deployment Frameworks
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs and Protocol Architects.
01
Aragon's Strength: Modular, No-Code OS
Specific advantage: Offers a comprehensive, modular OS (Aragon OSx) with a no-code frontend (Aragon App). This matters for enterprise adoption and rapid prototyping, allowing non-technical teams to deploy complex DAOs with custom governance plugins (e.g., optimistic voting, dispute resolution) on 8+ chains including Polygon, Arbitrum, and Base.
8+
Supported Chains
02
Aragon's Trade-off: Protocol Complexity & Cost
Specific disadvantage: The advanced modularity of Aragon OSx introduces higher gas costs for deployment and execution, and a steeper learning curve for custom integrations. This matters if you prioritize ultra-low-cost operations or need a simple, out-of-the-box solution without deep smart contract expertise.
03
DAOhaus's Strength: Moloch-Centric Simplicity
Specific advantage: Built on the battle-tested Moloch v3 framework, offering a simple, gas-efficient, and opinionated structure for grant-giving, investment clubs, and small working groups. This matters for community-focused DAOs that value lower deployment costs and a proven, secure codebase on networks like Ethereum Mainnet, Gnosis Chain, and Polygon.
Moloch v3
Core Framework
04
DAOhaus's Trade-off: Less Customization
Specific disadvantage: The opinionated Moloch framework means less flexibility for complex governance models and limited native multi-chain expansion compared to Aragon. This matters for protocols needing bespoke treasury management, complex voting mechanisms, or frequent cross-chain operations beyond its core supported networks.
MULTI-CHAIN DAO FRAMEWORK COMPARISON
Feature Matrix: Aragon vs DAOhaus Head-to-Head
Direct comparison of deployment, governance, and cost metrics for CTOs and Protocol Architects.
| Metric | Aragon | DAOhaus |
|---|---|---|
Primary Architecture | Modular OS (Client + Subgraph) | Protocol-First (Moloch V3) |
Native Multi-Chain Support | ||
Avg. DAO Creation Cost (ETH Mainnet) | $300 - $500+ | $50 - $150 |
Governance Token Required | ||
Built-in Treasury Management | ||
On-Chain Voting Gas Optimization | ||
Supported Chains | Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, Base | Ethereum, Gnosis Chain, Polygon |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Aragon vs DAOhaus: Multi-Chain DAO Deployment Frameworks
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs and architects choosing a foundational DAO framework.
01
Aragon's Pro: Enterprise-Grade Modularity
Specific advantage: Aragon OSx is a modular, upgradeable smart contract framework with a permission management system. This enables complex, custom governance models (e.g., time-locked votes, veto councils). This matters for protocols and corporations needing fine-grained, auditable control over treasury and governance actions.
20+
Chains Supported
02
Aragon's Con: Higher Implementation Complexity
Specific disadvantage: The power of Aragon OSx comes with a steeper learning curve. Teams must understand its proxy upgrade patterns and permission architecture, which increases initial development time and audit scope. This matters for smaller teams or rapid MVPs where speed to launch is critical.
03
DAOhaus' Pro: Rapid, No-Code Deployment
Specific advantage: DAOhaus offers a pure front-end, no-code interface for launching a Moloch V3-based DAO in minutes. Pre-built templates for Grants, Clubs, and Ventures accelerate launch. This matters for community DAOs and small projects that prioritize getting a functional treasury and voting live immediately without Solidity expertise.
< 5 min
Launch Time
04
DAOhaus' Con: Template-Driven Customization Limits
Specific disadvantage: While fast, DAOhaus is opinionated around the Moloch V3 framework (shares-based membership, ragequit). Deep, low-level customization (e.g., novel voting mechanisms) requires forking the platform. This matters for projects needing unique tokenomics or governance logic not covered by its templates.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
Aragon vs DAOhaus: Multi-Chain DAO Deployment Frameworks
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs evaluating DAO infrastructure.
01
Aragon's Strength: Enterprise-Grade Modularity
Customizable OS with Aragon App: Offers a modular, smart contract framework for building bespoke governance. This matters for protocols needing custom voting mechanisms (e.g., conviction voting, multisig hybrids) or deep integration with existing DeFi legos like Safe wallets.
02
Aragon's Strength: Broad Chain Support & Legal Wrappers
Deploy on 8+ chains including Ethereum, Polygon, and Arbitrum. Offers Aragon Court for dispute resolution and Aragon Association legal wrappers. This matters for DAOs requiring legal recognition or operating across a heterogeneous multi-chain ecosystem.
03
Aragon's Trade-off: Complexity & Cost
Higher implementation overhead: Custom builds require Solidity devs. Gas costs for deploying custom DAOs can be significant on Ethereum L1. This is a drawback for rapid prototyping or communities with limited technical resources.
04
DAOhaus's Strength: No-Code Launch & Moloch V3 Standard
Fully no-code UI to spin up a DAO in minutes using the battle-tested Moloch V3 framework. This matters for community-led projects (e.g., NFT collectives, grant committees) that prioritize speed to launch and a proven, opinionated structure.
05
DAOhaus's Strength: Optimized for L2s & Gas Efficiency
Native deployment on Polygon, Gnosis Chain, and Arbitrum with sub-$1 creation costs. Ragequit mechanism is a core, gas-efficient feature for member exits. This matters for micro-grant DAOs or communities where minimizing member onboarding cost is critical.
06
DAOhaus's Trade-off: Opinionated Framework
Less flexibility: Adheres strictly to the Moloch model (shares-based membership, proposal escrow). Harder to implement non-standard features like time-locks or complex treasury management. This is a drawback for protocols needing highly tailored governance logic.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Platform
Aragon for Protocol Architects
Verdict: The choice for maximum flexibility and custom governance logic. Strengths: Aragon's modular Aragon OSx framework allows for bespoke DAO designs. You can compose custom governance plugins, integrate with Gnosis Safe, and deploy on multiple EVM chains like Polygon and Arbitrum. Its Governance SDK enables programmatic DAO management, ideal for complex DeFi protocols or organizations with intricate treasury management needs. Considerations: Higher initial development overhead. Requires smart contract expertise to build and audit custom plugins.
DAOhaus for Protocol Architects
Verdict: The rapid deployment solution for standard, battle-tested DAO structures. Strengths: DAOhaus provides out-of-the-box Moloch V3 frameworks (Guild, Club, Company) with proven security. Its Boost system allows for pre-built, audited feature extensions (e.g., UberHaus for meta-governance). Deployment is a no-code wizard, but the underlying contracts are accessible for forks. Best for launching a Compound Grants DAO or a NFT community treasury quickly. Considerations: Less flexibility for novel governance mechanisms not covered by the Moloch paradigm or existing Boosts.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A data-driven breakdown of the core trade-offs between Aragon's modular, chain-agnostic protocol and DAOhaus's Moloch-centric, community-driven platform.
Aragon excels at providing a modular, chain-agnostic protocol for enterprise-grade DAOs because of its architecture built on the Aragon OSx protocol. This allows for granular, upgradeable governance modules (e.g., token voting, multisig) that can be deployed across any EVM chain, from Ethereum mainnet to Polygon and Arbitrum. For example, Aragon's protocol secures over $1.5B in assets across thousands of DAOs, demonstrating its capacity for high-value, complex governance. Its recent shift to a no-code frontend lowers the barrier to entry while maintaining a powerful SDK for developers.
DAOhaus takes a different approach by offering a highly opinionated, community-driven platform built on the Moloch v2 framework. This results in a faster, more cohesive user experience for launching and managing specific DAO types (Guilds, Ventures, Clubs) but with less flexibility for custom governance logic. Its strength lies in its vibrant ecosystem and gas-efficient, ragequit-enabled Moloch design, which has powered over 1,500 DAOs, primarily on Gnosis Chain and Polygon, where transaction fees are minimal.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum flexibility, security for high-value treasuries, and deployment across any EVM chain, choose Aragon. Its protocol-first design is ideal for CTOs building custom governance or migrating large, established organizations. If you prioritize rapid deployment of a proven DAO model (Moloch), a strong community ethos, and cost-effective operations on specific L2s like Polygon or Gnosis Chain, choose DAOhaus. It's the superior choice for community projects, grants DAOs, and ventures where speed and cultural fit are paramount.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall