Tally vs Commonwealth: Integrated Governance & Communication

Deep EVM-native integration: Directly reads and writes to governance contracts (e.g., Compound, Uniswap). This matters for protocols where execution security and finality are non-negotiable. It's the standard for major DeFi DAOs managing billions in TVL.

End-to-end workflow automation: From drafting to execution, with built-in multi-sig support (Safe) and gasless voting via Snapshot. This matters for technical teams who need a reliable, audited pipeline to manage complex protocol upgrades and parameter changes.

Rich, forum-style deliberation: Threaded discussions, polls, and sentiment analysis before proposals go on-chain. This matters for large, diverse communities (like Osmosis, dYdX) that require deep consensus-building and require high signal-to-noise ratio in debates.

Unified dashboard for 50+ chains: Aggregates discussions and proposals from Ethereum, Cosmos, Solana, and more. This matters for investors, delegates, and cross-chain protocols who need a single pane of glass to track governance activity across their entire portfolio.

Your priority is secure, direct execution for an EVM-based DAO.

• You manage a high-value Treasury (e.g., >$100M).
• Your proposals are technically complex (contract upgrades, parameter tuning).
• Your community votes primarily via delegated representation.

Your priority is scalable, inclusive discussion before on-chain voting.

• You have a massive, global community needing structured forums.
• You operate across multiple blockchain ecosystems.
• You need proposal discovery and delegation tools for token holders.

Real-time vote power dashboard: Tally surfaces live delegation data, making it the go-to for token-weighted governance models. Its UI is optimized for delegates (e.g., stablecoin DAOs, L2 governance) to track their influence and for voters to easily delegate.

Chain-agnostic communication hub: Supports discussions for Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, and more in one interface. Its thread-based model and web3 social features make it superior for ecosystem-wide coordination and cross-chain communities.

Relies on external forums: Tally focuses on the voting transaction, not the discussion. Teams must manage discourse elsewhere (Discord, Commonwealth, forums), creating fragmentation. A poor fit for communities that prioritize deliberation over execution speed.

Discussion-to-execution gap: While great for signaling, moving a finalized proposal to on-chain execution often requires manual steps or custom integrations. Adds overhead for high-frequency governance protocols that need automated, binding outcomes.

Native smart contract execution: Proposals can directly trigger on-chain actions (e.g., treasury transfers, parameter updates) via Governor contracts. This is critical for protocols requiring automated, trustless execution like Uniswap or Compound. Eliminates manual implementation risk.

In-depth voter dashboards track delegate performance, voting history, and proposal impact. Provides transparency for high-stakes DAO treasuries (e.g., managing $1B+ in assets). Essential for institutional delegates and governance professionals analyzing voting power concentration.

Primarily a voting front-end and analytics tool. Relies on external forums (like Commonwealth or Discord) for proposal ideation and debate. This creates friction for communities that prioritize discussion before on-chain signaling, potentially fragmenting the governance lifecycle.

Integrated forum, polls, and on-chain proposal creation. Hosts the entire governance lifecycle from idea to vote in one platform (e.g., used by Osmosis, dYdX). Ideal for community-driven protocols needing robust debate and temperature checks before committing gas fees.

Supports 50+ chains and L2s (Ethereum, Cosmos, Solana, etc.) with customizable forums and token-gating. Best for ecosystems or DAOs operating across multiple blockchains that require a consistent communication layer, like Polygon or Arbitrum DAOs.

Acts as a proposal aggregator, not an executor. Successful proposals often require a multi-sig or dev team to manually implement the passed vote. Adds coordination overhead and custodial risk for protocols that require immediate, automated on-chain effects.