Snapshot excels at low-cost, high-participation signaling because it operates off-chain using signed messages (EIP-712) and IPFS. This eliminates gas fees for voters, enabling massive-scale participation. For example, protocols like Uniswap and Aave regularly see thousands of voters per proposal, a volume that would be prohibitively expensive on-chain. Its ecosystem of over 7,000 spaces and integrations with wallets like MetaMask make it the de facto standard for community sentiment gathering.
LABS
Comparisons
Snapshot vs Tally: Proposal Lifecycle Platforms
A technical analysis comparing Snapshot's off-chain signaling with Tally's full-stack on-chain governance. We break down gas costs, execution automation, security models, and integration ecosystems for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The On-Chain vs Off-Chain Governance Divide
Choosing a governance platform is a foundational decision that dictates your protocol's security, speed, and accessibility.
Tally takes a different approach by focusing on on-chain execution and compliance. It directly integrates with Governor smart contracts (OpenZeppelin, Compound), automating the entire proposal lifecycle from creation to on-chain execution. This results in a critical trade-off: enhanced security and finality, as votes are binding and executed autonomously, but at the cost of requiring voters to pay gas fees, which can limit broad voter turnout compared to off-chain models.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing voter accessibility and testing community sentiment before committing to on-chain actions, choose Snapshot. It's ideal for gauging consensus on high-level direction or for DAOs with large, non-technical token holders. If you prioritize secure, automated, and legally-binding execution where every vote directly triggers protocol changes, choose Tally. This is critical for DeFi protocols like Compound or Fei Protocol where governance directly controls treasury funds and smart contract parameters.
tldr-summary
Snapshot vs Tally: Proposal Lifecycle Platforms
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for the two leading on-chain governance platforms.
01
Snapshot: For Flexibility & Cost-Efficiency
Gasless, off-chain voting: Signatures are stored on IPFS/Arweave, eliminating gas fees for voters. This matters for large, token-holder-based DAOs like Uniswap or Aave, where participation is the primary goal. Extensive plugin ecosystem with 20+ strategies (e.g., ERC-20, ERC-721, delegation) and custom spaces.
02
Snapshot: The Integration Powerhouse
Deep, chain-agnostic integrations: Native support for 100+ EVM and non-EVM chains via providers like WalletConnect and EIP-712. This matters for multi-chain protocols (e.g., Curve, Lido) needing a single governance frontend. Massive adoption with 100,000+ spaces, making it the de facto standard for signaling.
03
Tally: For On-Chain Execution & Security
End-to-end on-chain governance: Proposals are created, voted on, and executed directly on-chain via Governor contracts (OpenZeppelin, Compound). This matters for protocols requiring enforceable, trust-minimized upgrades, like Compound or Gitcoin. Real-time delegation & vote tracking with a live dashboard.
04
Tally: The Developer-Centric Platform
Seamless contract integration: Directly interacts with deployed Governor contracts, offering a standardized UI for any compatible protocol. This matters for teams that have already built custom governance logic and need a reliable frontend. Advanced proposal builder with built-in calldata simulation for safe execution.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Snapshot vs Tally: Proposal Lifecycle Platforms
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for on-chain governance platforms.
| Metric | Snapshot | Tally |
|---|---|---|
Voting Gas Cost | Gasless (Off-chain) | On-chain (User pays) |
Voting Standard | ERC-712 Signatures | Governor Contract Execution |
Proposal Creation Cost | Gasless (Off-chain) | On-chain (Creator pays) |
Real-Time Execution | ||
Multi-Chain Support | ||
Delegated Voting | ||
Native Treasury Management | ||
Governor Standard Compatibility | Limited | Full (OpenZeppelin, Tally) |
pros-cons-a
PROPOSAL LIFECYCLE PLATFORMS
Snapshot vs Tally: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading on-chain governance platforms.
01
Snapshot: Decentralized & Cost-Efficient
Gasless off-chain voting: Proposals and votes are signed messages, eliminating gas fees for participants. This matters for large, token-holder-based communities like Uniswap and Aave where voter turnout is critical. DAO-agnostic framework: Supports a wide range of strategies (ERC-20, ERC-721, whitelist) and is used by 10,000+ DAOs.
10,000+
Active DAOs
$0
Voter Gas Cost
02
Snapshot: Limited Execution Scope
Off-chain signaling only: Votes are not directly executable on-chain. This requires a separate, trusted multisig or custom relayer to enact results, adding a layer of centralization and process friction. This matters for protocols that require automated, trust-minimized execution post-vote, as it introduces a manual step.
03
Tally: On-Chain Execution & Transparency
Full on-chain governance lifecycle: Proposals are submitted, voted on, and executed directly on-chain via Governor contracts (OpenZeppelin, Compound). This matters for protocols like Fei Protocol and PoolTogether that require provable, immutable governance where votes directly trigger state changes without trusted intermediaries.
100%
On-Chain
04
Tally: Voter Cost & Complexity
Gas-intensive participation: Every vote and proposal submission requires paying network gas fees, which can disenfranchise smaller token holders. This matters for communities prioritizing broad, egalitarian participation. Contract dependency: Requires deploying and managing custom Governor contracts, increasing initial setup complexity versus Snapshot's plug-and-play spaces.
pros-cons-b
Snapshot vs Tally
Tally: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for the leading on-chain governance platforms at a glance.
02
Snapshot: Cons
Off-chain execution gap: Votes are signals only; separate transactions are required to execute proposals on-chain. This creates a coordination and security risk, as seen in delayed treasury payouts, making it less ideal for protocols requiring autonomous, trust-minimized execution.
04
Tally: Cons
Voter-paid gas costs: Every interaction (delegate, vote, execute) requires an on-chain transaction. This creates a participation barrier, especially for smaller token holders on high-fee networks like Ethereum mainnet, potentially centralizing governance power.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Platform
Snapshot for DAO Architects
Verdict: The default choice for community signaling and lightweight governance. Strengths: Unmatched network effects with over 10,000+ DAOs. Its off-chain, gasless voting is ideal for large, token-holder-based communities. The plugin ecosystem (SafeSnap, StarkNet, etc.) allows for complex, multi-step proposals. Best for: Large-scale token DAOs (e.g., Uniswap, Aave) prioritizing maximum voter participation and low friction.
Tally for DAO Architects
Verdict: The integrated platform for on-chain, executable governance. Strengths: Directly manages the full proposal lifecycle from draft to on-chain execution via Governor contracts (OpenZeppelin, Compound). Real-time delegate dashboards and delegation tools are built-in. Best for: Protocol DAOs (e.g., Gitcoin, Fei Protocol) requiring binding, on-chain votes with automatic execution and formal delegate systems.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Snapshot and Tally hinges on your governance philosophy: community-led signaling or structured, on-chain execution.
Snapshot excels at high-frequency, low-cost community signaling because its off-chain, gasless voting model removes participation barriers. For example, protocols like Uniswap and Aave use it to gauge sentiment on hundreds of proposals with zero voter cost, achieving participation numbers (often 10K+ voters) that would be economically prohibitive on-chain. Its strength is fostering broad, inclusive discussion and rapid iteration before committing resources to a formal vote.
Tally takes a different approach by integrating directly with on-chain governance contracts like Governor Bravo and OpenZeppelin. This results in a trade-off: it requires gas for proposals and voting, but it provides a full-stack platform for the entire proposal lifecycle—from creation and delegation to execution—with real-time on-chain data. This makes it the go-to for protocols like Fei Protocol and Index Coop that require enforceable, binding votes.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing voter turnout and iterative community feedback for ideation, choose Snapshot. Its plugin ecosystem for strategies (e.g., ERC-20, ERC-721, delegation) and massive existing user base (over 5,000 DAOs) is unmatched for signaling. If you prioritize secure, auditable, and executable on-chain governance with deep delegate tools, choose Tally. It is the superior platform for DAOs whose Snapshot votes are final and require seamless, trust-minimized execution.
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