Aragon OSx vs Aragon Classic for modular SubDAOs

Granular, chain-agnostic permissions: Uses a permission manager to define who can do what where. Enables complex, secure multi-chain SubDAO structures (e.g., a SubDAO on Polygon controlling a treasury contract on Arbitrum). Essential for cross-chain organizations.

Integrated frontend and tooling: The classic Aragon Client provides a full-stack solution. Reduces development and maintenance burden for SubDAOs that don't require custom UI. Best for projects with limited dev resources wanting a turnkey DAO solution.

Your SubDAO requires non-standard governance logic, needs to operate across multiple chains, or you anticipate frequent governance upgrades. Built for protocol treasuries, venture DAOs, and complex decentralized organizations.

You need a stable, production-ready DAO immediately and your governance fits standard templates (Token Voting, Multisig). Optimal for community grants DAOs, small project treasuries, or as a low-risk first step into on-chain governance.

Built for a multi-chain world: The OSx protocol is designed with L2s and appchains in mind. You can deploy a main DAO on Ethereum and permissioned SubDAOs on Arbitrum or Polygon with a unified governance interface.

Use Case Fit: Ideal for protocols like Convex Finance or Aave that need to manage treasury or grants programs on separate, cost-effective chains.

Battle-tested security: The Aragon Client (v0.8) has secured over $1B+ in assets for DAOs like Decentraland and Aragon DAO itself for years. Its audited, monolithic smart contracts offer a lower-risk foundation.

Key Metric: Zero critical smart contract exploits in its production history, making it a safe choice for high-value, conservative SubDAOs.

Integrated tooling: Comes with a full-stack, opinionated suite (Aragon Client, Agent, Survey, etc.). This reduces integration overhead for standard token-based voting SubDAOs.

Trade-off: Less flexibility than OSx, but faster time-to-DAO for common structures. Best for teams that prioritize a quick launch over long-term modularity, similar to early Lido or PoolTogether sub-entities.

Battle-tested infrastructure: Powers over 6,000 DAOs with billions in managed assets. This matters for production-ready SubDAOs that require a stable, predictable governance layer without the need for cutting-edge features.

Lower initial and operational cost: No recurring protocol fees. Deployment and maintenance costs are limited to standard Ethereum gas fees. This matters for bootstrapped or treasury-conscious SubDAOs where minimizing overhead is critical.

Monolithic, rigid architecture: Governance logic is hardcoded. Creating custom voting mechanisms or permission structures requires complex, one-off upgrades. This matters for innovative SubDAOs that need to implement unique tokenomics or governance models.

Depends on older standards: Built on Solidity 0.4.24 and uses a custom Aragon App framework, limiting integration with modern tooling like OpenZeppelin and Hardhat. This matters for teams prioritizing developer experience and interoperability with the latest DeFi protocols.

Plugin-based architecture: Governance is a permission manager that can install and upgrade plugins (e.g., Optimistic Voting, Token Vesting). This matters for future-proof SubDAOs that need to adapt their governance without migrating the entire organization.

Formally verified core and permissionless plugin marketplace: The DAO's core is audited and secure, while new functionality can be added safely via community-vetted plugins. This matters for high-value or complex SubDAOs where security and safe evolution are non-negotiable.