Sismo excels at providing portable, private, and granular identity attestations through zero-knowledge proofs. Its core strength is enabling users to aggregate credentials from sources like Ethereum, GitHub, or Twitter and mint them as non-transferable Sismo Badges (ERC1155) on a ZK rollup. This creates a reusable, privacy-preserving identity layer. For example, a user can prove they own a specific NFT or have a certain GitHub contribution history without revealing their wallet address, a critical feature for applications like private voting or gated communities.
LABS
Comparisons
Sismo vs Gitcoin Passport: ZK Attestation Aggregator vs Score Aggregator
A technical analysis comparing Sismo's privacy-preserving ZK attestation proofs with Gitcoin Passport's composite scoring model for Sybil-resistant identity and access control.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for Sybil-Resistant Identity
Sismo and Gitcoin Passport represent two dominant, philosophically distinct approaches to building trust and preventing Sybil attacks in decentralized applications.
Gitcoin Passport takes a different, score-based aggregation approach. It collects verifiable credentials ("stamps") from Web2 and Web3 sources and calculates a single, public Passport Score (e.g., a score out of 100). This strategy prioritizes simplicity and interoperability for Sybil defense. The trade-off is a loss of granularity and privacy—the score and its constituent stamps are publicly viewable. Its integration is proven, protecting over $50M in matching funds across Gitcoin Grants rounds by filtering out low-score, likely Sybil, contributions.
The key trade-off: If your priority is user privacy, credential granularity, and composable ZK proofs for complex gating logic, Sismo's architecture is superior. If you prioritize a simple, battle-tested Sybil-resistance score for applications like airdrops or quadratic funding where a public reputation metric is sufficient, Gitcoin Passport's streamlined model is the pragmatic choice.
tldr-summary
Sismo vs Gitcoin Passport
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key architectural and use-case trade-offs between a ZK attestation aggregator and a score aggregator for identity and reputation.
05
Choose Sismo For
- Privacy-First Applications: Anonymous proof-of-personhood, private governance.
- Credential Composability: Building an identity layer where users port proofs between dApps.
- High-Value Actions: Gating access to financial services or exclusive NFTs without doxxing.
06
Choose Gitcoin Passport For
- Sybil Resistance & Airdrops: Filtering real users from bots using a public score.
- Grants & Community Funding: Integrating with Gitcoin's quadratic funding stack.
- Rapid Integration: Needing a widely recognized score with existing SDKs and documentation.
ZK ATTESTATION AGGREGATOR VS SCORE AGGREGATOR
Feature Comparison: Sismo vs Gitcoin Passport
Direct comparison of core architecture, data models, and integration patterns for identity protocols.
| Metric / Feature | Sismo | Gitcoin Passport |
|---|---|---|
Core Data Model | ZK Attestations (Badges) | Weighted Score (0-100) |
Privacy Guarantee | ||
Primary Use Case | Selective disclosure, private sybil resistance | Score-based gating, reputation aggregation |
Data Source Flexibility | Any on-chain/off-chain source via ZK proofs | Curated list of ~20 stamp providers |
On-Chain Storage | EVM chains, Starknet, Solana | EVM chains (primarily) |
Integration Complexity | Higher (requires ZK circuit understanding) | Lower (API-based score checks) |
Native Token | true (GTC for governance) |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Sismo vs Gitcoin Passport: ZK Attestation Aggregator vs Score Aggregator
A technical breakdown of two leading identity protocols, highlighting their architectural trade-offs and ideal use cases for CTOs and protocol architects.
02
Sismo: Granular, Portable Data
Core Advantage: Focuses on aggregating and proving specific, granular claims from multiple sources (Ethereum, GitHub, Twitter). Data is stored as ERC1155 tokens (ZK Badges) on-chain, making attestations portable and composable across the ecosystem.
Why it matters for: Protocols needing fine-grained, verifiable credentials. A DAO can require a badge proving "ENS holder + Gitcoin Grants Round 18 donor" without exposing which specific ENS or donor wallet is being used.
04
Gitcoin Passport: Established Ecosystem & Stamps
Core Advantage: Boasts a large, active user base with over 1 million Passports created. Uses a "stamps" system (verifiable credentials) from 20+ providers, offering broad coverage of web2 and web3 identity signals.
Why it matters for: Applications prioritizing maximum user reach and a proven track record. The extensive stamp catalog and high adoption reduce user onboarding friction and provide a rich dataset for scoring algorithms focused on unique humanity.
05
Sismo: Complexity & Cost Trade-off
Key Limitation: ZK proof generation adds complexity for developers and gas costs for users (minting badges). The privacy model can be overkill for applications that don't require it.
Consider if: Your team has ZK expertise and your use case demands privacy. For simple, public Sybil filtering, this complexity may not be justified.
06
Gitcoin Passport: Centralized Scoring & Privacy
Key Limitation: The scoring algorithm is managed by Gitcoin, introducing a central point of trust. While stamps are stored in the user's custody, the aggregated score is not a private attestation and can lead to reputation linkage across dApps.
Consider if: You are comfortable with a managed service model and your application does not require user privacy between contexts. The score is transparent and mutable by the governing body.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
Sismo vs Gitcoin Passport: ZK Attestation vs Score Aggregator
Key architectural trade-offs and use-case fit for identity aggregation protocols.
02
Sismo's Trade-off: Higher Integration Complexity
Requires smart contract logic: To verify ZK proofs, dApps must integrate Sismo's ZK verifier contracts. This adds development overhead compared to a simple API call. This matters for teams with limited Solidity/zk expertise or those building on non-EVM chains where Sismo's infrastructure is less mature.
04
Gitcoin Passport's Trade-off: Privacy & Granularity Limits
Score reveals aggregated footprint: While stamps are held locally, the aggregated score and the stamps used to create it are shared with applications. This offers less privacy granularity than ZK proofs. This matters for users or applications prioritizing minimal data disclosure or needing to prove a specific credential in isolation.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Sismo vs Gitcoin Passport
Sismo for DeFi
Verdict: Choose for privacy-first, composable identity and Sybil resistance. Strengths: Sismo's ZK Badges (like "Proof of Humanity" or "ENS Holder") provide reusable, privacy-preserving attestations. This is ideal for permissioned liquidity pools, under-collateralized lending (e.g., integrating with Aave GHO), and governance delegation where user privacy is paramount. The Sismo Data Vault and ZK Connect protocol allow users to aggregate credentials without exposing their underlying wallets, offering superior Sybil resistance for airdrops or loyalty programs.
Gitcoin Passport for DeFi
Verdict: Choose for broad, score-based reputation and simple integration. Strengths: Gitcoin Passport's aggregated score (a single number from sources like BrightID, ENS, and POAP) is easy to integrate for basic gating. It's effective for quadratic funding rounds, community airdrop eligibility, and DAO membership checks where a simple threshold suffices. However, it's less granular and privacy-focused than Sismo, as it relies on a centralized scorer and reveals more about the user's connected accounts.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
A data-driven breakdown to guide your choice between Sismo's ZK attestations and Gitcoin Passport's aggregated scoring.
Sismo excels at privacy-preserving, granular credential aggregation because it leverages zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) to generate verifiable badges from multiple sources. For example, a user can prove they own a specific NFT or have a certain ENS name without revealing their wallet address, enabling use cases like anonymous airdrops or gated governance. Its modular Sismo Connect protocol and on-chain attestations on Ethereum and Polygon provide strong composability for dApps requiring verified, yet private, user attributes.
Gitcoin Passport takes a different approach by aggregating diverse web2 and web3 identity signals into a single, portable score. This results in a trade-off of transparency for simplicity; the scoring algorithm is public, but individual attestation details are not privately verifiable. Its strength lies in its extensive, growing stamp ecosystem (over 20+ providers like BrightID, ENS, and Coinbase) and its proven track record in sybil-resistant quadratic funding rounds, where it has helped secure over $50M in community-matched grants.
The key trade-off: If your priority is user privacy, cryptographic proof of specific credentials, and on-chain composability for functions like token-gating or anonymous voting, choose Sismo. If you prioritize a battle-tested, easy-to-integrate reputation score for sybil resistance and broad, non-sensitive eligibility checks (e.g., for airdrops or generalized access), choose Gitcoin Passport. Your decision hinges on whether you need verifiable data or a computed score.
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