Polygon CDK excels at providing a fast, secure path to a high-performance Ethereum L2 by offering a tightly integrated, opinionated stack. It bundles a ZK-prover, a sequencer, and a bridge, all optimized to settle on the Polygon zkEVM network. This integration translates to predictable performance, with current deployments like Immutable zkEVM and Astar zkEVM achieving over 100 TPS and sub-cent transaction fees, while benefiting from shared liquidity and security from the established Polygon ecosystem.
LABS
Comparisons
Polygon CDK vs Celestia's Rollkit: Integrated vs Agnostic DA
A technical analysis comparing Polygon's integrated ZK rollup stack with Celestia's modular Rollkit framework, focusing on architecture, data availability, and trade-offs for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Stack Strategy Fork
The fundamental choice between an integrated, opinionated stack and a modular, agnostic toolkit defines your rollup's future.
Celestia's Rollkit takes a different approach by providing a modular, agnostic framework for sovereign rollups. It decouples execution from data availability (DA) and settlement, allowing developers to choose their own DA layer (e.g., Celestia, Avail, EigenDA) and settlement chain. This results in a trade-off: maximum flexibility and potential cost savings on data (Celestia's blobspace costs ~$0.01 per MB) at the expense of a more complex integration process and the need to bootstrap your own validator set and liquidity.
The key trade-off: If your priority is time-to-market, ecosystem integration, and leveraging an existing security umbrella, choose Polygon CDK. If you prioritize sovereignty, minimal trust assumptions, and long-term cost optimization via modular DA, choose Celestia's Rollkit. The former is a turnkey solution for an app-chain; the latter is a toolkit for a sovereign nation.
tldr-summary
Polygon CDK vs Celestia's Rollkit
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
A direct comparison of the integrated, EVM-centric approach versus the modular, agnostic framework for building rollups.
01
Polygon CDK: Integrated & Opinionated
EVM-Centric Development: Leverages the Polygon zkEVM prover and a unified bridge for seamless integration with the Polygon ecosystem. This matters for teams prioritizing developer familiarity and liquidity portability from Ethereum/Polygon.
Guaranteed Interoperability: All CDK chains are natively interoperable via the AggLayer, enabling atomic cross-chain composability. This is critical for applications requiring a unified user experience across multiple chains.
Proven Infrastructure: Built on the battle-tested zkEVM stack, offering ~2-second finality and <$0.01 transaction costs. Ideal for projects needing a production-ready, high-throughput environment from day one.
02
Celestia's Rollkit: Modular & Agnostic
Sovereign DA Choice: Provides data availability (DA) as a standalone service, allowing rollups to choose any execution environment (EVM, SVM, CosmWasm, etc.). This matters for teams building non-EVM applications or prioritizing maximum flexibility.
Minimal Trust Assumptions: Leverages Celestia's data availability sampling (DAS) for scalable, secure DA without relying on a full consensus layer. This is optimal for projects focused on sovereignty and minimizing protocol-level dependencies.
Cost-Efficient Scaling: Pay only for blob space on Celestia, which can be ~100x cheaper than calldata on Ethereum L1. Essential for ultra-high-throughput applications where marginal transaction cost is the primary constraint.
03
Choose Polygon CDK If...
- Your team's core competency is in Solidity/EVM tooling (Hardhat, Foundry).
- You require native, atomic cross-chain composability with other Polygon chains via the AggLayer.
- Your go-to-market strategy depends on tapping into the existing Polygon PoS liquidity and user base.
- You want a full-stack, supported solution with a clear upgrade path from Polygon.
04
Choose Celestia's Rollkit If...
- You are building a non-EVM chain (e.g., using Move, Solana VM, or a custom VM).
- Sovereignty and minimal vendor lock-in are primary architectural goals.
- Your application's economics demand the lowest possible DA costs, even if it adds integration complexity.
- You are an infrastructure-focused team comfortable assembling modular components (execution, settlement, DA).
INTEGRATED VS AGNOSTIC DATA AVAILABILITY
Feature Comparison: Architecture & Capabilities
Direct comparison of Polygon CDK's integrated stack versus Celestia's modular, agnostic approach.
| Metric / Feature | Polygon CDK | Celestia + Rollkit |
|---|---|---|
Core Architecture | Integrated ZK Rollup Stack | Modular DA + Rollkit Framework |
Data Availability Layer | Polygon Avail (Integrated) | Celestia (Agnostic) |
Sovereignty & Forkability | ||
DA Cost per MB (Est.) | $0.10 - $0.30 | $0.01 - $0.05 |
EVM Compatibility | Full EVM Equivalence | Custom VM (EVM via Rollkit) |
Shared Security Source | Ethereum L1 (via bridge) | Celestia (Data), Optional Ethereum (Settlement) |
Native Interop (Within Ecosystem) | Polygon AggLayer | IBC (Inter-Blockchain Communication) |
pros-cons-a
ARCHITECTURE COMPARISON
Polygon CDK vs Celestia's Rollkit: Integrated vs Agnostic DA
A side-by-side analysis of two leading approaches to building sovereign rollups: Polygon's integrated stack versus Celestia's modular, agnostic framework.
01
Polygon CDK: Integrated Stack Advantage
Full-stack integration with Polygon's ecosystem. Offers a pre-configured, interoperable L2/L3 solution using the Polygon zkEVM, a shared bridge, and native access to the Polygon AggLayer for unified liquidity. This matters for teams prioritizing time-to-market and seamless connectivity to a large existing ecosystem (e.g., Aave, Uniswap V3) without managing multiple vendor integrations.
~$1B+
TVL on Polygon zkEVM
< $0.01
Avg. L2 Tx Cost
02
Polygon CDK: Vendor-Lock In Trade-off
Tightly coupled to Polygon's technology stack (zkEVM prover, bridge, sequencer). While this simplifies setup, it reduces flexibility. You cannot easily swap out the execution client, data availability layer, or settlement layer. This matters for protocols with long-term architectural sovereignty requirements or those who may want to leverage future innovations from other ecosystems (e.g., a different zkVM or a new DA layer).
03
Celestia's Rollkit: Modular & Agnostic
Maximum flexibility with a modular, plug-and-play framework. Rollkit provides the minimal rollup scaffolding, allowing you to choose your own execution environment (e.g., Rollmint, Arbitrum Nitro), settlement layer (e.g., Ethereum, Celestia, Polygon), and data availability layer (optimized for Celestia). This matters for research-focused teams and protocols building custom VMs or requiring sovereign control over their entire tech stack.
~$0.0005
Per-byte DA Cost (Celestia)
100+
Rollups on Celestia
04
Celestia's Rollkit: Integration Overhead
Higher initial complexity from managing multiple modular components. You are responsible for integrating and maintaining the connections between your chosen execution layer, DA layer (Celestia), and optional settlement layer. This matters for resource-constrained teams or applications where developer velocity and ecosystem tooling (like standardized block explorers and bridges) are critical success factors.
pros-cons-b
Polygon CDK vs Celestia's Rollkit
Celestia's Rollkit: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs between an integrated L2 framework and a modular DA-agnostic toolkit.
01
Polygon CDK: Integrated Ecosystem
Specific advantage: Native integration with Polygon's zkEVM and the AggLayer for shared liquidity and atomic composability. This matters for projects prioritizing interoperability within a single ecosystem and needing access to Polygon's existing user base and tools like the PoS bridge.
02
Polygon CDK: Ethereum-Centric Security
Specific advantage: Data availability and settlement are anchored to Ethereum L1, leveraging its ~$100B+ security budget. This matters for institutional DeFi and applications where maximizing Ethereum's consensus security is non-negotiable, despite higher base costs.
03
Celestia's Rollkit: Modular & DA-Agnostic
Specific advantage: Decouples execution from data availability, allowing rollups to post data to Celestia (~$0.0015 per MB) or any DA layer. This matters for sovereign rollups and projects needing minimum cost structure and the flexibility to switch DA providers without forking.
04
Celestia's Rollkit: Developer Sovereignty
Specific advantage: Provides a minimal, unopinionated framework (Rollkit) for building rollups with full control over the stack. This matters for protocols like Dymension that require custom settlement logic and are not tied to a single L1's roadmap or governance.
05
Polygon CDK: Higher Baseline Cost
Specific trade-off: DA costs are tied to Ethereum calldata prices, leading to higher fixed operational costs versus modular alternatives. This is a constraint for high-throughput, low-fee applications like gaming or microtransactions where marginal cost is critical.
06
Celestia's Rollkit: Emerging Ecosystem
Specific trade-off: While growing rapidly, the tooling and shared liquidity layer (like the AggLayer) is less mature than Polygon's. This matters for teams that need battle-tested bridges, oracles (Chainlink), and wallets with immediate, broad user support.
INTEGRATED VS AGNOSTIC DATA AVAILABILITY
Cost Analysis: DA Fees & Operational Overhead
Direct comparison of cost structures and operational responsibilities for Polygon CDK's integrated DA versus Celestia's agnostic Rollkit framework.
| Metric | Polygon CDK (Integrated) | Celestia + Rollkit (Agnostic) |
|---|---|---|
DA Cost per MB (Est.) | $0.20 - $0.50 | $0.01 - $0.05 |
Ethereum L1 Settlement Cost | Required for proofs | Not required |
DA Layer Security | Polygon PoS / Avail | Celestia |
Sequencer Operation | Managed by chain operator | Managed by chain operator |
Multi-DA Flexibility | ||
Native Bridging to Ethereum | ||
Primary Cost Driver | L1 proof posting + DA fees | Celestia blob fees + sequencer ops |
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Polygon CDK for DeFi
Verdict: The integrated choice for Ethereum-centric, high-value applications. Strengths: Native access to Polygon's AggLayer for shared liquidity and atomic composability is a game-changer. Direct bridge to Ethereum L1 and Polygon PoS provides immediate access to massive TVL (e.g., Aave, Uniswap V3). Battle-tested EVM environment with zkEVM security. Ideal for protocols like decentralized exchanges, lending markets, and yield aggregators that require deep liquidity pools and trust-minimized bridging.
Celestia + Rollkit for DeFi
Verdict: The modular, experimental frontier for novel economic designs. Strengths: Radically lower data availability costs enable micro-transactions and high-frequency state updates. Sovereignty allows for custom fee markets and governance without external constraints. Best suited for new DeFi primitives (e.g., hyper-efficient AMMs, prediction markets) where cost structure and maximum flexibility outweigh the need for pre-existing liquidity. Requires building your own bridge and liquidity from scratch.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict: The Strategic Choice
Choosing between Polygon CDK and Celestia's Rollkit is a foundational decision between an integrated, opinionated stack and a modular, agnostic toolkit.
Polygon CDK excels at delivering a high-performance, production-ready L2 with deep Ethereum compatibility because it is a vertically integrated framework. It provides a turnkey solution with a battle-tested ZK-rollup architecture, a unified bridge to Ethereum, and native interoperability with other Polygon chains via AggLayer. For example, chains built with CDK can leverage the security of Ethereum's L1 for data availability while achieving over 100 TPS with sub-cent transaction fees, as seen in early deployments like Astar zkEVM and Immutable zkEVM.
Celestia's Rollkit takes a different approach by offering a modular, agnostic toolkit for sovereign rollups. This strategy provides ultimate flexibility, allowing developers to choose their own execution environment (e.g., Optimint for Cosmos, Rollkit for general use), settlement layer, and DA provider. This results in a trade-off: you gain sovereignty and can potentially achieve lower DA costs by leveraging Celestia's specialized data availability layer, but you must assemble and maintain the interoperability bridges, sequencers, and prover networks yourself.
The key trade-off: If your priority is time-to-market, Ethereum-centric security, and seamless interoperability within the Polygon ecosystem, choose Polygon CDK. It is the strategic choice for enterprises and protocols like gaming studios or DeFi applications that need a robust, supported L2 without reinventing the wheel. If you prioritize maximum sovereignty, architectural freedom, and experimenting with novel DA economics across multiple ecosystems, choose Celestia's Rollkit. It is the tool for teams building app-specific chains that demand control over their entire stack and are willing to manage its complexity.
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