Sismo excels at aggregating and selectively disclosing off-chain reputation from across Web2 and Web3 because of its zero-knowledge (ZK) zkBadge system. For example, a user can prove they own a specific NFT or have a certain GitHub contribution history without revealing their entire wallet address or profile. This is powered by its Sismo Connect protocol, which has facilitated over 500,000 attestations, enabling applications like token-gated access based on composite reputation from sources like Ethereum, Gnosis, and Lens Protocol.
LABS
Comparisons
Sismo vs. Polygon ID for Portable Identity Proofs
A technical analysis comparing Sismo's ZK badge protocol for aggregated reputation against Polygon ID's verifiable credential framework for selective disclosure. Evaluates architecture, use cases, and trade-offs for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for Portable Identity
A data-driven comparison of Sismo and Polygon ID, two leading architectures for portable, privacy-preserving identity proofs.
Polygon ID takes a different approach by providing a full-stack, blockchain-native identity framework built directly on the Polygon zkEVM. This results in a trade-off: it offers tighter integration with on-chain verification and compliance (e.g., reusable KYC proofs via iden3 protocol and Circom circuits), but requires more initial setup within the Polygon ecosystem. Its architecture is designed for high-throughput verification, leveraging the chain's ~150 TPS capacity for scalable proof verification.
The key trade-off: If your priority is flexible aggregation of existing off-chain and cross-chain social/gaming credentials for community gating or sybil resistance, choose Sismo. If you prioritize native on-chain identity with built-in compliance levers and deep integration into a high-throughput EVM ecosystem for DeFi or enterprise use cases, choose Polygon ID.
tldr-summary
Sismo vs. Polygon ID
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs for implementing portable identity proofs.
01
Sismo: Data Aggregation & Privacy
Core strength: Aggregates multiple identity sources (GitHub, Twitter, Ethereum) into a single, reusable zk-proof (ZK Badge). This enables granular, privacy-preserving attestations (e.g., "prove you have >100 GitHub followers without revealing your handle"). This matters for sybil-resistant airdrops and gated communities where user privacy is paramount.
ZK-Proofs
Privacy Tech
02
Sismo: Protocol-Centric Composability
Core strength: Badges are stored as Soulbound Tokens (SBTs) on Ethereum L1/L2s, making them portable across any EVM chain. This matters for cross-chain reputation systems and decentralized applications (dApps) that need a unified identity layer not tied to a single chain's ecosystem.
EVM Native
Portability
03
Polygon ID: Native Chain Integration
Core strength: Built as the native identity layer for the Polygon PoS and Supernets ecosystem. Offers seamless integration with Polygon's tooling (zkEVM, Miden) and benefits from its high throughput (< 2 sec finality, ~$0.01 fees). This matters for enterprise use cases and high-frequency applications requiring fast, cheap verification on a single, scalable chain.
< 2 sec
Verification Time
04
Polygon ID: W3C Standard Compliance
Core strength: Implements W3C Verifiable Credentials (VCs) and Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) as first-class citizens. This ensures interoperability with enterprise and government systems outside crypto. This matters for real-world asset (RWA) tokenization, regulated DeFi, and institutional KYC/AML workflows requiring standard compliance.
W3C VC
Standard
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Feature Matrix: Sismo vs. Polygon ID
Direct comparison of key technical and ecosystem metrics for portable identity solutions.
| Metric | Sismo | Polygon ID |
|---|---|---|
Core Architecture | Off-chain ZK attestations via Sismo Connect | On-chain ZK proofs via Iden3/Circom |
Primary Data Source | Aggregated from existing web2 & web3 accounts | Self-sovereign W3C Verifiable Credentials |
Proof Portability | Cross-chain via Ethereum mainnet settlement | Native to Polygon PoS, portable via bridges |
Gas Cost for Verification | ~$0.10 - $1.00 (depends on destination chain) | < $0.01 (on Polygon PoS) |
Developer SDK | Sismo Connect (React, API) | Polygon ID SDK (JS, Flutter, Android) |
Native Token Required | true (MATIC for gas) | |
Major Integrations | Aave, Lens, Guild.xyz | Collab.Land, Kaleido, Fractal ID |
pros-cons-a
Portable Identity Proofs
Sismo vs. Polygon ID: Pros and Cons
Key architectural strengths and trade-offs for ZK-based identity solutions. Choose based on your protocol's privacy, composability, and integration needs.
02
Sismo's Trade-off: Application Complexity
Higher integration overhead: Developers must manage the Sismo Data Vault app, understand ZK proof verification, and integrate the Sismo Contracts SDK. This creates a steeper learning curve compared to simpler auth solutions, making it less suitable for rapid prototyping or teams without ZK expertise.
04
Polygon ID's Trade-off: Ecosystem Lock-in
Primary focus on Polygon: While portable via W3C Verifiable Credentials, its tooling and native verification are optimized for Polygon chains. This can create friction for multi-chain applications or protocols that prioritize chain-agnostic user identities over deep integration with a single L2.
pros-cons-b
PORTABLE IDENTITY PROOFS
Sismo vs. Polygon ID: Pros and Cons
Key architectural strengths and trade-offs for CTOs evaluating zero-knowledge identity infrastructure.
02
Sismo's Strength: Privacy-First, On-Chain Verification
Specific advantage: Proofs are verified on-chain via smart contracts (like Sismo's ZK Badge attestation registry), enabling trustless integration. This matters for decentralized applications (dApps) that require Sybil resistance or gated access without exposing user data.
10+
Integrated Data Sources
04
Polygon ID's Strength: High-Throughput, Low-Cost Issuance
Specific advantage: Leverages the Polygon PoS chain for credential issuance and revocation, offering sub-cent transaction fees and ~2 second finality. This matters for scaling to millions of users where cost and speed of identity operations are critical.
< $0.01
Avg. Issuance Cost
~2 sec
Finality
05
Sismo's Trade-off: Application-Specific Focus
Specific limitation: Optimized for web3-native, on-chain use cases like airdrop protection and DAO voting. It can be less suited for off-chain, enterprise KYC flows that require direct issuer-holder relationships and complex credential schemas.
06
Polygon ID's Trade-off: Issuer-Centric Complexity
Specific limitation: Requires issuers to run node infrastructure for credential management, increasing operational overhead. This matters for smaller projects or DAOs that prefer a more lightweight, aggregation-focused model like Sismo's.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose: Decision by Use Case
Sismo for DeFi
Verdict: The superior choice for privacy-preserving, reputation-based access and sybil resistance. Strengths: Sismo's ZK Badges and Data Vault allow users to prove eligibility (e.g., "Top 10% Uniswap LP") without revealing their underlying wallet addresses or transaction history. This enables novel DeFi primitives like undercollateralized lending based on anonymous credit scores, private governance voting, and fair airdrops. Integration is via its Sismo Connect SDK, which is EVM-agnostic.
Polygon ID for DeFi
Verdict: Best for KYC/AML compliance and institutional-grade identity verification on a single chain. Strengths: Built on Iden3 protocol and Circom ZK circuits, it excels at issuing reusable, verifiable credentials (e.g., "Accredited Investor") that can be validated on-chain. Its native integration with the Polygon PoS chain simplifies gas-efficient verification. Ideal for regulated DeFi pools, compliant token sales, and permissioned liquidity markets where issuer trust and legal identity are non-negotiable.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Verdict and Decision Framework
A final breakdown of the architectural trade-offs between Sismo's ZK-powered attestations and Polygon ID's on-chain verifiable credentials.
Sismo excels at privacy-preserving, composable reputation aggregation because its core primitive is the ZK Badge—a zero-knowledge proof that a user meets certain criteria without revealing the underlying data. For example, its protocol has minted over 600,000 badges across Ethereum, Optimism, and Gnosis Chain, enabling applications like anonymous Sybil resistance and gated access based on aggregated on-chain history. This makes it ideal for protocols like Aave or Snapshot that need to verify user traits without compromising privacy.
Polygon ID takes a different approach by providing a full-stack framework for W3C-compliant Verifiable Credentials (VCs) anchored to the Polygon blockchain. This strategy results in a trade-off: it offers stronger enterprise and regulatory alignment with standards like Iden3, but requires more complex issuer/verifier infrastructure. Its native integration with the Polygon zkEVM (processing ~100 TPS) provides a scalable, low-fee environment for issuing and verifying credentials, which is crucial for use cases like KYC or educational certificates.
The key trade-off is between privacy-by-design aggregation and standardized, verifiable identity. If your priority is anonymous, portable reputation built from multiple data sources (e.g., DeFi protocols, DAOs, social), choose Sismo. Its ZK Badges are gasless for users and function as a universal, privacy-preserving social graph. If you prioritize regulatory-compliant, issuer-controlled credentials with strong revocation and selective disclosure (e.g., for enterprise, real-world assets, or legal identity), choose Polygon ID. Its on-chain VC model provides a robust, auditable chain of trust.
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