Snapshot's strategy system excels at cost-effective, flexible governance because it operates off-chain, leveraging a decentralized network of indexers to compute voting power. For example, a DAO can combine strategies like erc20-balance-of, erc721-with-multiplier, and delegation to create a complex, gas-free voting system, as seen in protocols like Aave and Uniswap which manage billions in TVL through Snapshot.
LABS
Comparisons
Snapshot's Strategies vs Custom Voting Power Calculations
A technical comparison for DAO architects evaluating the trade-offs between using Snapshot's off-chain plugin system and building a custom, on-chain voting power module. This analysis covers development cost, security model, flexibility, and long-term maintenance.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Core Governance Decision
Choosing between Snapshot's off-chain strategies and custom on-chain calculations defines your protocol's governance security, cost, and flexibility.
Custom on-chain calculations take a different approach by executing voting logic directly within smart contracts. This results in absolute security and verifiability, as every vote is an immutable on-chain transaction, but introduces significant gas costs and complexity. Protocols like Compound and its Governor Bravo system exemplify this, where voting power is calculated at the block of proposal creation, ensuring no manipulation but requiring users to pay for each interaction.
The key trade-off: If your priority is low-friction, high-participation governance with complex, multi-asset voting power, choose Snapshot's strategies. If you prioritize cryptographic security, full on-chain execution, and are willing to accept higher user costs for mission-critical decisions, choose a custom on-chain system.
tldr-summary
Snapshot vs Custom Voting
TL;DR: Key Differentiators
A high-level comparison of the leading off-chain voting platform versus building a custom solution for governance power calculations.
02
Snapshot: Security & Maintenance
Zero infrastructure overhead: Snapshot Labs manages all hosting, indexing, and UI. This matters for teams with limited DevOps resources.
Battle-tested security: Processes over $10B in governance power across 100k+ spaces. This matters for mitigating custom contract risks and Sybil attacks.
03
Custom Solution: Flexibility
Unconstrained logic: Implement any on-chain or off-chain data source (e.g., staking derivatives, time-locked tokens, soulbound credentials). This matters for novel consensus mechanisms or protocol-specific metrics.
Full sovereignty: No dependency on a third-party service's uptime or roadmap. This matters for protocols where governance is a core, non-negotiable component.
04
Custom Solution: Integration & Cost
Deep wallet integration: Seamlessly embed voting into your dApp's native UX. This matters for providing a cohesive user journey.
Long-term cost control: Avoid potential future platform fees (Snapshot is currently free). This matters for large-scale protocols anticipating millions of votes, where even micro-costs scale.
100%
Logic Control
$0
Platform Fee Risk
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Feature Comparison: Snapshot Strategies vs Custom Module
Direct comparison of voting power calculation approaches for on-chain governance.
| Metric / Feature | Snapshot Strategies | Custom On-Chain Module |
|---|---|---|
Voting Power Source | Off-chain data (IPFS, The Graph) | On-chain state (ERC-20, veTokens, NFTs) |
Gas Cost for Voter | ~$0 (Gasless Signature) | $5 - $50+ (On-chain TX) |
Time to Deploy / Update | < 5 minutes | 1 day - 2 weeks (Dev + Audit) |
Sybil Resistance | Depends on strategy (e.g., ERC-20, ERC-721) | Native to chain (e.g., Proof-of-Stake) |
Execution Automation | Requires relayer (e.g., SafeSnap) | Native via smart contract |
Custom Logic Complexity | Limited to pre-built strategies | Unlimited (Turing-complete) |
Data Freshness | ~1 block delay (indexer lag) | Real-time (current block) |
pros-cons-a
BUILT-IN STRATEGIES VS. CUSTOM CALCULATIONS
Snapshot Strategies: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for governance voting power at a glance.
01
Snapshot's Built-in Strategies
Pros:
- Rapid Deployment: Choose from 50+ pre-built strategies (e.g.,
erc20-balance-of,erc721,whitelist) to launch a proposal in minutes. - Battle-Tested Security: Audited, widely-used code with over $30B+ in TVL secured across 100,000+ spaces, minimizing smart contract risk.
- Voter Convenience: Seamless integration with Snapshot's UI; voters see clear power breakdowns without custom frontends.
Best for: DAOs needing speed, security, and standard token/NFT-based voting like Uniswap, Aave, or Lido.
02
Snapshot's Built-in Strategies
Cons:
- Limited Logic Complexity: Strategies are constrained by Snapshot's execution environment; complex multi-chain or time-weighted calculations are impossible.
- Protocol Lock-in: Voting power logic is dependent on Snapshot's infrastructure and cannot be ported to other governance platforms.
- Opaque for Voters: While convenient, the 'black box' nature of some strategies can reduce transparency into precise power calculations for sophisticated voters.
03
Custom Voting Power Calculations
Pros:
- Unlimited Flexibility: Implement any logic (e.g., time-locked veTokens, cross-chain merkle proofs, reputation scores) by writing your own strategy contract.
- Full Ownership & Portability: The smart contract is yours; can be used with Snapshot, Tally, or any other platform that reads from it.
- Transparent & Verifiable: Every voter can audit the on-chain contract logic, ensuring complete trustlessness for critical governance decisions.
Best for: Protocols with novel tokenomics like Curve (veCRV), cross-chain DAOs, or those requiring custom delegation logic.
04
Custom Voting Power Calculations
Cons:
- High Development Overhead: Requires Solidity/ Vyper development, security audits, and ongoing maintenance—budget $50K+ and 2-3 months.
- Increased Attack Surface: Custom code introduces smart contract risk; a bug could compromise the entire governance process.
- Poor Voter UX: Often requires a custom frontend to display voting power, adding friction and potentially lowering participation.
Best for: Teams with significant engineering resources and a clear requirement that off-the-shelf solutions cannot meet.
pros-cons-b
SNAPSHOT STRATEGIES VS. CUSTOM ON-CHAIN LOGIC
Custom Voting Module: Pros and Cons
Choosing between Snapshot's off-chain strategies and building a custom on-chain voting module is a foundational decision for DAO governance. This comparison highlights the key trade-offs in flexibility, security, and implementation effort.
02
Snapshot: Limited Composability & Security
Specific trade-off: Voting is off-chain and non-binding; execution requires a separate multisig or custom relayer. Strategies are constrained by Snapshot's plugin architecture, making complex logic (e.g., time-weighted averages, cross-chain power) difficult. This matters if you need self-executing proposals or sophisticated, real-time economic calculations that reflect on-chain state.
03
Custom Module: Unlimited Logic & Direct Execution
Specific advantage: Encode any voting power formula directly into a smart contract (e.g., time-lock based veTokens, staking derivatives, or cross-chain Merkle proofs). Proposals can automatically execute transactions upon passing, creating a trust-minimized governance pipeline. This is critical for DeFi protocols like Curve or MakerDAO where governance directly controls treasury parameters.
04
Custom Module: High Cost & Maintenance Burden
Specific trade-off: Requires significant engineering resources for development, auditing, and ongoing upgrades. Every vote consumes gas, potentially disincentivizing participation. You lose access to Snapshot's UX and tooling, needing to build your own front-end and voter guides. This matters for early-stage projects where developer bandwidth and community gas budgets are constrained.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Guide: When to Use Which
Snapshot Strategies for DAO Architects
Verdict: The default choice for most governance launches. Strengths: Rapid deployment with a vast library of pre-built strategies (ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, delegation). Seamless integration with Safe, ENS, and Sybil for identity. Proven security model with over 7,000 DAOs and $20B+ in managed TVL. Ideal for bootstrapping community governance with minimal dev overhead.
Custom Calculations for DAO Architects
Verdict: Required for novel tokenomics or multi-chain governance. Strengths: Enables complex logic like time-locked voting power (ve-tokens), cross-chain aggregation (using LayerZero, Axelar), or integrating off-chain data (Chainlink Oracles). Necessary for protocols like Curve Finance or Frax Finance where voting power is non-linear. Use when your governance model cannot be expressed via Snapshot's composable strategy pattern.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
Choosing between Snapshot's pre-built strategies and custom calculations is a fundamental trade-off between development speed and governance flexibility.
Snapshot's strategy library excels at rapid, secure deployment because it offers over 50 pre-audited, community-tested modules for common voting power sources like ERC-20, ERC-721, and delegation. For example, a DAO can launch a weighted voting proposal using the erc20-balance-of strategy in minutes, leveraging its battle-tested integration with major wallets like MetaMask and a proven track record of securing over $30B in TVL across 5,000+ DAOs. This drastically reduces development overhead and audit risk.
Custom voting power calculations take a different approach by allowing protocol architects to define bespoke logic, such as time-weighted balances, staking derivatives, or multi-chain asset aggregation. This results in a trade-off: unparalleled flexibility to align incentives perfectly with your tokenomics, but at the cost of significant engineering resources for development, security auditing, and ongoing maintenance of the custom smart contract or off-chain indexer.
The key trade-off: If your priority is time-to-market, security, and community familiarity, choose Snapshot. Its plug-and-play strategies are optimal for standard token-based governance. If you prioritize unique incentive alignment, complex tokenomics, or cross-chain sovereignty, choose a custom calculation. This path is essential for protocols like Curve (vote-escrowed tokens) or OlympusDAO (bonding-based governance) that require novel power distributions not covered by standard modules.
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