Snapshot excels at flexible, gasless voting by decoupling vote weight calculation from the blockchain. Its strategy system allows DAOs to compose complex logic—like combining ERC-20, ERC-721, and ERC-1155 balances, or delegating from platforms like Element or Uniswap—into a single off-chain query. For example, a DAO can implement a time-weighted snapshot or a multi-token governance model without a single on-chain transaction, enabling massive participation at zero cost for voters. This has made it the dominant standard, powering over 7,000 DAOs with billions in governed assets.
LABS
Comparisons
Snapshot's Strategies vs Tally's Voting Power Calculation: Vote Weighting Logic
A technical analysis comparing Snapshot's flexible, off-chain strategy system with Tally's on-chain, token-weighted calculations for determining DAO voting power. We examine architecture, security, cost, and use cases for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Core Architectural Divide in DAO Voting
The fundamental choice between Snapshot's flexible off-chain strategies and Tally's on-chain calculation engine defines how a DAO measures and secures its governance power.
Tally takes a different approach by anchoring voting power calculation directly in on-chain smart contracts. Its architecture relies on standards like OpenZeppelin's Governor and token contracts with built-in delegation (e.g., Compound's COMP). This results in a trade-off: voting is cryptographically verifiable and enforceable on-chain, but requires gas fees for delegation and voting. This model is inherently more secure against manipulation of vote weight data, as the source of truth is the immutable ledger itself, not an off-chain indexer.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing voter participation and experimental governance models with zero friction, choose Snapshot. Its strategy framework is ideal for large communities or multi-chain protocols like Aave or Uniswap that need custom, gasless voting. If you prioritize cryptographic security, on-chain enforceability, and integration with DeFi-native token standards, choose Tally. It is the superior choice for DAOs where vote outcomes automatically trigger on-chain execution, such as Compound or Gitcoin, ensuring the governance process is as trustless as the protocol it governs.
tldr-summary
Snapshot's Strategies vs Tally's Voting Power Calculation
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A side-by-side comparison of the core vote weighting logic, highlighting the architectural trade-offs for protocol governance.
01
Snapshot: Flexible & Extensible Logic
Customizable Strategies: Supports ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, and custom off-chain logic (e.g., Gitcoin Passport, POAPs). This matters for DAOs with complex, multi-asset or reputation-based governance models like Uniswap or Aave.
02
Snapshot: Off-Chain Efficiency
Gasless Voting: Votes are signed messages stored on IPFS/Arweave, making participation free. This matters for maximizing voter turnout in large communities like ENS DAO, where gas costs are a significant barrier.
03
Tally: On-Chain Verifiability
Real-Time, Immutable Power: Voting power is calculated directly from the blockchain state at the proposal's snapshot block. This matters for protocols like Compound or Nouns, where governance directly controls on-chain treasury and parameters, requiring absolute trustlessness.
04
Tally: Native Delegate Integration
Seamless Delegation Systems: Natively integrates with standards like OpenZeppelin's Governor and Compound's delegation contracts. This matters for protocols using a delegate model (e.g., Uniswap, Gitcoin), providing a unified dashboard for delegate discovery and tracking.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Feature Comparison: Snapshot Strategies vs Tally Voting Power
Direct comparison of vote weighting logic for on-chain and off-chain governance.
| Metric | Snapshot Strategies | Tally Voting Power |
|---|---|---|
Core Data Source | Off-chain (IPFS, APIs) | On-chain (EVM state) |
Real-time State Updates | ||
Vote Weight Calculation | Strategy-defined (ERC-20, ERC-721, etc.) | Contract-defined (ERC-20Votes, ERC-721Votes) |
Gas Cost for Voter | $0 | $5 - $50+ |
Delegation Support | Via custom strategies | Native (ERC-5805, ERC-6372) |
Sybil Resistance | Strategy-dependent (e.g., PoH, token gating) | Token-holding based |
Integration Complexity | Medium (strategy design) | High (contract upgrades) |
pros-cons-a
Vote Weighting Logic
Snapshot's Strategy System: Pros and Cons
Key architectural differences and trade-offs for protocol architects choosing a governance dependency.
03
Snapshot's Complexity & Latency
Strategy execution overhead: Each vote requires off-chain indexers to fetch and compute weights, introducing latency (2-30 sec) and a dependency on Snapshot's infrastructure. This is a trade-off for time-sensitive proposals or protocols requiring sub-second vote power finality.
04
Tally's Chain & Asset Limitations
Tightly coupled to Ethereum L1/L2: Primarily optimized for Ethereum Virtual Machine chains and standard token interfaces. This is a constraint for non-EVM DAOs (e.g., Solana, Cosmos) or those using custom, non-standard voting power logic not natively supported by Tally's UI.
pros-cons-b
Snapshot's Strategies vs Tally's Voting Power Calculation
Tally's On-Chain Calculation: Pros and Cons
Key architectural trade-offs in vote weighting logic for DAO governance.
01
Snapshot's Flexibility
Off-chain strategy composability: Supports hundreds of custom strategies (e.g., ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, whitelist) that can be combined for complex logic like quadratic voting or time-weighted balances. This matters for DAOs with multi-token governance, NFT-based voting, or needing rapid iteration without gas costs.
02
Snapshot's Cost & Speed
Gasless voting and instant execution: Votes are signed messages stored on IPFS/Arweave, eliminating voter gas fees and enabling participation for small holders. Proposals and results are near-instant. This matters for maximizing voter turnout and running frequent, low-stakes polls.
03
Tally's Verifiability
Fully on-chain, cryptographically verifiable state: Voting power is calculated in real-time via smart contract calls (e.g., getPriorVotes). Every vote is an on-chain transaction, providing a single source of truth. This matters for high-value treasury decisions requiring complete audit trails and resistance to manipulation.
04
Tally's Finality & Execution
Direct execution path: On-chain votes can automatically trigger treasury transactions (via Governor contracts) upon passing, creating a trustless proposal-to-execution pipeline. This matters for protocols like Uniswap or Compound where votes must have immediate, enforceable on-chain effects.
05
Snapshot's Centralization Risk
Relies on off-chain infrastructure: Strategy logic and result aggregation depend on Snapshot's hosted service and IPFS pinning. While open-source, this introduces a liveness dependency. This is a critical weakness for DAOs prioritizing maximal decentralization and censorship resistance.
06
Tally's Cost & Complexity
Voter-paid gas and slower cycles: Every interaction (delegation, voting) requires a transaction, creating cost barriers. Proposal lifecycle (queue, timelock, execute) is slower. This matters for large, diverse communities where gas costs can disenfranchise voters and slow governance momentum.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Snapshot vs Tally: Decision by Use Case
Snapshot for DAO Architects
Verdict: The default for flexible, gasless governance of large, token-based communities. Strengths: Unmatched flexibility in vote weighting logic via custom Strategies. Supports complex multi-token voting (e.g., veCRV + staked LP positions), time-weighted balances (e.g., ERC20Votes), and cross-chain governance (via Multichain, Starknet strategies). Ideal for protocols like Curve, Aave, and Uniswap that require nuanced power distribution. The off-chain, signature-based model eliminates voter gas costs, maximizing participation. Weaknesses: Off-chain votes require a trusted executor (often a multisig) for on-chain execution, adding a layer of centralization and execution lag.
Tally for DAO Architects
Verdict: The superior choice for enforceable, on-chain governance with transparent delegation. Strengths: Native integration with OpenZeppelin Governor contracts. Voting power is calculated directly from the token's ERC-20Votes or ERC-721Votes standard at the block of proposal creation, ensuring immutable, on-chain verifiability. The delegation dashboard and delegate profiles create a transparent political layer. Best for DAOs like Fei Protocol or PoolTogether where vote outcomes must be self-executing and tamper-proof. Weaknesses: Less flexible for exotic voting strategies; voters must pay gas to delegate and cast votes on-chain.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
A data-driven breakdown to help you choose the right vote weighting logic for your DAO's governance.
Snapshot's Strategies excel at flexibility and composability because they allow DAOs to define custom logic via JavaScript. This enables complex, multi-chain governance models. For example, protocols like Uniswap and Aave use strategies to calculate voting power from staked tokens, LP positions, and even off-chain reputation scores, creating a tailored governance layer that can adapt to evolving tokenomics.
Tally's Voting Power Calculation takes a different approach by integrating directly with on-chain state, primarily focusing on ERC-20, ERC-721, and ERC-1155 token holdings. This results in a trade-off of simplicity for depth. While less flexible for bespoke logic, it provides a more transparent and verifiable audit trail directly from the source chain, which is critical for high-value, security-focused protocols.
The key trade-off: If your priority is custom, multi-faceted governance (e.g., rewarding active contributors, integrating cross-chain assets, or using non-standard token contracts), choose Snapshot. Its strategy framework is the industry standard for a reason, powering over 5,000 DAOs. If you prioritize on-chain verifiability, simplicity of setup, and deep integration with existing token standards for a straightforward token-weighted vote, choose Tally. Its native on-chain approach minimizes trust assumptions for core voting power logic.
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