Cosmos Starport excels at launching sovereign, application-specific blockchains (appchains) because it provides a full-stack framework for bootstrapping a Tendermint-based chain with IBC connectivity. This grants developers ultimate control over their stack—gas token, governance, and execution environment—enabling high throughput (e.g., 10,000+ TPS for chains like Injective) and minimal transaction fees for users. The trade-off is the operational overhead of securing and maintaining an independent validator set and the initial hurdle of bootstrapping liquidity and tooling from scratch.
LABS
Comparisons
Cosmos Starport vs Hardhat Starter Kits
A technical analysis for CTOs and architects comparing the foundational tooling for building sovereign Cosmos appchains versus deploying smart contracts on EVM-compatible general-purpose blockchains.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: Sovereign Appchains vs EVM Smart Contracts
A foundational comparison of the Cosmos Starport and Hardhat Starter Kit paradigms, focusing on architectural sovereignty versus ecosystem integration.
Hardhat Starter Kits take a different approach by optimizing for deployment on existing EVM smart contract platforms like Ethereum, Arbitrum, or Polygon. This strategy leverages deep, established ecosystems—with over $50B in Total Value Locked (TVL) across major L2s—immediately providing access to battle-tested infrastructure (The Graph, Etherscan), liquidity pools (Uniswap), and a massive developer talent pool. The trade-off is operating within the constraints of a shared execution layer, competing for block space and accepting the base layer's fee market and upgrade timelines.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum performance, custom economics, and long-term sovereignty for a high-throughput application (e.g., a decentralized exchange or gaming ecosystem), choose the Cosmos Starport path. If you prioritize rapid deployment, immediate access to deep liquidity, and a mature toolchain for a DeFi protocol or NFT project, choose a Hardhat Starter Kit targeting a major EVM chain or L2.
tldr-summary
Cosmos Starport vs Hardhat Starter Kits
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for blockchain developers choosing a foundational framework.
02
Cosmos Starport: Built-in Interoperability
Specific advantage: Generates IBC (Inter-Blockchain Communication) relayer and channel configuration out-of-the-box. This matters for protocols whose core value depends on cross-chain asset transfers and composability within the Cosmos ecosystem of 50+ chains.
50+
IBC Chains
04
Hardhat: Superior Local Development UX
Specific advantage: Features like console.log debugging, mainnet forking, and a rich plugin architecture (e.g., for gas reporting, deployment). This matters for developers prioritizing a fast, familiar, and feature-rich local testing environment before deploying to a shared chain.
4M+
Monthly NPM Downloads
COSMOS STARPORT VS HARDHAT STARTER KITS
Head-to-Head Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for blockchain development frameworks.
| Metric | Cosmos Starport | Hardhat Starter Kits |
|---|---|---|
Primary Blockchain Target | Cosmos SDK AppChain | EVM (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum) |
Native Interoperability | ||
Default Consensus | Tendermint BFT | Ethereum PoS (via client) |
Time to First Chain (Local) | < 5 minutes | < 2 minutes |
Built-in IBC Support | ||
Native Token Minting | ||
Primary Smart Contract Language | CosmWasm (Rust) | Solidity/Vyper |
Active Developer Community | ~2,000+ | ~15,000+ |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Cosmos Starport vs Hardhat Starter Kits
Key strengths and trade-offs for blockchain development frameworks at a glance.
01
Cosmos Starport Pro: Sovereign Chain Scaffolding
Specific advantage: Generates a fully functional, IBC-ready blockchain in minutes. This matters for protocols needing custom economics and governance (e.g., Osmosis, Injective). The CLI (starport chain serve) handles consensus, networking, and tokenomics boilerplate, letting teams focus on application logic.
50+
Live Cosmos Chains
02
Cosmos Starport Con: EVM & Solidity Isolation
Specific disadvantage: Native development uses Cosmos SDK (Go) and CosmWasm (Rust), not Solidity. This matters for teams with existing EVM expertise or smart contracts. Migrating dApps requires a full rewrite, increasing time-to-market and limiting access to Ethereum's vast developer tooling (e.g., Foundry, Ethers.js).
03
Hardhat Starter Kit Pro: EVM Ecosystem Integration
Specific advantage: Plug-and-play with the entire Ethereum toolchain. This matters for teams deploying to L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism) or forking mainnet. Immediate access to libraries like OpenZeppelin, testing with Waffle/Chai, and deployment scripts for any EVM-compatible chain reduces initial setup from weeks to hours.
90%+
EVM Market Share
04
Hardhat Starter Kit Con: AppChain Complexity
Specific disadvantage: Building a standalone blockchain (appchain) requires integrating multiple consensus and networking layers (e.g., Polygon Edge, Avalanche). This matters for projects needing sovereign execution environments. The starter kit is optimized for smart contracts on existing L1/L2s, not launching independent, interoperable chains like Cosmos zones.
pros-cons-b
Cosmos Starport vs Hardhat
Hardhat Starter Kits: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for EVM vs Cosmos SDK development at a glance.
01
Starport: Built for Interoperability
Native Cosmos SDK & IBC Integration: Generates a fully functional, sovereign blockchain with built-in IBC relayer setup. This matters for teams building app-chains that need to communicate across the Cosmos ecosystem (e.g., Osmosis, Injective).
02
Starport: Developer Velocity
Scaffolding CLI: starport scaffold auto-generates CRUD logic, messages, queries, and front-end components from a single type definition. This matters for rapid prototyping of Cosmos-based chains, reducing boilerplate by 70%+.
03
Hardhat: EVM Ecosystem Dominance
Tooling & Plugin Ecosystem: Integrates seamlessly with 300+ plugins (e.g., @nomiclabs/hardhat-ethers, hardhat-deploy) and services like Alchemy, Tenderly, and Etherscan. This matters for developers leveraging the mature Ethereum toolchain and existing Solidity knowledge.
04
Hardhat: Advanced Testing & Debugging
Console Logging & Stack Traces: console.log in Solidity and precise error traces streamline debugging. Combined with forking mainnet (e.g., forking Ethereum at block 18,000,000), this matters for complex DeFi protocol testing and security audits.
05
Starport: Limited EVM Support
Cosmos-Centric Design: Primarily for Cosmos SDK's Go modules. While EVM support exists via Ethermint, it's a secondary layer. This matters for teams requiring deep, native EVM compatibility and access to all Hardhat plugins.
06
Hardhat: Chain-Agnostic Overhead
No Native Chain Orchestration: You build smart contracts, not blockchains. Deploying a standalone chain requires additional infrastructure (e.g., Ganache, Anvil). This matters for projects needing a sovereign execution environment or custom consensus.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Cosmos Starport for Appchains
Verdict: The definitive choice for sovereign, IBC-connected chains. Strengths: Starport provides a full-stack framework for launching a Cosmos SDK-based blockchain with Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC) enabled by default. It automates genesis, validator setup, and chain upgrades. This is ideal for projects like Osmosis or Injective that require custom governance, fee markets, and native interoperability. The ecosystem offers proven modules for staking, slashing, and governance. Limitations: You are committing to the Cosmos ecosystem's tooling (CosmWasm, Tendermint Core) and must manage your own validator set and security.
Hardhat Starter Kits for Appchains
Verdict: Not applicable. Hardhat is a development environment for EVM-based smart contracts, not for launching standalone blockchains. For an EVM-compatible appchain (e.g., using Polygon Edge or Avalanche Subnets), you would use Hardhat for contract development but require separate chain deployment tooling.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Cosmos Starport and Hardhat Starter Kits is a foundational decision that hinges on your target ecosystem and architectural philosophy.
Cosmos Starport excels at launching sovereign, interoperable blockchains via the Cosmos SDK and IBC protocol. Its primary strength is providing a full-stack framework for building application-specific blockchains (AppChains) with built-in governance, staking, and cross-chain communication. For example, projects like Osmosis and Juno Network leveraged this model to achieve high TPS (thousands) tailored to their specific DeFi and smart contract needs, bypassing the congestion and shared execution environment of general-purpose chains.
Hardhat Starter Kits take a different approach by optimizing for smart contract development and deployment on existing EVM-compatible chains like Ethereum, Arbitrum, or Polygon. This strategy results in a trade-off: you gain immediate access to massive liquidity (Ethereum's ~$50B+ DeFi TVL) and a mature tooling ecosystem (OpenZeppelin, The Graph, Etherscan), but you operate within the constraints (e.g., gas fees, block space competition) of the underlying L1/L2.
The key trade-off: If your priority is sovereignty, customizability, and building a dedicated chain with native interoperability, choose Starport. If you prioritize rapid deployment, leveraging existing Ethereum liquidity, and a battle-tested EVM developer ecosystem, choose a Hardhat-based kit. Your choice fundamentally dictates whether you are building a new blockchain or a premier dApp on an existing one.
ENQUIRY
Build the
future.
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