Cosmos SDK vs Arbitrum One: Launch Timeline

Build and launch your own blockchain: The SDK provides the framework to launch a standalone, application-specific chain (appchain) with its own validator set and governance. This matters for protocols needing maximum sovereignty over fees, security, and upgrades, like dYdX v4 or Injective.

Longer time-to-market: Launching a sovereign chain requires bootstrapping validators, establishing economic security, and building cross-chain bridges (IBC). This typically takes 6-12+ months of dedicated development. This matters for teams with the resources for a long-term infrastructure build.

Deploy a smart contract in days: Use existing EVM tooling (Hardhat, Foundry) to deploy dApps to a live, high-security rollup. Leverage Arbitrum's existing validator set, token (ARB), and bridge. This matters for rapid iteration and teams prioritizing speed, like GMX or Radiant Capital.

Dependent on L1 and L2 governance: Your chain's liveness and upgrade path are tied to Ethereum's security and Arbitrum DAO decisions. You also compete for block space in a shared environment. This matters for protocols accepting trade-offs of sovereignty for immediate access to $18B+ TVL and 500+ dApps.

Custom chain development: Building an appchain from scratch requires implementing consensus (CometBFT), IBC, and custom modules. This typically takes 6-12+ months for a production-ready chain. This matters for protocols needing full sovereignty over their stack, like dYdX v4 or Celestia.

L2 deployment in weeks: Fork an existing L2 stack (Arbitrum Nitro) or use a rollup-as-a-service provider (e.g., Conduit, Caldera) for deployment in under a month. This matters for teams prioritizing speed-to-market and leveraging Ethereum's liquidity and security immediately.

Control over upgrades: Once launched, your chain's upgrade timeline is governed by your validator set, not a shared L1 sequencer. This matters for protocols with aggressive feature schedules (e.g., frequent major protocol upgrades) that cannot wait for L1 governance.

Sequencer and upgrade dependencies: Protocol upgrades and sequencer performance are tied to Arbitrum DAO governance and Ethereum L1 finality. Major upgrades (e.g., BOLD) require community approval. This matters for teams who prefer to avoid shared infrastructure governance overhead.

Full control over chain governance and upgrades: You own the validator set and can fork the chain without permission. This is critical for protocols like Osmosis or dYdX Chain that require custom fee markets and governance models.

Timeline: 2-6 months for a production-ready, secure chain with IBC integration, depending on customization.

High initial bootstrap effort: You must recruit and incentivize a validator set (often 100+ nodes) for security. Requires deep integration work for IBC connections to access liquidity from chains like Juno or Celestia. This matters if your core team is small but you need ultimate sovereignty.

Launch in weeks, not months: Deploy a smart contract using Arbitrum Orbit or Stylus. Leverage the existing $18B+ Arbitrum One TVL and security of Ethereum from day one. Ideal for GMX-style perp DApps or Treasure gaming ecosystems that need fast time-to-market.

Bound by L1/L2 governance: Upgrades and core protocol changes (e.g., fee mechanics) require coordination with Arbitrum DAO or depend on Ethereum's consensus. Throughput is capped by the parent chain's capacity. Choose this for applications where EVM compatibility and existing user base outweigh the need for full sovereignty.