zkSync excels at providing a familiar and accessible developer experience by prioritizing EVM compatibility. Its zkSync Era SDK supports Solidity and Vyper, allowing developers to deploy existing smart contracts with minimal modifications. This is backed by a robust tooling suite including Hardhat plugins, a native block explorer, and a faucet, which has contributed to its rapid adoption, surpassing $1.2B in TVL and fostering a large ecosystem of DeFi protocols like SyncSwap and Maverick Protocol.
LABS
Comparisons
zkSync vs StarkNet: Developer SDKs
A technical comparison of zkSync's zksync-ethers and StarkNet's starknet.js SDKs, analyzing language support, tooling, fees, and ecosystem for engineering leaders.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction
A technical breakdown of zkSync and StarkNet's developer SDKs, focusing on language support, tooling maturity, and the trade-offs between developer experience and ecosystem potential.
StarkNet takes a different approach by championing a purpose-built, high-performance stack with its native smart contract language, Cairo. This strategy results in a steeper initial learning curve but unlocks superior scalability and the ability to write more complex, efficient logic. Its StarkNet SDK for JavaScript/TypeScript and the Cairo language server provide powerful, albeit more niche, tools. This focus has attracted ambitious projects like dYdX V4 and StarkEx-based validiums, which process millions of transactions.
The key trade-off: If your priority is rapid deployment, EVM compatibility, and leveraging existing Solidity talent, choose zkSync. Its mature SDK and toolchain minimize migration friction. If you prioritize maximizing scalability for novel, compute-intensive applications and are willing to invest in learning Cairo, choose StarkNet. Its SDK is the gateway to a more performant, albeit less conventional, development paradigm.
tldr-summary
zkSync vs StarkNet: Developer SDKs
TL;DR: Key Differentiators
A direct comparison of the core developer experience and tooling philosophies for two leading ZK-Rollups.
01
zkSync: Developer Velocity
EVM-Equivalence Focus: zkSync Era's LLVM-based compiler supports Solidity and Vyper with minimal changes, enabling faster porting of existing dApps. This matters for teams migrating from Ethereum Mainnet or other EVM chains who prioritize speed to market.
>95%
Solidity Compatibility
04
StarkNet: Provable Computation
STARK Proof System: Offers greater scalability and quantum resistance. The toolchain (Cairo, Starknet Remix, Voyager) is built for verifiable computation. This matters for institutions and protocols where maximum security and long-term proof robustness are non-negotiable requirements.
Quantum-Resistant
Proof Security
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
zkSync vs StarkNet: Developer SDK Feature Matrix
Direct comparison of developer tools, languages, and ecosystem support for building on zk-rollups.
| Metric / Feature | zkSync Era | StarkNet |
|---|---|---|
Primary Smart Contract Language | Solidity, Vyper | Cairo |
Native Account Abstraction Support | ||
SDK Language Coverage | JavaScript, Python, Java, Go | JavaScript, Python |
Local Testing Framework | zkSync CLI (Hardhat plugin) | StarkNet CLI (Cairo test runner) |
Mainnet Production Ready | ||
Formal Verification Tooling | ||
On-Chain Proof Verification Cost | ~500k gas | ~600k gas |
Native Bridge SDK |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
zkSync vs StarkNet: Developer SDKs
A data-driven comparison of the two leading ZK-Rollup SDKs. Choose based on your protocol's specific needs for speed, cost, and ecosystem.
01
zkSync SDK: Developer Experience
Familiar EVM tooling: Uses Solidity/Vyper with minimal changes, leveraging Hardhat and Foundry. This matters for teams migrating from Ethereum or other EVM L2s who need to deploy in days, not months.
~90%
EVM Opcode Parity
02
zkSync SDK: Time-to-Market
Faster proof generation: ZK-SNARK circuits are optimized for general compute, offering sub-10 minute finality for most dApps. This matters for consumer applications where user experience depends on fast transaction confirmation.
< 10 min
Typical Finality
03
StarkNet SDK: Scalability & Cost
Superior TPS & lower fees: STARK proofs offer better scalability long-term, with theoretical TPS in the thousands and consistently lower fees for complex transactions. This matters for high-throughput DeFi protocols and on-chain games.
$0.01-0.05
Avg. Complex Tx Cost
04
StarkNet SDK: Innovation & Customization
Cairo-native development: While steeper learning curve, Cairo allows for custom primitives and optimized logic impossible in EVM. This matters for novel DeFi primitives, autonomous worlds, and protocols needing maximum performance.
05
zkSync SDK: Ecosystem Lock-in
Centralized sequencer & upgrade keys: The Matter Labs team controls critical infrastructure. This matters for protocols prioritizing maximum decentralization and censorship resistance over pure performance.
06
StarkNet SDK: Learning Curve
Cairo language barrier: Requires learning a non-EVM language (Cairo) and new toolchains. This matters for teams with tight deadlines or predominantly Solidity talent, increasing initial development time.
2-3x
Longer Dev Onboarding
pros-cons-b
zkSync Era vs StarkNet
StarkNet SDK: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs choosing a ZK-Rollup development stack.
02
zkSync Era SDK: Cost Predictability
Paymaster & Account Abstraction First: Native SDK support for sponsoring transaction fees via ERC-4337 and custom paymasters. This enables gasless UX and fixed-price operations, critical for consumer dApps. The system contracts are directly callable, simplifying economic modeling for applications like gaming or social feeds.
04
StarkNet SDK: Long-Term Flexibility
Provable Compute & Customizability: Cairo allows developers to define custom cryptographic primitives and data structures (e.g., verifiable ML). The starknet.js library provides low-level control over account implementations. This is essential for protocol architects building novel applications like on-chain gaming engines or privacy-preserving identity systems.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Which SDK
zkSync for DeFi
Verdict: The pragmatic choice for established protocols seeking liquidity and composability. Strengths:
- High TVL & Ecosystem: Leading L2 for DeFi with deep liquidity in protocols like SyncSwap, Maverick, and zkSwap Finance.
- EVM Compatibility: Near-perfect Solidity/Vyper compatibility via zkEVM, enabling easy porting of existing dApps (e.g., Uniswap V3).
- Proven Security: Inherits Ethereum's security via validity proofs with a battle-tested zk-rollup architecture. Considerations: Transaction fees, while low, are slightly higher than StarkNet's.
StarkNet for DeFi
Verdict: The high-throughput, cost-optimized engine for novel, computation-heavy DeFi primitives. Strengths:
- Ultra-Low Fees: Cairo VM's efficiency yields the lowest transaction costs for complex operations, ideal for perps/options.
- Unmatched Scalability: Higher theoretical TPS (90-180) for high-frequency applications like on-chain order books.
- Innovation Hub: Native account abstraction and custom logic enable novel designs (e.g., zkLend, Nostra). Considerations: Requires learning Cairo; smaller, though growing, DeFi TVL compared to zkSync.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
Choosing between zkSync and StarkNet's SDKs is a strategic decision between developer velocity and long-term scalability.
zkSync excels at developer onboarding and rapid deployment due to its EVM-compatible Solidity/Vyper support and familiar Hardhat/Foundry tooling. This focus on accessibility has driven significant adoption, with the network processing over 100 million transactions and securing over $800M in TVL. The zksync-ethers SDK provides a near-seamless transition for Ethereum developers, making it the pragmatic choice for teams prioritizing time-to-market and leveraging existing Solidity expertise.
StarkNet takes a different approach by championing its purpose-built Cairo language and native account abstraction. This strategy results in superior long-term performance and flexibility for novel applications, as evidenced by its ability to handle complex computations for dApps like dYdX v4. However, the trade-off is a steeper learning curve. Developers must master Cairo and its unique toolchain, which can increase initial development time but unlocks greater optimization potential for high-throughput, custom logic.
The key trade-off: If your priority is developer velocity, EVM compatibility, and deploying existing Solidity code quickly, choose zkSync. Its ecosystem tools and familiar paradigms minimize friction. If you prioritize maximizing scalability for a novel application, require Cairo's performance benefits, or are building from scratch with a forward-looking stack, choose StarkNet. Its architecture is built for the next generation of high-complexity dApps.
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