OP Stack excels at developer velocity and familiarity through its Bedrock architecture. Its integration with Hardhat is mature, leveraging the standard hardhat-deploy plugin and @eth-optimism/plugins for seamless contract deployment to L2. For example, developers can use the same Solidity tooling and testing frameworks with minimal configuration, a key reason why chains like Base and Zora achieved rapid mainnet launches. The ecosystem's focus on EVM-equivalence means your existing Hardhat workflows for mainnet Ethereum largely work out-of-the-box on an OP Chain.
LABS
Comparisons
Hardhat Integration: OP Stack vs ZK Stack
A technical comparison of Hardhat development experience, plugin ecosystems, and deployment workflows for Optimism's OP Stack and zkSync's ZK Stack rollup frameworks.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Hardhat Integration Battle for Rollup Supremacy
A technical breakdown of how OP Stack and ZK Stack integrate with Hardhat, defining the developer experience for building custom L2s.
ZK Stack takes a different approach by prioritizing sovereignty and cryptographic security. Its integration, centered on zkSync Era's tooling, requires adopting its custom zkEVM compiler (zksolc) and Hardhat plugin (@matterlabs/hardhat-zksync). This results in a steeper initial learning curve but unlocks native account abstraction and advanced cryptographic primitives. The trade-off is a more specialized toolchain that offers superior finality and data compression, as evidenced by zkSync Era's ability to batch thousands of transactions into a single proof for ~$0.01 average fee.
The key trade-off: If your priority is speed to market, maximum EVM compatibility, and leveraging a vast existing toolchain (e.g., Foundry, Tenderly), choose OP Stack. If you prioritize ultimate scalability, cryptographic security guarantees, and are building applications that benefit from native account abstraction or future-proofing for ZK-native features, choose ZK Stack. Your decision hinges on whether you value developer ecosystem maturity or architectural frontier.
tldr-summary
Hardhat Integration: OP Stack vs ZK Stack
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A direct comparison of developer experience, tooling maturity, and architectural trade-offs when building with Hardhat.
01
Choose OP Stack for Speed & Familiarity
Mature, battle-tested workflow: Hardhat's @nomicfoundation/hardhat-optimism plugin offers seamless integration with the OP Stack's L2 sequencer and standard EVM equivalence. This matters for teams prioritizing rapid deployment and leveraging existing Solidity knowledge with minimal friction.
~5 min
Devnet Spin-up
02
Choose OP Stack for Cost-Effective Testing
Native support for fraud proofs & dispute testing: The Hardhat plugin integrates with the op-challenger and dispute game contracts, enabling you to test the core security model locally. This matters for protocols where validating the entire fraud-proof flow is a non-negotiable security requirement before mainnet deployment.
03
Choose ZK Stack for Custom Prover Integration
Deep control over the proving pipeline: While more complex, ZK Stack's architecture allows Hardhat tasks to be tailored for custom proving circuits, witness generation, and prover configuration (e.g., using Boojum). This matters for teams building application-specific chains (appchains) that require specialized proving logic or privacy features.
04
Choose ZK Stack for Native Bridging & Finality Testing
First-class L1<>L2 messaging simulation: Hardhat environments for ZK Stack (like zkSync Era's) are built to test the full lifecycle of contract deployment, bridging, and state finality via validity proofs. This matters for DeFi protocols and cross-chain applications where secure, verifiable asset transfers are critical.
OP STACK VS ZK STACK
Hardhat Integration Feature Matrix
Direct comparison of Hardhat integration for building on Optimism and zkSync Era.
| Metric / Feature | OP Stack (Optimism) | ZK Stack (zkSync Era) |
|---|---|---|
Native Hardhat Network Support | ||
Custom Network Configuration | via hardhat.config.js | via zksync-cli or plugin |
Primary Hardhat Plugin | @nomicfoundation/hardhat-verify | @matterlabs/hardhat-zksync |
Local Devnet Setup Time | < 1 min | ~5 min |
Contract Verification | Etherscan-compatible | zkSync Era Explorer |
Gas Estimation in Hardhat | Standard EVM | L1-L2 fee abstraction |
Mainnet Forking Support |
pros-cons-a
DEVELOPER TOOLING COMPARISON
OP Stack Hardhat Integration: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for teams choosing between Optimism's OP Stack and zkSync's ZK Stack for Hardhat-based development.
02
OP Stack: EVM-Equivalence Simplicity
Seamless dev experience: OP Stack's EVM-equivalent architecture means Hardhat scripts, tests, and plugins (like hardhat-ethers) work with minimal modification. This reduces migration friction for Solidity teams and leverages the entire Hardhat plugin ecosystem without custom adapters.
04
ZK Stack: Future-Proof Architecture
Hyperchain flexibility: ZK Stack's vision for a network of ZK-powered L3s (Hyperchains) is baked into its tooling. Hardhat plugins are designed for multi-chain deployment scenarios from day one. This matters for enterprise or gaming studios planning to deploy their own app-specific chain with customizable data availability.
05
OP Stack Con: Centralized Sequencing Dependency
Sequencer control: Most OP Stack chains rely on a single, centralized sequencer (often the core team). Hardhat forks for testing are straightforward, but production deployments inherit this bottleneck. This is a trade-off for teams that value simplicity over decentralization in the short term.
06
ZK Stack Con: Steeper Learning Curve
ZK-specific complexity: Developers must understand ZK-circuits, proof generation times, and custom precompiles. The Hardhat plugin, while robust, requires learning new concepts like gasPerPubdata. This increases initial setup time and is less ideal for teams with tight deadlines or primarily EVM-native expertise.
pros-cons-b
OP STACK VS ZK STACK
ZK Stack Hardhat Integration: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs choosing a development framework.
01
OP Stack: Mature Developer Experience
Proven tooling and extensive documentation: The OP Stack's Hardhat plugin (@eth-optimism/hardhat-optimism) is battle-tested with 1M+ downloads. It offers seamless deployment to OP Mainnet, Base, and other L2s with minimal configuration. This matters for teams prioritizing speed to market and leveraging a stable ecosystem of tools like Foundry and Tenderly.
02
OP Stack: Lower Development Complexity
No ZK proof system overhead: Developers work with a familiar EVM environment. The stack uses optimistic rollup mechanics, meaning you don't need to manage circuit logic, proof generation, or specialized trust assumptions. This reduces the learning curve and is ideal for general-purpose dApps migrating from Ethereum L1.
03
ZK Stack: Native ZK Circuit Testing
First-class support for ZK primitives: The ZK Stack's Hardhat plugin (@matterlabs/hardhat-zksync) integrates directly with zkSync Era's LLVM compiler and SDK. It allows for testing of custom precompiles and zkEVM-specific opcodes, which is critical for protocols building advanced privacy features or validity-proof-based logic.
04
ZK Stack: Superior Finality & Security
Instant cryptographic finality post-proof: Transactions achieve finality in minutes (~1 hour for OP Stack's challenge window). The stack's security relies on cryptographic validity proofs instead of social/economic games. This is non-negotiable for high-value DeFi, institutional, or cross-chain bridge applications where withdrawal guarantees are paramount.
05
OP Stack: Higher Gas Cost Predictability
EVM-equivalent gas estimation: Gas costs on OP Stack chains closely mirror Ethereum L1, making fee forecasting straightforward. The L2 fee is a simple function of L1 data cost. This simplifies budgeting for high-frequency trading or social dApps where user experience depends on stable, predictable transaction costs.
06
ZK Stack: Built-in Account Abstraction
Native AA SDK and paymaster integration: The Hardhat tooling includes utilities for testing sponsored transactions, batch operations, and custom signature schemes via the zkSync Era Account Abstraction stack. This is a decisive advantage for projects focused on mass adoption, onboarding non-crypto users, or complex multi-step protocols.
HARDHAT INTEGRATION
Technical Deep Dive: Plugin Architecture and Testing Fidelity
A critical analysis of how OP Stack and ZK Stack integrate with the Hardhat development environment, focusing on plugin ecosystems, local testing capabilities, and developer experience.
OP Stack currently has more mature and extensive Hardhat plugin support. The @nomicfoundation/hardhat-verify and community plugins for L1-L2 message passing are well-established. ZK Stack's plugin ecosystem, particularly for zkSync Era, is rapidly evolving with tools like @matterlabs/hardhat-zksync but is newer and more specialized for zero-knowledge proving. For teams prioritizing a battle-tested plugin suite, OP Stack is the safer choice.
HARDHAT INTEGRATION PRIORITIES
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Stack
OP Stack for Speed & Cost
Verdict: Superior for rapid prototyping and high-throughput, low-fee applications. Strengths:
- Faster Development: Optimistic rollups are conceptually simpler. The fraud proof system is easier to simulate and test locally with Hardhat's forked mainnet and console.log capabilities.
- Lower Gas on L2: Transaction fees are typically 80-90% cheaper than Ethereum mainnet, crucial for user-facing dApps.
- Proven Tooling: Seamless integration with existing Hardhat plugins for Etherscan verification, deployment scripts, and testing frameworks used by Base and Optimism. Trade-off: You accept a 7-day withdrawal delay to mainnet and the security model of fraud proofs.
ZK Stack for Speed & Cost
Verdict: Competitive on cost, but development iteration is slower. Best for applications where near-instant finality is a product requirement. Strengths:
- Instant Finality: State updates are finalized in minutes, not days. This is critical for exchanges (e.g., dYdX v4) or real-time gaming.
- Comparable Low Fees: zkEVMs like zkSync Era and Polygon zkEVM offer fee structures competitive with OP Stack. Trade-off: ZK circuit development and proving is complex. Testing is more involved, and contract size limits can be stricter, requiring more development time.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between OP Stack and ZK Stack for Hardhat integration is a strategic decision between pragmatic speed and cryptographic finality.
OP Stack excels at developer velocity and ecosystem maturity because it leverages the battle-tested Optimism Bedrock architecture and a pragmatic fraud-proving mechanism. For example, its mainnet deployments like Base and OP Mainnet have achieved over 90% uptime and support a TVL exceeding $7B, providing a stable, well-documented environment for rapid dApp deployment. The @eth-optimism/hardhat-deploy-config plugin offers a streamlined workflow for configuring L1 and L2 contracts, significantly reducing integration friction.
ZK Stack takes a fundamentally different approach by prioritizing cryptographic security and near-instant finality via validity proofs. This results in a trade-off of higher initial computational overhead and a more complex proving setup, but delivers unparalleled trust assumptions. Projects like zkSync Era and Polygon zkEVM, built with this stack, achieve finality in minutes versus the 7-day challenge window of Optimistic Rollups, a critical metric for exchanges and high-value DeFi protocols requiring fast, secure withdrawals.
The key trade-off: If your priority is rapid iteration, lower gas costs for users, and leveraging a vast EVM-compatible toolchain, choose OP Stack. Its integration with Hardhat via the Optimism plugins is the most straightforward path to production. If you prioritize maximizing security, achieving fastest possible finality, and building applications where cryptographic guarantees are non-negotiable, choose ZK Stack. Be prepared for a steeper integration curve with tools like hardhat-zksync and managing prover infrastructure, but you gain a future-proof, trust-minimized foundation.
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