ZK Stack excels at building high-throughput, EVM-compatible L2/L3 chains because it's a modular framework anchored by the battle-tested zkSync Era zkEVM. This specialization means developers can deploy Solidity/Vyper smart contracts with minimal friction, leveraging a mature ecosystem with over $750M in TVL and tools like Hardhat plugins. The focus on EVM equivalence provides a powerful on-ramp for existing Web3 teams.
LABS
Comparisons
ZK Stack vs Risc Zero's zkVM: zkEVM vs General-Purpose zkVM
A technical comparison between Matter Labs' ZK Stack for launching EVM-compatible zkRollups and Risc Zero's Bonsai platform for building custom, provable applications in any language. We analyze architecture, developer experience, and use-case fit.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Fork in the Zero-Knowledge Road
A foundational comparison between a specialized zkEVM framework and a general-purpose zkVM, defining the first major architectural choice for ZK application developers.
RISC Zero's zkVM takes a fundamentally different approach by providing a general-purpose, RISC-V based virtual machine for generating zero-knowledge proofs of arbitrary computation. This results in a trade-off: you sacrifice out-of-the-box EVM compatibility for unparalleled flexibility. Developers can write provable logic in Rust, C++, or other languages, enabling novel use cases like verifiable AI inference or custom state transitions that don't fit the EVM mold.
The key trade-off: If your priority is building a scalable, EVM-native blockchain or rollup with existing tooling and liquidity, choose ZK Stack. If you prioritize maximum flexibility for novel, non-EVM applications where you need to prove custom logic written in general-purpose languages, choose RISC Zero's zkVM. Your choice defines whether you are extending the Ethereum ecosystem or building a new, verifiable compute paradigm from scratch.
tldr-summary
ZK Stack vs Risc Zero zkVM
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance. ZK Stack offers a specialized zkEVM for Ethereum compatibility, while Risc Zero provides a general-purpose zkVM for arbitrary computation.
01
ZK Stack: EVM-Equivalent Scaling
Specific advantage: Full EVM bytecode compatibility via zkSync Era's zkEVM. This matters for Ethereum-native teams who need to migrate dApps (DeFi, NFTs) with minimal code changes and retain existing tooling (MetaMask, Hardhat).
02
ZK Stack: Integrated L2 Stack
Specific advantage: A full-stack framework (ZKsync Hyperchains) with shared security, native account abstraction, and a canonical bridge securing $1B+ TVL. This matters for protocols launching app-chains that require deep liquidity and fast, cheap transactions for end-users.
03
Risc Zero: General-Purpose zkVM
Specific advantage: Proves correctness of arbitrary Rust code via the RISC-V instruction set. This matters for off-chain compute like AI/ML inference, gaming logic, or custom cryptography where EVM constraints are a bottleneck.
04
Risc Zero: Proof Portability
Specific advantage: Zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) generated are chain-agnostic and can be verified on Ethereum, Cosmos, or Solana. This matters for cross-chain protocols and verifiable compute services that need to attest to computation results on multiple L1s.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
ZK Stack vs Risc Zero zkVM: zkEVM vs General-Purpose zkVM
Direct comparison of core architecture, performance, and ecosystem features for two leading zero-knowledge infrastructure approaches.
| Metric | ZK Stack (zkEVM) | Risc Zero (General-Purpose zkVM) |
|---|---|---|
Primary Architecture | zkEVM (Ethereum-equivalent) | RISC-V (General-purpose CPU) |
Proving System | zk-SNARKs (Plonky2, Boojum) | zk-STARKs (RISC-V Continuations) |
Developer Experience | Solidity/Vyper, EVM tooling | Rust, C++, Go (any language) |
Proving Time (Local) | ~10 min (for 12M gas block) | ~1-2 min (for 1B cycle program) |
Proof Verification On-Chain | Ethereum L1 (~500k gas) | Ethereum L1 (~300k gas) |
Native Interoperability | Ethereum L1 & L2s (via bridges) | Any chain (proof is chain-agnostic) |
Use Case Focus | High-throughput L2s, DeFi, dApps | Custom compute, oracles, coprocessors |
pros-cons-a
ZK Stack vs Risc Zero's zkVM
ZK Stack: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs between a specialized zkEVM framework and a general-purpose zkVM at a glance.
01
ZK Stack: EVM-Native Development
Specific advantage: Full EVM equivalence via zkSync Era. Developers can deploy existing Solidity/Vyper smart contracts with minimal changes, leveraging tools like Hardhat and Foundry. This matters for teams migrating dApps from Ethereum L1 or other EVM chains who prioritize developer velocity and ecosystem compatibility.
02
ZK Stack: High-Throughput L2/L3s
Specific advantage: Enables creation of sovereign zkRollups with shared security and liquidity via the ZK Stack's hyperchain architecture. Projects like GRVT and Cronos zkEVM use this for customizable, high-throughput chains (> 2,000 TPS per chain). This matters for protocols needing dedicated blockspace and governance, such as gaming or DeFi-specific chains.
03
ZK Stack: Limited VM Flexibility
Specific trade-off: Locked into the zkSync Era's zkEVM architecture. You cannot implement a non-EVM execution environment (e.g., Move, FuelVM, or a custom VM). This matters for projects that require novel state models or opcode sets not supported by the EVM, limiting innovation at the VM level.
04
Risc Zero: General-Purpose zkVM
Specific advantage: The RISC-V instruction set allows you to write provable code in any language that compiles to RISC-V (Rust, C++, Go, Solidity via the zkEVM adapter). This matters for building custom cryptographic protocols, verifiable ML, or bridging non-EVM chains where you need to prove arbitrary computation.
05
Risc Zero: Proof Portability & Interop
Specific advantage: Zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) generated by the zkVM are chain-agnostic. You can verify proofs on Ethereum, Cosmos, or Solana using the Bonsai proving service or the on-chain verifier. This matters for creating cross-chain attestations, verifiable off-chain compute (like Brevis, EZKL), or trust-minimized bridges.
06
Risc Zero: Higher Integration Complexity
Specific trade-off: Not a turnkey L2. You must design and secure your own state management, sequencing, and data availability layer if building a chain. This matters for teams that lack the resources for deep infrastructure work and prefer an integrated stack like ZK Stack's hyperchains or OP Stack's rollup client.
pros-cons-b
zkEVM vs General-Purpose zkVM
ZK Stack vs Risc Zero zkVM
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs choosing between a specialized zkEVM framework and a general-purpose zkVM.
01
ZK Stack: EVM-Native Development
Full EVM Equivalence: Enables direct deployment of Solidity/Vyper smart contracts with minimal changes. This matters for teams migrating from Ethereum L1 or other EVM chains, leveraging existing tooling like Hardhat, Foundry, and MetaMask. Proven Scale: Supports Polygon zkEVM, zkSync Era, and Linea, securing a combined TVL of over $1B.
02
ZK Stack: High-Throughput Rollups
Optimized for Rollups: Architecture is purpose-built for creating sovereign ZK-powered L2/L3 chains (Hyperchains) with shared security and liquidity. This matters for protocols needing dedicated, high-throughput execution environments (e.g., > 2,000 TPS per chain) with native cross-chain interoperability via the ZK Stack bridge.
03
Risc Zero zkVM: Language Agnostic
General-Purpose Proofs: Execute any code written in Rust, C++, or Go via the RISC-V instruction set. This matters for proving complex, non-smart-contract logic like machine learning inference (e.g., Giza, EZKL) or game state transitions outside the EVM paradigm.
04
Risc Zero zkVM: Custom Proof Integration
Modular Proof System: Generate ZK proofs for arbitrary computations and verify them on-chain via the Bonsai proving service or custom provers. This matters for teams needing to embed verifiable off-chain computation into any blockchain (Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos) as a verifiable co-processor.
05
ZK Stack Limitation: Ecosystem Lock-in
Vendor-Centric Tooling: Deep integration with the ZK Stack ecosystem (zkSync, etc.) can create dependency. This matters for teams seeking maximal chain sovereignty or those wanting to deploy proofs to non-EVM environments like Solana or Bitcoin L2s.
06
Risc Zero Limitation: EVM Overhead
No Native EVM: Requires building custom circuits or using higher-level frameworks (like zkEVM emulation layers) for EVM compatibility, adding development complexity. This matters for teams that prioritize rapid deployment of existing DeFi dApps over flexibility.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
ZK Stack for L2 Rollups
Verdict: The definitive choice for launching a sovereign zkEVM L2 or L3. Strengths: Full EVM equivalence via zkSync Era's battle-tested zkEVM circuit. Native account abstraction and hyperbridging for seamless interoperability. Inherits security from Ethereum L1 with ZK proofs. Optimized for high-throughput DeFi and high-value transactions. Considerations: You are committing to the Ethereum ecosystem and its tooling (Solidity/Vyper, Foundry/Hardhat).
RISC Zero's zkVM for L2 Rollups
Verdict: A specialized tool for novel, non-EVM virtual machines or custom state transitions. Strengths: Use Rust, C++, or Go to write your VM's logic, then prove its execution with the RISC-V-based zkVM. Ideal for building a zkRollup with a custom consensus algorithm, a gaming engine, or a privacy-focused VM that doesn't need EVM compatibility. Considerations: You must build your own client, state management, and bridge infrastructure from scratch.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A decisive comparison of the zkEVM-centric ZK Stack and the general-purpose RISC Zero zkVM, guiding infrastructure selection for high-stakes projects.
ZK Stack excels at building high-throughput, EVM-compatible L2/L3 chains because it leverages the battle-tested zkSync Era codebase and a specialized zkEVM prover. For example, zkSync Era mainnet consistently processes 100+ TPS with sub-$0.01 fees, demonstrating the stack's production readiness for DeFi and consumer dApps. Its native account abstraction and hyperbridges provide a full-stack solution for teams prioritizing Ethereum alignment and rapid developer onboarding.
RISC Zero's zkVM takes a fundamentally different approach by offering a RISC-V instruction set for general-purpose computation, decoupled from any specific blockchain. This results in superior flexibility—you can prove correctness for any code written in Rust, C++, or other languages—but requires integrating your own settlement and data availability layers. This trade-off makes it a powerful tool for novel use cases like verifiable AI inference or custom gaming logic, where EVM compatibility is not a constraint.
The key trade-off is between a turnkey, ecosystem-rich L2 framework and a versatile, low-level proving primitive. If your priority is launching a scalable, EVM-native blockchain with access to a mature toolchain (like Hardhat/Vyper) and existing liquidity, choose ZK Stack. If you prioritize maximal flexibility to build novel, verifiable off-chain compute or need to prove arbitrary programs for a non-EVM environment, choose RISC Zero's zkVM.
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