Appchains / L3s
Appchains / L3s evaluated across security inherited from settlement layer, permissionless exit without the operator, operators running the chain today, and measured liquidity on arrival.
9providers tracked
9ranked (methodology v2026.11.1)
12 November 2026Ranking snapshot
28 September 2026oldest read · due 12 NovIndependent. Evidence-based.We rank with a published method and sourced evidence. No one can pay to rank.How it works
Set your country and amount to see your costs ·
Your setup
What your country changes
Pick a country to see which appchains and L3s serve it. Nothing is hidden — any that does not is listed with that reason.- 🇺🇸 United States
- 🇨🇦 Canada
- 🇲🇽 Mexico
- 🇬🇧 United Kingdom
- 🇩🇪 Germany
- 🇫🇷 France
- 🇮🇹 Italy
- 🇪🇸 Spain
- 🇳🇱 Netherlands
- 🇨🇭 Switzerland
- 🇸🇪 Sweden
- 🇳🇴 Norway
This affects provider availability.
Requirements (0)
Preferences (0)
Preferences re-weight Fit for you, which needs your country.
More filters
Funding & access
9 providers match your requirements
Out of 9 ranked providers. 0 excluded.
What this ranks
Ranked here: appchains and L3s, each a chain of its own, for a reader about to deploy on one or bridge into it.Not ranked here: products that are not a chain of their own, and chains that are neither an appchain nor an L3.9 of the 9 assessed are ranked.Requirements narrow the list; they never change a published ChainChoice Score. How the ranking works
Abstract
How Abstract was chosen
Leads this ranking on Security inherited from settlement layerZK Stack L2
78 / 100 out of 100published score, #1 of all 9 worldwide
Evidence
High
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.Security inherited from settlement layerMeasured liquidity on arrival
Why it leads
- Abstract is 12 points ahead of dYdX Chain, mainly because it scores higher on its settlement security inherited and its permissionless exit.
- Best in this ranking on settlement security inherited (8/10; next 5/10)
- Ahead of dYdX Chain on settlement security inherited (+15.3 points) and permissionless exit (+4.7 points)
Tradeoff
Operator set today: 3 points below the best in this ranking
Share
#ProviderPriceCompare
2
Cosmos SDK appchain running a perpetuals...
66 / 100 out of 100
3
ZO
OP Stack L2
65 / 100 out of 100
4
Arbitrum Orbit L3
64 / 100 out of 100
5
Arbitrum Orbit AnyTrust L3
60 / 100 out of 100
6
Same score, not joint · ordered by weighted total (34.80 against 34.70)
Gaming chain
60 / 100 out of 100
7
Gaming chain on the Polygon stack
57 / 100 out of 100
8
SVM chain
51 / 100 out of 100
9
Arbitrum Orbit AnyTrust L3 on Base
43 / 100 out of 100
Degen Chain has shut down (Arbitrum Orbit AnyTrust L3 on Base that has shut down: L2BEAT archived it on 2026-09-01 and no batch has reached Base since 2026-09-15).
Compare providers (0)
See key differences in features, fees, security and more.
Settlement security inherited
Security inherited from settlement layer
35% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Settlement security inherited (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Abstract | 8 | 78 |
| Zora Network | 5 | 65 |
| ApeChain | 3 | 64 |
| Xai | 2 | 60 |
| dYdX Chain | 1 | 66 |
| Ronin | 1 | 60 |
| Immutable zkEVM | 1 | 57 |
| Eclipse | 1 | 51 |
| Degen Chain | 0 | 43 |
Permissionless exit
Permissionless exit without the operator
25% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Permissionless exit (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| ApeChain | 5 | 64 |
| Xai | 5 | 60 |
| Abstract | 4 | 78 |
| Zora Network | 4 | 65 |
| Ronin | 3 | 60 |
| dYdX Chain | 1 | 66 |
| Immutable zkEVM | 1 | 57 |
| Eclipse | 1 | 51 |
| Degen Chain | 0 | 43 |
Liquidity on arrival
Measured liquidity on arrival
20% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Liquidity on arrival (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| dYdX Chain | 8 | 66 |
| Abstract | 5 | 78 |
| Ronin | 5 | 60 |
| Immutable zkEVM | 5 | 57 |
| ApeChain | 2 | 64 |
| Zora Network | 1 | 65 |
| Xai | 1 | 60 |
| Eclipse | 1 | 51 |
| Degen Chain | 0 | 43 |
Operator set today
Operators running the chain today
20% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Operator set today (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| dYdX Chain | 7 | 66 |
| Abstract | 4 | 78 |
| Zora Network | 3 | 65 |
| ApeChain | 3 | 64 |
| Xai | 3 | 60 |
| Ronin | 3 | 60 |
| Immutable zkEVM | 3 | 57 |
| Eclipse | 2 | 51 |
| Degen Chain | 0 | 43 |
All 4 published criteria
Every ranked row’s score on each criterion, in the published order. Choose a column to order by it.
| Provider | ChainChoice Score | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Abstract | 8 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 78 |
| 2 | dYdX Chain | 1 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 66 |
| 3 | Zora Network | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 65 |
| 4 | ApeChain | 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 64 |
| 5 | Xai | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 60 |
| 6 | Ronin | 1 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 60 |
| 7 | Immutable zkEVM | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 57 |
| 8 | Eclipse | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 51 |
| 9 | Degen Chain | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43 |
How this ranking works
How firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and which appchains / L3s were assessed and left out.
FirmThis verdict holds under every one-point re-read
See the arithmetic
Every published criterion was moved up and down by one point and the ranking re-run. The same product came first each time. The published rankings file
Why this score4 published criteria · leads 1 of 4
Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap/10 out of 10Pts
Security inherited from settlement layer8.4·89.0
Permissionless exit without the operator6−143.2
Operators running the chain today4.8−342.6
Measured liquidity on arrival4.8−353.2
Σ methodology points17.9/32
Each bar is the score on that criterion’s own 0–10 scale, never rescaled to the pool. The dark line is the best any product here reached on that axis. Wt is the most the criterion can add to the 86-point weighted total. Pts is weight × score × 32; the sum is the methodology score, and each weighted point behind the leader costs 2.6 on the displayed score. how these are weighted
Why it ranks first
Why Abstract leads this category right now
ZK Stack L2 for consumer apps, settling to Ethereum with state diffs posted on L1. Strongest on security inherited from settlement layer (8/10): Abstract is a ZK Stack rollup that settles directly to Ethereum with live validity proofs and every state diff published on L1. Its Ethereum contract shows 92,628 of 92,630 committed batches proven. It is still Stage 0, because an emergency upgrade path has no delay. Weakest on permissionless exit without the operator (4/10): Users can queue transactions on Ethereum but cannot force them in. If the sequencer stops, the queue stops for everyone. Only whitelisted proposers post state roots, so withdrawals freeze if they fail, and the emergency upgrade path leaves no exit window. Published price: "Fees on Abstract therefore consist of both **off-chain** and **onchain** components", the offchain part a "Fixed cost (approximately \$0.001 per transaction)" and the onchain part "ActualFee = gasSpent * gasPrice" (docs.abs.xyz gas-fees page, fetched…
Best for
Security inherited from settlement layer — 8/10
Main tradeoff
Read 11 November 2026: Abstract shuts down on 15 December 2026. Its migration page states "All users will have until December 15th 2026 to migrate their assets off Abstract." Move your assets off before then: Abstract's terms (last updated 6 October 2026) state that when normal transaction processing ends, access to transfer assets remaining on Abstract "WILL END PERMANENTLY", and that "No post-discontinuation recovery process is promised."
Verify before signup
"Fees on Abstract therefore consist of both **off-chain** and **onchain** components", the offchain part a "Fixed cost (approximately \$0.001 per transaction)" and the onchain part "ActualFee = gasSpent * gasPrice" (docs.abs.xyz gas-fees page, fetched 28 September 2026). Worked example, not a published price: eth_gasPrice on api.mainnet.abs.xyz returned 0.04525 gwei at Abstract block 85,930,616 on 28 September 2026, so one 21,000-gas transfer costs 21000 x 0.04525e-9 = 0.00000095025 ETH, which at the ETH price of 2,644.08 US dollars returned by coins.llama.fi the same day is about 0.0025 US dollars (on 7 August 2026 the same transfer cost about 0.0018 US dollars at an ETH price of 1,915.24; the gas price is unchanged and the rise is the ETH price). Still the most expensive chain in this table to transact on, because it is the only one billing in ETH at a non-trivial gas price.
Recommendation summary
What should decide this category
If the sequencer stops or starts censoring you, which contract lets you withdraw without it — and is that contract actually deployed?
Is there any delay between an upgrade being signed and it taking effect, or can the contracts change under you in one block?
Of the value this chain reports as secured, how much is its own token, and how much can you trade against on arrival?
Quick picks
Strong options in this category
Start with the lead choice first, then use the shortlist only if you still need a challenger or stronger fit for a specific setup.
Best overall
Abstract
ZK Stack L2 for consumer apps, settling to Ethereum with state diffs posted on L1
ZK Stack L2 for consumer apps, settling to Ethereum with state diffs posted on L1. Strongest on security inherited from settlement layer (8/10): Abstract is a ZK Stack rollup that settles directly to Ethereum with live validity proofs and every state diff published on L1. Its Ethereum contract shows 92,628 of 92,630 committed batches proven. It is still Stage 0, because an emergency upgrade path has no delay. Weakest on permissionless exit without the operator (4/10): Users can queue transactions on Ethereum but cannot force them in. If the sequencer stops, the queue stops for everyone. Only whitelisted proposers post state roots, so withdrawals freeze if they fail, and the emergency upgrade path leaves no exit window. Published price: "Fees on Abstract therefore consist of both **off-chain** and **onchain** components", the offchain part a "Fixed cost (approximately \$0.001 per transaction)" and the onchain part "ActualFee = gasSpent * gasPrice" (docs.abs.xyz gas-fees page, fetched…
Best for: Security inherited from settlement layer — 8/10
Security inherited from settlement layer · weight 35%8/10Permissionless exit without the operator · weight 25%4/10Operators running the chain today · weight 20%4/10Measured liquidity on arrival · weight 20%5/10
Quick pick
dYdX Chain
Cosmos SDK appchain running a perpetuals orderbook on its own 21-validator proof-of-stake set
Cosmos SDK appchain running a perpetuals orderbook on its own 21-validator proof-of-stake set. Strongest on measured liquidity on arrival (8/10): dYdX Chain holds about 72.9 million US dollars of DeFi TVL on DefiLlama, more than six times any other chain in this table. DefiLlama's stablecoin index does not list the chain, so no stablecoin float is counted. Weakest on security inherited from settlement layer (1/10): dYdX Chain is a sovereign Cosmos SDK chain with no settlement contract on Ethereum, so it inherits nothing. L2BEAT's dYdX page covers only the retired v3 and states that none of it applies to v4. The chain's safety rests on its own 21-validator set. Published price: "Staking Rewards = Trading Fees + Gas Fees - Community Tax - Validator Commission" (docs.dydx.xyz Rewards, Fees and Parameters page, fetched 2026-09-28) — trading fees and gas both accrue to the chain's own validators and stakers rather than to a settlement…
Best for: Measured liquidity on arrival — 8/10
Security inherited from settlement layer · weight 35%1/10Permissionless exit without the operator · weight 25%1/10Operators running the chain today · weight 20%7/10Measured liquidity on arrival · weight 20%8/10
Quick pick
ZO
Zora Network
OP Stack L2 built for NFT minting, settling to Ethereum with all data posted on L1
OP Stack L2 built for NFT minting, settling to Ethereum with all data posted on L1. Strongest on security inherited from settlement layer (5/10): Zora publishes all its data on Ethereum, but its proof system is deployed and not working. The permissioned dispute game commits to a placeholder 0xdead prestate, so no dispute can be settled by execution, and security rests on the permissioned proposer. Weakest on measured liquidity on arrival (1/10): Zora's own product now runs on Base. DefiLlama counts about 46,700 US dollars of DeFi TVL on Zora Network, against about 5.8 million bridged in. About 82,900 USDzC circulates on the chain. Published price: Zora publishes no gas or fee page for the network. Its documentation index still describes the whole site as "Documentation for the ZORA Coins Protocol — a protocol for creating and trading ERC-20 media coins on Base." and lists no page about Zora Network…
Best for: Security inherited from settlement layer — 5/10
Security inherited from settlement layer · weight 35%5/10Permissionless exit without the operator · weight 25%4/10Operators running the chain today · weight 20%3/10Measured liquidity on arrival · weight 20%1/10
Quick pick
ApeChain
Arbitrum Orbit L3 for the ApeCoin ecosystem, settling to Arbitrum One with APE as gas
Arbitrum Orbit L3 for the ApeCoin ecosystem, settling to Arbitrum One with APE as gas. Strongest on permissionless exit without the operator (5/10): Anyone can force a transaction in from Arbitrum One, within 3 days at the L3 contract or up to 4 days end to end on L2BEAT. Anyone can also propose once the whitelisted proposers go inactive. The contracts are instantly upgradable, so there is no exit window. Weakest on measured liquidity on arrival (2/10): The APE token makes up 100% of ApeChain's value secured on L2BEAT (about 19.8 million), with zero ETH and zero stablecoins in the breakdown. DefiLlama counts about 3.1 million US dollars of DeFi TVL and 0.41 million of stablecoins. Published price: "ApeChain utilizes $APE as its native gas token." (docs.apechain.com, fetched 2026-09-28).
Best for: Permissionless exit without the operator — 5/10
Security inherited from settlement layer · weight 35%3/10Permissionless exit without the operator · weight 25%5/10Operators running the chain today · weight 20%3/10Measured liquidity on arrival · weight 20%2/10
Considered and not ranked
None left out by name
We assessed 9 products here and rank all 9. No product has been turned away by name; when one is, its name and the reason appear here. Evidence last read 28 September 2026.
What this ranking does not assess
- Contract failure: the code holding the funds is exploited.
- Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.
- Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.
These can still cost you money here; the ranking does not measure them, so a high place says nothing about them. Which criterion scores each family, and why the others do not apply, is in /data/risk-coverage.json.
Quantum exposure: which signature scheme each product here relies on, and what it has published about post-quantum readiness, as of 15 October 2026. Read the explainer. It changes no score.
How this ranking is built
Reviewed on security inherited from settlement layer, permissionless exit without the operator, operators running the chain today, and measured liquidity on arrival.
Data checked Sep 2026 · Independent rankings · We show our work
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means every product ranked on this page was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
Direct answer
What is the best appchain or L3 in 2026?
Abstract ranks #1 overall for appchains / L3s on ChainChoice. ZK Stack L2 for consumer apps, settling to Ethereum with state diffs posted on L1. It holds that rank under an affiliate-blind methodology scored across 4 published, weighted criteria — the code that ranks providers physically cannot read affiliate payouts (CI-enforced), so a payout can't move a rank. The verdict re-computes on every fee change, incident, or regulatory action; the full reasoning and the audit receipt are under Methodology.
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Verification failure: an invalid state or transfer is accepted.Scored by Security inherited from settlement layer · 35% (Abstract 8/10, dYdX Chain 1/10, Zora Network 5/10)Scored by Operators running the chain today · 20% (Abstract 4/10, dYdX Chain 7/10, Zora Network 3/10)
- Liveness failure: the operator stops, censors you or loses data.Scored by Permissionless exit without the operator · 25% (Abstract 4/10, dYdX Chain 1/10, Zora Network 4/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Execution failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Measured liquidity on arrival (20%).
FAQs
4 questions readers ask before choosing appchains / L3s.
Frequently asked
Questions people ask before choosing appchains
If a chain posts all its data to Ethereum, can I always exit without the operator?
No, and Zora Network is the clean counter-example. It publishes its data on Ethereum, but at Ethereum block 25,705,326 its OptimismPortal2 0x1a0ad011913A150f69f6A19DF447A0CfD9551054 returns respectedGameType() = 1 while the DisputeGameFactory 0xB0F15106fa1e473Ddb39790f197275BC979Aa37e returns gameImpls(0) = the zero address and gameImpls(1) a deployed contract — the permissionless fault dispute game has no implementation at all, so a user cannot create the game their own withdrawal would be proven against. Eclipse shows the same gap from the other side: its documentation describes a forced-inclusion mechanism, while L2Beat, reading the contracts, states "There is no mechanism to have transactions be included if the sequencer is down or censoring" and "Only the whitelisted proposers can publish state roots on L1, so in the event of failure the withdrawals are frozen." Publishing the data is a necessary condition for exit, never a sufficient one.
What is a challenge period worth if nobody waits it out?
Less than the number on the page suggests. Degen Chain advertises a 5d 14h challenge period. The NodeConfirmed logs on Base show nodes 15777, 15778, 15779 and 15780 created at Base blocks 49,664,057 / 49,666,059 / 49,667,880 / 49,669,780 and confirmed 303, 303, 304 and 304 blocks later — each roughly 241,616 blocks before its own deadline. Every one of those four confirmations was sent from the EOA 0x3cAF7ceF6B2aECA72102E8835325B26BF99FE9E0 through the Safe 0xc207cbc35dd3cd172059730380a45ae14eb0e403, and that Safe returns getThreshold() 1 with that EOA as its only owner. One key finalises the chain and the bridge honours it. ApeChain and Xai are the contrast: anyTrustFastConfirmer() is the zero address on both, and they carry 149 and 152 unconfirmed assertions — there the period is real, and so is the wait.
Is value secured the same as liquidity I can trade against?
Not remotely — across this set the two differ by up to four orders of magnitude, read on 2026-08-07. Degen Chain: 2,244,439.75 secured on L2Beat against $49.50 of DeFi TVL on DefiLlama. Xai: 544,929.7 secured against $6,424. Zora Network: 4,431,179 secured against $35,825. ApeChain makes the point a different way — L2Beat prints a warning that the APE token accounts for 100% of the value secured, and the breakdown behind it reads a total of 16,712,720 with canonical 0, ether 0, stablecoin 0 and btc 0. APE is also the gas token, so a holder's ability to transact and the asset backing the chain are the same position. That is why liquidity here is measured on arrival rather than read off the bridge.
Are these actually rollups?
Three of the largest names are called rollups or zkEVMs by their own marketing and something else by the neutral tracker. L2Beat classifies Immutable zkEVM as "a sidechain focused on gaming and powered by Polygon stack" and Eclipse as "a sidechain powered by the Solana Virtual Machine (SVM)". Ronin has no L2Beat project page at all — /scaling/projects/ronin, /roninchain and /ronin-chain each returned HTTP 404 on 2026-08-07 in a run where eleven other project slugs returned 200 — while Ronin's own documentation opens "Ronin is an Ethereum L2 built for gamified experiences and real-world crypto adoption." The label is marketing. What the settlement contracts actually do is the fact, and that is what the first criterion scores.
Free advisor·No signup needed
Still unsure? Get your best appchains pick
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — then review the evidence before deciding.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Best picks
Best appchains / L3s in 2026
Weighted on what the chain's state actually inherits from its settlement layer (35), whether you can withdraw without the operator (25), how many independent parties order and finalise transactions today (20), and what liquidity is measurably there when you arrive (20). The trade every appchain offers is control in exchange for borrowed security, and how much is really borrowed is what this comparison checks. Read on 2026-08-07, seven of the nine — ApeChain, Xai, Degen Chain, Zora Network, Abstract, Immutable zkEVM and Eclipse — carry L2Beat's finding that their contracts are instantly upgradable, so the exit window is None, and no exit window was found published for the other two either. That is why permissionless exit carries a quarter of the weight here rather than a footnote.
Best overall
Abstract
ZK Stack L2 for consumer apps, settling to Ethereum with state diffs posted on L1
Data checked Sep 2026
ZK Stack L2 for consumer apps, settling to Ethereum with state diffs posted on L1. Strongest on security inherited from settlement layer (8/10): Abstract is a ZK Stack rollup that settles directly to Ethereum with live validity proofs and every state diff published on L1. Its Ethereum contract shows 92,628 of 92,630 committed batches proven. It is still Stage 0, because an emergency upgrade path has no delay. Weakest on permissionless exit without the operator (4/10): Users can queue transactions on Ethereum but cannot force them in. If the sequencer stops, the queue stops for everyone. Only whitelisted proposers post state roots, so withdrawals freeze if they fail, and the emergency upgrade path leaves no exit window. Published price: "Fees on Abstract therefore consist of both **off-chain** and **onchain** components", the offchain part a "Fixed cost (approximately \$0.001 per transaction)" and the onchain part "ActualFee = gasSpent * gasPrice" (docs.abs.xyz gas-fees page, fetched…
Best for: Security inherited from settlement layer — 8/10
Browse this network
MS
Written and reviewed by Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research