Hop Protocol vs zkSync Bridge zkSync Bridge leads by 9 points.
zkSync Bridge scores 9 points above Hop Protocol, which no longer operates (since 2026-10-23) and scores zero on the criteria block. Hop Protocol ranks #18 and zkSync Bridge #13 of 18 published bridges. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
HOHop Protocol41
vs
zkSync Bridge50
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #18 and #13 of 18
No longer operatingEligibilityoperatingsunset 2026-10-23—+26.0for zkSync Bridge
Net of the terms+46.3
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread−1.1
Reproduced gap+45.2
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below5041+9.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
EvidenceEvidence evidence high vs evidence low — how well each score is supported, not the score itself
zkSync Bridge's lead rests on lighter criteria: Hop Protocol is ahead on route coverage, which carries more weight (28) than any criterion zkSync Bridge leads on (26).
Hop Protocol no longer operates (since 2026-10-23) and is kept for reference: the engine zeroes its criteria block, whatever its cells say.
A floor bound on one row means the criterion arithmetic does not reproduce the displayed gap exactly.
zkSync BridgeScore 50Native canonical bridge for Ethereum ↔ zkSync EraStrength: Trust — 8/10Watch-out: Smaller dapp ecosystem than the largest L2sHop ProtocolScore 41Withdrawn: the Ethereum-rollup bridge whose site now serves a gambling page and whose app and route service are downStrength: Nothing — Hop is not operating; it was withdrawn on 23 October 2026Watch-out: Withdrawn 23 October 2026. On that day hop.exchange (and www.hop.exchange) served an Indonesian slot-gambling page titled "JUDIMPO Situs Judi Mpo Slot 10k dengan Peluang Maxwin Terbaik", app.hop.exchange answered HTTP 400 "unexpected error" and the route API api.hop.exchange/v1/available-routes answered HTTP 530; the same three surfaces had already failed on 2026-09-30. Do not follow hop.exchange: it is not Hop
Quick facts
At a glance
FactHop ProtocolzkSync Bridge
PricingSnapshotWithdrawn 23 October 2026 (hop.exchange serves a gambling page; app and route API down), so no current price exists. Last read, kept for the record: Hop user docs, "Fees" (docs.hop.exchange/basics/fees, fetched 30 September 2026; the page reads "Last updated 2 years ago"): "3. Bonder fee (0.05-0.30%)", AMM swap fees of "0.01% - 0.04%" per swap ("L2 <> L2 -> 0.02% - 0.08% swap fees (because two swaps)"), destination gas, and "To prevent spamming there is a minimum fee of $0.25 per Hop transfer." These are documentation figures only: on the same date app.hop.exchange answered HTTP 400 "unexpected error", the quote API api.hop.exchange returned a Cloudflare origin-DNS error, explorer.hop.exchange returned a Netlify "Site not found" page and hop.exchange served an unrelated gambling page, so no live Hop price could be read.ZKsync docs, "Bridging assets" (docs.zksync.io/zksync-protocol/rollup/bridging-assets, fetched 30 September 2026): no bridge fee is stated on that page; withdrawals carry a time cost - "To provide additional security, withdrawals in ZKsync Chains are delayed for 3 hours" - and the finality page (docs.zksync.io/zksync-protocol/rollup/finality) adds that proof generation "typically takes about an hour". The ZKsync Bridge front end (portal.zksync.io/bridge, titled "ZKsync Bridge | Transfer funds between ZKsync and Ethereum") renders client-side, so no live quote was read.
Asset coverageEditorialRollup-specific bridge movement across supported token routesETH and registered ERC-20s
Region fitSnapshotus, europe, globalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
HO
Hop Protocol
41#18 of 18
Pick it when
Pick Hop Protocol if route coverage matters most — it scores 3/10 to zkSync Bridge's 1/10 there (weight 28).
Strength
Nothing — Hop is not operating; it was withdrawn on 23 October 2026
Tradeoff
Withdrawn 23 October 2026. On that day hop.exchange (and www.hop.exchange) served an Indonesian slot-gambling page titled "JUDIMPO Situs Judi Mpo Slot 10k dengan Peluang Maxwin Terbaik", app.hop.exchange answered HTTP 400 "unexpected error" and the route API api.hop.exchange/v1/available-routes answered HTTP 530; the same three surfaces had already failed on 2026-09-30. Do not follow hop.exchange: it is not Hop
zkSync Bridge
50#13 of 18
Leads
Pick it when
Pick zkSync Bridge if trust matters most — it scores 8/10 to Hop Protocol's 5/10 there (weight 26).
Strength
Trust — 8/10
Tradeoff
Smaller dapp ecosystem than the largest L2s
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
HOHop Protocol
Choose Hop Protocol if route coverage matters most
Route coverage: 3/10 against 1/10 for zkSync Bridge (weight 28)
Hop ProtocolScore 41Withdrawn: the Ethereum-rollup bridge whose site now serves a gambling page and whose app and route service are downStrength: Nothing — Hop is not operating; it was withdrawn on 23 October 2026Watch-out: Withdrawn 23 October 2026. On that day hop.exchange (and www.hop.exchange) served an Indonesian slot-gambling page titled "JUDIMPO Situs Judi Mpo Slot 10k dengan Peluang Maxwin Terbaik", app.hop.exchange answered HTTP 400 "unexpected error" and the route API api.hop.exchange/v1/available-routes answered HTTP 530; the same three surfaces had already failed on 2026-09-30. Do not follow hop.exchange: it is not Hop
zkSync BridgeLeads
Choose zkSync Bridge if trust matters most
Trust: 8/10 against 5/10 for Hop Protocol (weight 26)
Route clarity: 6/10 against 4/10 for Hop Protocol (weight 24)
Transfer speed: 5/10 against 4/10 for Hop Protocol (weight 22)
zkSync BridgeScore 50Native canonical bridge for Ethereum ↔ zkSync EraStrength: Trust — 8/10Watch-out: Smaller dapp ecosystem than the largest L2s
Criterion by criterion
Scorecard
Published criteria · weight in points of 868 of 8 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology
Route coverage
by 2 of 10weight 6.7 of 86Hop Protocol leads
Hop Protocol3/10 out of 10
zkSync Bridge1/10 out of 10
Route clarity
by 2 of 10weight 5.8 of 86zkSync Bridge leads
Hop Protocol4/10 out of 10
zkSync Bridge6/10 out of 10
Transfer speed
by 1 of 10weight 5.3 of 86zkSync Bridge leads
Hop Protocol4/10 out of 10
zkSync Bridge5/10 out of 10
Trust
by 3 of 10weight 6.2 of 86zkSync Bridge leads
Hop Protocol5/10 out of 10
zkSync Bridge8/10 out of 10
Score dimensions
weights sum to 86
The published score is five dimensions, each weighted for the category. "Published criteria" is the criteria block above; the other four are the engine's own terms — availability, friction, trust record, measured data. Each bar is one side's points out of that dimension's maximum; the weight beside the name is its points of the 86-point weighted total. The published criteria above can fill 24 of the block’s 30. A weight marked “constant here” belongs to a dimension every ranked product in the category holds at the same value: it still counts in the total, and it orders nothing here.
Availabilityweight 20 of 86
Hop Protocol14/20zkSync Bridge14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Hop Protocol0/30zkSync Bridge11.8/30
zkSync Bridge leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Hop Protocol2.7/10zkSync Bridge2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Hop Protocol3.2/8zkSync Bridge3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Hop Protocol6.9/18zkSync Bridge12.5/18
zkSync Bridge leads
Decision rulePublished order
Choose zkSync Bridge unless the term Hop Protocol leads on is the one you are buying.
Pick Hop Protocol if route coverage matters most — it scores 3/10 to zkSync Bridge's 1/10 there (weight 28).
The published order weighs every criterion the same way for everyone. To weigh them your way, run .
From the published order
Next best action
If this isn't your case
Other matchups worth comparing
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
Verification failure: an invalid state or transfer is accepted.
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Regulatory failure, Execution failure, Exit 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: Route coverage (28%), Route clarity (24%), Execution speed (22%).
Questions
Frequently asked questions
zkSync Bridge scores 9 points above Hop Protocol, which no longer operates (since 2026-10-23) and scores zero on the criteria block. Published scores, out of 100: Hop Protocol 41 (rank 18 of 18 bridges), zkSync Bridge 50 (rank 13 of 18).
Reviewed means both products compared here 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.
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — with rationale, tradeoffs, and a path to monitor the decision.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
