Skip to main content

Why Devs Choose Polymer

With Polymer, we enable the smart contracts you already use to be crosschain—a simpler, more flexible way to build multi-chain applications that puts developers first.

tip

With Polymer, developers can now treat interoperability as a byproduct of execution within their application contracts— not a separate architecture to manage.

Outdated Messaging​

Traditional messaging approach diagram

This approach involves:

  • Deploying source and destination contracts for every chain pair.
  • Integrating bridge-specific logic and OApp/gateway contracts.
  • Encoding application logic into payloads executed by the bridge.
  • Managing on-chain fee estimation using external oracles.
  • Parsing and executing data as dictated by the bridge protocol.

Drawbacks​

  • High engineering cost — weeks or even months to implement and debug.
  • Single-source-to-single-destination limitation — additional chains require more messages and more gas.
  • Infra overhead — fees estimations by bridges often exceed 10x of execution costs.
    • LZ typical fee: ~$0.30
    • HL typical fee: ~$1.0
  • Manual reconfiguration — adding new chains requires bridge updates on all existing instances.

Use Cases​

Prove Actions Across Chains​

  • Intent Settlement: Prove that a user fill occurred (e.g., trade executed) before repaying solvers on the origin chain (e.g., Eco, Catalyst).
  • Solver-Based Zaps: Execute user-defined logic (like swaps or vault entry) fronted by solvers and proven via user-signed calldata (more fun with ERC-7702 and AI agents).
  • Decentralized Governance: Enable token holders to vote on any chain and prove outcomes back to Ethereum for canonical result aggregation.