NEAR Protocol vs ZKsync
How NEAR Protocol vs ZKsync compare on our ratings, blockchain specs, funding, pros and cons.
| Feature | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ratings | ||
| Our score | 4.1/5 | 3.7/5 |
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Performance | 4.5 | 4.0 |
| Fees | 4.5 | 4.0 |
| Ecosystem | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Decentralization | 4.0 | 3.0 |
| Developer experience | 4.0 | 4.5 |
| Specs | ||
| Layer | Layer 1 | Layer 2 |
| Consensus / design | Proof of Stake | ZK rollup |
| Native token | NEAR | ZK |
| EVM compatible | No | Yes |
| Smart contract languages | Rust, JavaScript | Solidity, Vyper |
| Block time | 600ms | ~1s |
| Typical transaction fee | Not disclosed | $0.05 |
| Finality | 1.2s | minutes to Ethereum |
| Mainnet since | 2,020 | 2,023 |
| Throughput (TPS) | 1000000 | Not disclosed |
| Sequencer | Not applicable | Not disclosed |
| Data availability | NEAR Protocol | Not disclosed |
| Gas paid in | NEAR | ETH |
| Company | ||
| Founded | 2020 | 2023 |
| Headquarters | Switzerland | — |
| Investors | Andreessen Horowitz, Accomplice, Metastable Capital, Arrington Capital +6 | Andreessen Horowitz, Coinbase Ventures, Dragonfly, Ethereum Foundation +5 |
| Strengths and weaknesses | ||
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Best for | Developers writing smart contracts in Rust, Users swapping across chains without manual bridges, Teams deploying autonomous AI agent systems | Developers deploying smart accounts with passkeys, Institutions building private, compliant rollups, Solidity teams seeking low-cost ZK scaling |
Highlighted cells show the stronger value in each row. Data comes from each provider's site and public sources; check details before you sign up.

