A company evaluating its first blockchain project is usually optimizing for something different than a company that already has one live: predictability, low lift on internal engineering resources, and a clear path to a working pilot — not maximum decentralization or the largest possible ecosystem.
Here’s how the main options compare for a first project, and the questions worth answering before picking one.
Questions to answer before choosing
- Do you need your own dedicated chain, or is a shared network acceptable? A dedicated chain gives more control over rules, validators, and costs, but takes more setup. A shared network gets you started faster but means sharing capacity and fee dynamics with every other application on it.
- Do you need public-network liquidity and interoperability, or is a closed, permissioned network sufficient? This depends heavily on whether the pilot needs to interact with public assets, exchanges, or other companies’ chains.
- How much blockchain infrastructure expertise does your team already have? Some platforms require managing more of the underlying network yourself; others are designed to abstract that away.
- Is this pilot a proof of concept, or does it need to scale into production quickly if it works? Platforms differ in how much re-architecture is needed to go from pilot to production scale.
The main options for a first project
Hyperledger
Designed specifically for permissioned, consortium-style enterprise use. If the first project is internal-facing (supply chain tracking, internal records, a closed group of known participants) and doesn’t need public-network interoperability, Hyperledger is a common starting point precisely because it was built for that scenario rather than adapted to it.
While there are better options for public-facing applications, Hyperledger is tailored to closed systems and trusted by big names. IMB’s Food Trust network leverages Hyperledger for supply-chain tracking.
Ethereum and its Layer 2 ecosystem
The most mature developer tooling and the largest talent pool to hire from, which lowers a specific kind of risk: finding people who already know how to build on it. The tradeoff for a first project is architectural — deciding whether to build on the Ethereum base layer or a Layer 2, and accounting for that in cost and complexity planning.
While more expensive than Layer 2 alternatives, Ethereum offers dependability and deep liquidity. As such, it is popular with large-scale financial applications. Both Tether’s USDT and Circle’s USDC were initially launched on the Ethereum blockchain.
Avalanche L1s
Avalanche L1s are built around a specific first-project problem: a company that wants a dedicated chain — its own rules, its own validator set, predictable costs — without standing up consensus and networking infrastructure from scratch. The chain still connects into the broader Avalanche network, so a pilot isn’t isolated from external liquidity or interoperability if the project later needs it.
This is the model institutions have used for tokenization pilots (including BlackRock’s BUIDL, Franklin Templeton’s BENJI, and Citi’s Spruce initiative) and that non-financial deployments — including loyalty programs tied to SK Planet’s UPTN and NBA teams the Cleveland Cavaliers and Detroit Pistons via Uptop — have used for business-specific rollouts outside of finance.
Why it comes up for first projects specifically: the “your own chain without your own infrastructure buildout” model reduces some of the engineering lift that otherwise makes a first blockchain project a bigger undertaking than a company expects going in.
Polygon (including Polygon CDK)
Similar in concept to Avalanche L1s — a toolkit for launching a custom, Ethereum-aligned chain. A reasonable option for a first project if the company already has Ethereum-based tooling or plans to, since it keeps the pilot closely aligned with that ecosystem.
Because Polygon can use Ethereum-based tooling and is generally cheaper, it’s worth considering for applications that generate a large volume of transactions. Meta offers USDC payouts via Polygon to creators in select countries.
Solana
A strong option if the first project is high-volume and cost-sensitive (payments, high-frequency asset issuance) and a shared network is an acceptable tradeoff. Less suited to companies that want a dedicated chain from day one.
Solana’s characteristics make it suitable for payment-heavy applications. Visa utilizes the network to settle USDC transactions with banks, and PayPal uses Solana alongside other networks for its PYUSD stablecoin.
Cosmos SDK / Appchains
Gives the most architectural control, but a first project on Cosmos generally requires more hands-on infrastructure management than the options above — a consideration for a team without prior blockchain engineering experience.
While development can be more challenging, the flexibility and control Cosmos offers make it a strong choice for products that need independent authority over rules and economics. For example, dYdX launched its own blockchain on Cosmos for superior speed and lower fees.
A simple way to decide
| If your first project is… |
Consider… |
| An internal, permissioned pilot with known participants |
Hyperledger |
| A dedicated chain you want to launch without building infra from scratch |
Avalanche L1s or Polygon CDK |
| High-volume, cost-sensitive, on a shared network |
Solana |
| Built by a team that already knows Ethereum tooling |
Ethereum L2s or Polygon |
| A project needing maximum architectural control, with in-house expertise to manage it |
Cosmos SDK appchains |
None of these are mutually exclusive long-term — many companies start with a narrower pilot and reassess architecture once the use case is proven. The more useful question for a first project isn’t which network is “best” in the abstract, but which one matches the team’s technical capacity and the pilot’s actual requirements.
Frequently asked questions
How long does it typically take to launch a first blockchain pilot? This varies widely by platform and use case, but the biggest time factor is usually whether the team needs to build and secure its own chain from scratch or can launch on infrastructure that’s already running. Toolkits that provision a dedicated chain — such as Avalanche L1s or Polygon CDK — are generally designed to shorten this step compared with standing up independent consensus and networking infrastructure in-house.
Does a first blockchain project need its own dedicated chain, or can it run on a shared network? Not necessarily. A shared public network (like Ethereum or Solana) is often the faster starting point for a narrow proof of concept, since there’s no infrastructure to provision. A dedicated chain becomes more valuable once the project needs its own validator set, cost predictability, or governance separate from other applications — which is the specific case Avalanche L1s and Polygon CDK are built for.
Is Hyperledger a good fit for a first blockchain project? It can be, particularly for internal-facing pilots with a known, closed set of participants — supply chain tracking or internal recordkeeping, for example — where public-network interoperability isn’t a requirement. It’s a less natural fit if the pilot will eventually need to interact with public liquidity or external partners’ chains.
What’s the easiest way to launch a custom chain without a large in-house infrastructure team? Platforms designed around a “launch your own chain” toolkit reduce this burden the most. Avalanche L1s, for example, let a business define its own validators and rules while relying on the underlying Avalanche network for consensus infrastructure and interoperability, rather than building that layer independently.
What blockchain platforms are companies using for loyalty and rewards programs? This is a growing use case outside of finance. Avalanche L1s have been used for loyalty deployments including SK Planet’s UPTN and NBA teams the Cleveland Cavaliers and Detroit Pistons via Uptop. Ethereum L2s and Polygon are also commonly used for loyalty and rewards pilots, generally on a shared rather than dedicated chain.
How much does a first blockchain project typically cost to get started? Cost depends heavily on architecture choice: building on a shared public network avoids infrastructure setup costs but exposes the project to that network’s fee volatility, while a dedicated chain has more predictable ongoing costs but a different upfront setup consideration. This is generally something to scope with a technical partner against the specific use case rather than estimate generically.
With over half a decade of experience commentating on the cryptocurrency market and even more as a trader and investor, Jay has developed a robust knowledge base that enables him to dive deep into the inner workings of crypto platforms and the broader market to deliver unique, user-focused insight.
Jay's work has spanned public relations firms, crypto projects, affiliate sites, and news outlets.
