Skip to main content

Polygon (MATIC) vs Polkadot (DOT)

  • Author:
  • Updated date:

Let's Compare Polkadot vs. Polygon (Matic) blockchains. Is Polkadot more secure than Polygon? Is Polygon more scalable than Polkadot? This post answers some of these questions that the blockchain community is searching for in a singular solution.

Here are some of the differences between Polkadot (DOT) and Polygon (MATIC).

Polygon (MATIC)Polkadot (DOT)


Oct. 2017

Concept in 2016, Launch in 2020.


Total Supply: 10,000,000,000 and 6,652,300,637 coins in Circulation.

Total Supply: 1.11 Billion dot coins and 1 Billion dot coins in Circulation.

Consensus Mechanism

Polygon makes use of the Proof of Stake as it's consensus mechanism.

Polkadot makes use of the hybrid consensus model for it's blockchain.

Transaction Per Second

Speculated to be 65,000 TPS.

So far recorded 1000 TPS.

Programming Language


Substrate (Rust framework)


zkRoll Up Security

Shared Pool Security

Smart Contracts




Yes. 5% rewards for stake.

Yes. 7% to 12% for it's stake.

Use Case

DeFi, Interoperability between Chains, Bridge and Ethereum Layer 2 solution use cases.

Muti-chain connectivity, smart contracts, interoperability, Slot based secure chain model & respective policy based use cases.

Polygon Security vs Polkadot Security

Polygon blockchain uses the three different security models on various levels. The proof of Stake security model is being used on the transaction level and offers many secure options for node security. The plasma security model is deployed on the polygon blockchain to protect various accounts. The third model is a mixture of both models that implement both POS+Plasma in its solution.

Polkadot makes use of the shared security model. This is also known as the "Pooled Security," which many people criticize as it could lead to a single point of failure. However, the parachain accepted into the main relay chain is vetted for the performance and traffic load, so the security model imposed on validators does not result in internal security issues and attacks like other chains.

Polygon Scalability vs Polkadot Scalability

Polygon was developed to extend the limited scalable capacity of the Ethereum in the layer two solutions. Polygon can handle a larger number of transactions than its parent chain Ethereum. It solves the network congestion issues of Ethereum and can process secure transactions a lot quicker than Ethereum itself.

Scroll to Continue

Polkadot was designed to allow interoperability solutions and the external chain bridge as a service use case. So it makes use of the parachain model, which makes scalability a lot easier to deploy. It also uses secure transaction and quick transfers at a far lower cost. However, Polygon has surpassed the number of transactions it can handle compared to the Polkadot.

Polygon Bridge vs Polkadot Bridge

Polygon blockchain has been developed as a bridge to the side chain and tokens in the layer-2 solutions of the Ethereum blockchain. This use case allows the bridge to transfer the assets like the NFTs and tokens across the bridge.

On the other hand, the Polkadot bridge can connect the parachains and the external blockchains. So far, the market testing has been done for Polkadot connecting to the binance smart chain and the Cosmos chain. In the near future, they may also include internal parachains of Polkadot with the external blockchains.

Polygon Development vs Polkadot Development

Polygon uses Solidity as it's the primary programming language for writing smart contracts. Polygon contracts can be deployed using services such as Remix, Truffle, Alchemy, Replt and Chainstack. You can also develop the Polygon smart contracts on your own node if you deploy one for your use case.

Polkadot makes use of Substrate framework for the development of dApps and smart contracts. The substrate framework is written in a language called - "Rust". This makes it easier to write and develop smart contracts which are far more scalable and performance efficient. You can develop and deploy the apps on their respective public parachains which allow dApp development and testing.

Utility Use Case - Polkadot vs Polygon

Polygon blockchain is currently being used in various use cases in the market. Polygon bridge is one of the famous use cases deployed recently and is being used heavily to transfer and swap Ethereum assets. There are also NFTs and blockchain games being deployed on the chain.

Polkadot blockchain uses parachains for a variety of its use cases. One example is the blockchain has the Defi use case in the financial domain. You may also find the NFTs and other assets being deployed recently on it's parachains along with it's sister chain - Kusama. Most of the use case is around the financial industry as the chain has both private and public chains, making smart contract development and asset deployment a lot easier.


Polygon is a general-purpose blockchain chosen when the developers want cheaper transactions, the ability to scale, add zkRollup security, and provide solutions for Defi and dApps.

On the other hand, Polkadot is chosen when you want to deploy a parachain or the respective solution on existing parachain that serves the feature set of the blockchain and intended use cases like public blockchains, Defi, smart contracts, NFTs etc.

This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.

© 2022 skyfire

Related Articles