{"id":37864,"date":"2023-01-20T07:00:00","date_gmt":"2023-01-20T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forklog.com\/en\/?p=37864"},"modified":"2025-08-29T22:40:12","modified_gmt":"2025-08-29T19:40:12","slug":"what-are-appchains","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forklog.com\/en\/what-are-appchains\/","title":{"rendered":"What are appchains?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

What are appchains?<\/h2>\n

An appchain (application-specific blockchain) is a blockchain built to run a single decentralised application (dapp).<\/p>\n

Such designs give developers more freedom to shape ecosystems, governance structures and consensus algorithms for the dapps they build.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

How do appchains work?<\/h2>\n

Appchains operate much like a base blockchain, but on top of one. The key difference is that they are application-specific.<\/p>\n

For security, appchains rely on layer-1 (L1) blockchains. These systems are highly customisable and can deliver significant performance, since they do not compete with L1 applications for compute and storage.<\/p>\n

They typically issue a utility token used for staking, as an in-app currency and for voting.<\/p>\n

Appchains are supported by validators from the base network, provided those validators choose to allocate resources to the specific application.<\/p>\n

\"The
The process of creating an appchain in the Octopus Network blockchain. Data: Octopus Network documentation<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n
\n

What are the advantages of appchains?<\/h2>\n

Building with this approach offers several advantages over L1, layer-2 solutions (L2)<\/a> and sidechains<\/a>. As noted, appchains bring customisability and higher throughput without sacrificing security, because they rely on a base blockchain.<\/p>\n

Using L1 directly to build dapps<\/span> means competing with other applications for limited compute resources. That risks lower performance and drawn-out upgrade cycles, since developers do not control the consensus protocol.<\/p>\n

Rivalry among dapps on a single network can let one popular application consume a disproportionate share of resources. This pushes up fees (as during the launch of XEN Crypto) and delays transaction processing.<\/p>\n

Appchains offer low and predictable transaction costs, which improves the user experience.<\/p>\n

As dapps gain traction, developers may need deeper customisation and optimisation of parameters including throughput, finality, security level and access model (permissionless or permissioned).<\/p>\n

For traditional organisations, appchains provide a way to enter Web3<\/a> without making platforms public from day one. For example, companies can initially require validators to pass KYC<\/span>, rely on a limited circle of developers and choose specific services for cross-chain<\/a> interactions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

What are the drawbacks of appchains?<\/h2>\n

Their defining feature\u2014and potential limitation\u2014is that they are tailored to a single application. L2 solutions, by contrast, can interact with a variety of dapps.<\/p>\n

Appchains have limited composability and a degree of isolation, which risks fragmenting liquidity. Cross-chain bridges help, but they are frequent targets for hackers.<\/p>\n

If an application sees insufficient activity, launching and maintaining an appchain may prove a waste of time and money. Validators dedicated to the platform could use their resources elsewhere more effectively.<\/p>\n

Running an appchain can introduce various complexities\u2014for instance, managing additional infrastructure such as sequencers<\/span> or validators.<\/p>\n

Developers may lack off\u2011the\u2011shelf components\u2014block explorers, RPC<\/span> providers, indexers<\/span>, oracles, fiat gateways, and so on.<\/p>\n

Building directly on L1 has its upsides\u2014such as abundant resources, infrastructure and tooling (especially for beginners). That abundance can simplify integration across ecosystems.<\/p>\n

With L2, developers can scale services without major changes to the codebase.<\/p>\n

Second-layer solutions also inherit strong security by anchoring to the base blockchain. For example, Optimism<\/a> and Arbitrum<\/a> process transactions quickly and submit \u201cfraud proofs\u201d to the main network thanks to Optimistic rollups.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

How do appchains differ from sidechains?<\/h2>\n

Sidechains<\/a> run a parallel network with a two-way peg to the main chain, but they do not rely on L1 security. Unlike L2s, sidechains do not post transactions to the base blockchain.<\/p>\n

Appchains are built for a specific application (app-specific). Sidechains, by contrast, handle operations of any kind. Their main drawback is weaker security due to limited decentralisation.<\/p>\n

One of the best-known sidechains is Polygon Proof of Stake, part of the ecosystem of the Polygon project<\/a>. The latter also includes Polygon Edge\u2014an open-source development environment for creating L2 solutions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Which projects offer appchains?<\/h2>\n

Several blockchain projects let developers create appchains. Among them:<\/p>\n