Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

Comparing DAO Voting: On-Chain vs. Off-Chain

One of the main advantages of DAOs is in allowing their community to make decisions for the DAO via direct voting, which some DAOs do on-chain and some off-chain. What’s the difference and why does it even matter?

On-chain voting

On-chain voting means that each vote is recorded on the blockchain so anyone can see how each DAO member voted (and that record is preserved forever). If a proposal is passed with enough votes, it will become official at the predetermined snapshot of the blockchain. Since on-chain votes need to be added to the blockchain the same way other data is added to the blockchain (by miners in PoW, stakers in PoS, etc.), each vote may require a gas fee, which may make regular voting expensive for some DAO members.

Off-chain voting

Off-chain voting can be as simple as a vote on any website or app. The implementation of a passed proposal can also use the snapshot method or be done manually. There is generally no cost involved for the voter. It is also much easier and faster to implement as opposed to the slower on-chain voting (where the DAO must wait for the votes to be added to the blockchain). However, off-chain voting lacks the historical permanence of on-chain voting — if the website the vote is on decides to delete voting info, it’s gone.

Does it matter which type of voting to use?

In both cases, each voter is usually authenticated with their Web3 wallet like MetaMask to prevent double voting and other fraud.

Which of the two options is implemented should not directly affect the vote as long as fraud and technical malfunctions are prevented. However, the choice has many implications for the nature of the DAO, including transparency and trust, voting dynamics, development costs, and more.

Transparency and Trust

This one is obvious: on-chain voting is visible immediately and forever, so you know who voted for what. Transparency in voting helps to hold people accountable for their governance actions. On the other hand, open voting allows malicious actors to target those whose vote they don’t agree with or to discriminate against them. The recent controversy of the a16z hedge fund single-handedly trying to sway the Uniswap DAO vote in favor of their preferred token bridge to BNB is a case in point. If a16z was able to do so anonymously, there would not be a controversy. Whether that would be a good thing is debatable, of course.

To be clear, off-chain voting can also be transparent. But it would require a higher level of trust since a website (usually running on Web2 tech at this point) is generally much easier to hack than a blockchain.

Voting dynamics

If you see that your friends are voting one way on a proposal, would you be swayed to vote with them? What if it’s a whale or the founder of the DAO? The permanence of a voting record can also have a self-policing effect of making one think twice about their vote.

Another voting dynamic is the ease of casting a vote. On-chain voting requires you to sign your vote, which at the very least requires your Web3 wallet and the blockchain to be functioning at the time you’re voting. In this way, at least, off-chain voting is generally easier.

Development costs

Any on-chain system is generally more costly to implement than an off-chain one based on both blockchain fees and the actual development costs. That being said, there are third-party platforms that can be used for voting, with Snapshot being perhaps the most known off-chain one. Aragon offers a hybrid of off-chain voting with on-chain execution. Plus, the ability to fork the code of many blockchain projects lowers the development costs vis-a-vis Web2 development.

Wen which?

When it comes down to it, the choice of on-chain vs. off-chain is not one of absolutes but based on each DAO’s specific situation and the kind of voting going on. For example, a small DAO may not afford the costs of on-chain voting while also not needing to worry so much about centralization (since there are so few members.

Meanwhile, a large DAO may absorb such costs much more easily and have greater concerns of keeping voting records transparent and voting itself decentralized — with the historical evidence of the votes being inscribed into the blockchain.

The DeXe way

DeXe’s DAO builder is all about flexibility, so we offer both on-chain and off-chain voting options. Better yet, DAO creators can implement variable voting rules for different types of votes. So more routine ones can be done off-line with a lower quorum while a proposal that may fundamentally change the DAO or make significant use of the treasury’s funds can be put to an on-chain vote with a big quorum to make sure it’s truly the will of the people. Members can even delegate their votes to trusted delegators to make sure their voice is heard without being there for every single vote.

As a DAO member, the choice is always yours. At DeXe, our choice was to give you the options for all your choices. That’s the DAO way!

Stay tuned!

Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • BTC Surpasses $77,000

    Market data shows that BTC has surpassed $77,000, currently priced at $77,012.01, with a 24-hour increase of 0.43%. The market is experiencing significant volatility, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • Iranian Official: Management of the Strait of Hormuz Will Not Return to Pre-War Status

    On May 25, local time May 24, Rezaei, spokesperson for Iran's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, stated that the management of the Strait of Hormuz will not return to its pre-war status. He also mentioned that the strait is currently under Iranian control, and after the end of the state of war, Iran can facilitate the passage of vessels. Rezaei further stated that Iran has not negotiated with the United States regarding its enriched uranium stockpile and will never back down from its current position; the U.S. has no choice but to accept Iran's conditions.

  • Trump: US-Iran Agreement 'Not Fully Negotiated Yet'

    On May 25, U.S. President Trump stated on the 24th that the agreement between the United States and Iran is 'not fully negotiated yet,' accusing some uninformed individuals of 'unfounded criticism.' Trump posted on social media, saying, 'If I reach an agreement with Iran, it will be a good and appropriate agreement.' 'No one has seen it or knows its contents. It is not fully negotiated yet. So don't listen to those losers who criticize something they don't understand at all.' According to U.S. media reports, although the draft of the agreement has not been made public, some individuals in the U.S. have criticized it fiercely, claiming it actually undermines the goals set by the Trump administration. White House officials told the media that it will take 'a few more days' to finalize the agreement between the U.S. and Iran. (Xinhua News Agency)

  • Vitalik: Ethereum Foundation is Not the Central Manager of the ETH Ecosystem, Future Development Will Shift to 'Small and Long-term' Approach

    On May 25, Ethereum founder Vitalik shared his views on the future development direction of the Ethereum Foundation in a post on the X platform. He emphasized that this is just his personal opinion. The board does not consist solely of him, and he does not have more special powers than other board members. Aya Miyaguchi is leading most of the execution work for this transformation, while his own involvement is more focused on technical issues. The board is currently expanding, and his influence within the organization will continue to decline in the future, which, frankly, is what he hopes to see. By 2025, the Ethereum Foundation has made significant improvements in its execution capabilities. Many issues have been resolved, and the foundation continues to benefit from greater efficiency and a stronger focus on specific goals. However, as these issues were addressed, he began to care more about another concern: he often sees people saying, 'Vitalik has always talked about Ethereum needing to be decentralized, having privacy, and becoming a shelter technology, but why do the actions of the Ethereum Foundation not reflect these ideals?' Of course, there are those who hold completely different views. Some do not feel there is a crisis at all, but rather believe that the Ethereum Foundation has finally begun to take execution and business development seriously, and the next focus should be to continue along this path faster and stronger. Vitalik believes that this difference essentially reflects varying sensitivities to different types of criticism, and he is more easily hurt by criticisms regarding deviations from values. Vitalik stated that the Ethereum Foundation should not be 'the center of Ethereum,' but rather 'a node with clear responsibilities, existing alongside other nodes.' In the past, they have always said this, but many people in the ecosystem, including some within the foundation, hoped the foundation would become a true center. Now, they are taking concrete actions to ensure the foundation becomes the latter. This is particularly important because the Ethereum Foundation is essentially a resource-limited and organizationally limited entity. The foundation currently holds only about 0.16% of all ETH, which is even lower than many large ETH holders; whereas many other blockchain projects' 'central foundations' typically control 10%-50% of their tokens. The current Ethereum Foundation has decided to use its remaining resources to pursue 'long-term viability' rather than continuous expansion (which also means they will sell less ETH). The foundation will focus on those things that are crucial for Ethereum to become a censorship-resistant, control-resistant, open, private, and secure system, but that no one else would do if the foundation does not. This means they must make difficult choices. Some projects and individuals they highly respect may no longer belong to the foundation's system in the future. In fact, if they want important tasks to attract external capital, it may be necessary to keep some talented individuals, influential public figures, and those who share the mission and CROPS philosophy outside the foundation. This also means that the Ethereum Foundation will take a clearer and more principled stance on a cultural level.

  • ETH Surpasses $2100

    Market data shows that ETH has surpassed $2100, currently priced at $2101.04, with a 24-hour increase of 1.9%. The market is experiencing significant volatility, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • U.S. Officials: Agreement with Iran Expected Not to Be Signed on Sunday, Some Issues Remain

    On May 24, Axios reported, citing a U.S. official, that Iran's Supreme Leader has approved the overall framework of the agreement. There are some important statements for us and some significant wording for Iran. It is expected that the agreement with Iran will not be signed on Sunday, as there are still some issues that need to be resolved. The current status of the Iranian regime is progressing slowly, and completing the necessary approvals will take a few days.

  • ETH Falls Below $2100

    Market data shows that ETH has fallen below $2100, currently priced at $2096.81, with a 24-hour increase of 2.47%. The market is experiencing significant volatility, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • PAYS Officially Launches on Nivex, Surges 100% on Debut

    At 15:18 on May 24, 2026, PAYS officially launched on the Nivex exchange and opened for trading globally.

  • U.S. Secretary of State: Announcement on Agreement with Iran Possible Later Sunday

    On May 24, U.S. Secretary of State Rubio stated that an announcement regarding an agreement with Iran may be made later on Sunday.

  • BTC Surpasses $77,000

    Market data shows that BTC has surpassed $77,000, currently priced at $77,073.6, with a 24-hour increase of 1.32%. The market is experiencing significant volatility, so please ensure proper risk management.