Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

Multichain and Cross-Chain: Know The Difference

Validated Individual Expert

Multichain and cross-chain are two terms you’ll be familiar with as you engage with the crypto ecosystem — but what are their differences?

Each of these technologies contributes something important to the blockchain space, but they do so in different ways — and understanding the function and limits of each one is essential for anyone trying to comprehend the crypto space and its future.

So what exactly do these terms mean, and how do they impact blockchain as a whole? In this article, we answer that question. But before we answer all of that, we need to discuss separately what is multichain and cross-chain.

Defining Multichain

The term multichain refers to decentralized applications that have been deployed across multiple blockchains that share similar smart contract technology. Ethereum, Avalanche, Polygon, BNB Chain, are all compatible with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) which enables developers to launch multichain dApps.

While originally the majority of the development in the crypto space was based on the Ethereum mainnet, the focus has now shifted to either the layer 2 blockchains like Optimism and Arbitrum, sidechains like Polygon, or alternative layer 1 blockchains like Solana and Avalanche.

Defining Cross-Chain

Cross-chain describes the communication between blockchains, and is the natural evolution of multichain. In cross-chain architectures, blockchains are not isolated silos, but are interconnected.

Cross-chain becomes possible thanks to cross-chain bridges and interoperability protocols like Ren Protocol, Multichain, and Connext, who have pioneered the concept of xCalls — the ability to call smart contracts across chains in a secure way.

Cross-chain vs. Multichain Comparison

So to summarize, mutichain technology creates an internet of blockchains capable of communicating freely while remaining secure thanks to a shared underlying security layer, while cross-chain technology uses smart contracts to create synthetic versions of your coins that are able to interact with other blockchains directly.

Weighing the Advantages

One important factor for builders considering whether to pursue cross-chain or multichain solutions is how implementing each approach factors into the overall strategy for scaling a blockchain ecosystem.

It’s easy to understand the benefits of a multichain approach: multichain inherently offers greater security but the money, time, and effort involved in this approach can’t be ignored.

A multichain approach may be inherently safer but building that sort of infrastructure comes with significantly higher up-front costs.

On the other hand, implementing a set of cross-chain solutions is generally a more straightforward proposition than building out a multichain ecosystem. And for users, regulated cross-chain solutions offer safety to users by insuring their funds in the event of a catastrophe.

Ultimately, cross-chain versus multichain approaches aren’t mutually exclusive. Cross-chain solutions can, are, and will likely continue to be used to facilitate the development of multichain ecosystems.

Rather than taking on such a large project all at once, projects can rely on bridges between popular networks as a temporary solution while a more effective long-term solution can be implemented.

The Future of Blockchain

Both approaches have their trade-offs and the inherently-superior security of a multichain approach may not be the factor that determines which approach will become more popular in the long run.

Unless a particular approach proves to be disastrous, it’s likely we’ll see projects embrace a range of strategies involving cross-chain and multichain approaches to scaling.

Removing the barriers between different blockchains will define the future of the space — and how far the technology can go. So understanding the different approaches to interoperability, as well as their limitations, is an essential lesson for anyone trying to deeply comprehend the crypto arena and where it might take us in future.

Now you understand the different approaches to developing interoperability, you’re empowered to make well-informed decisions as you explore the digital space yourself!

Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • Nexus Chain & Cointime to Host Industry AMA — Unpacking DeFi’s “Missing Layer”

    Nexus Chain will host a global AMA on December 27, 2025, at 20:00 (UTC+8) — “DeFi AMA|Unpacking the Missing Layer in Layer1.” The session will explore a key question facing the industry: as PoS evolves and liquidity remains fragmented, does DeFi still lack a foundational execution layer?

  • Japanese listed company ANAP Holdings increased its holdings of Bitcoin by 127.73.

    according to market sources, Japanese listed company ANAP Holdings has disclosed an increase in its Bitcoin holdings by 127.73 coins. As of now, the company's total Bitcoin holdings have reached 1,346.58 coins, valued at approximately 118 million USD.

  • Changpeng Zhao: Binance Wallet now supports identifying malicious addresses; you will receive a warning if you transfer funds to them.

    Zhao Changpeng posted on Binance Plaza stating, "The cryptocurrency industry should be able to completely eradicate address poisoning attacks and protect users. All wallets should simply check whether the receiving address is a poisoned address and block the user.This is a blockchain query. Wallets should not even display these junk transactions anywhere. If the value of the transaction is very small, filter it out. Security alliances in the industry should maintain a real-time blacklist of these addresses so that wallets can check before sending transactions. Binance Wallet is already doing this. If a user tries to send to a malicious address, they will receive a warning.

  • Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a total net outflow of $189 million yesterday, marking the fourth consecutive day of net outflows.

     according to SoSoValue data, the total net outflow of Bitcoin spot ETFs is 189 million USD.The Bitcoin spot ETF with the largest single-day net outflow yesterday was Blackrock's ETF IBIT, with a single-day net outflow of 157 million USD. Currently, IBIT's total historical net inflow has reached 62.34 billion USD. The second is Fidelity's ETF FBTC, with a single-day net outflow of 15.2979 million USD. Currently, FBTC's total historical net inflow has reached 12.189 billion USD. As of the time of writing, the total net asset value of Bitcoin spot ETFs is 114.289 billion USD, with the ETF net asset ratio (market value as a proportion of Bitcoin's total market value) reaching 6.53%, and the cumulative historical net inflow has reached 57.076 billion USD.

  • BTC falls below $88,000

     market shows BTC fell below $88,000, currently at $87,997.85, 24-hour decline reaches 0.88%, market volatility is significant, please manage your risk accordingly.

  • The U.S. spot Ethereum ETF saw net inflows of $84.59 million yesterday.

     according to Trader T monitoring, the US spot Ethereum ETF had a net inflow of 84.59 million USD yesterday.

  • ETH breaks $3,000

     the market shows ETH breaking through $3000, currently at $3000.08, with a 24-hour decline of 0.38%. The market is highly volatile, please manage your risk accordingly.

  • Binance Wallet launches "secure auto-signature" service

     according to the official announcement, Binance Wallet has launched the "Secure Auto Sign" (SAS) service: it now supports mnemonic/private key wallets to trade on Binance Wallet (web version).