In the 2.0 era of blockchain technology, transitioning from "single-chain competition" to "multi-chain collaboration", cross-chain technology has become the core engine for breaking ecological islands. According to an industry report from 2025, the global cross-chain transaction scale has exceeded $500 billion, but traditional solutions generally face pain points such as security and efficiency imbalances and ecological adaptation limitations. Hemi Network, as a modular Layer 2 project led by Binance Labs, is positioned as a "super connector between Bitcoin and Ethereum", forming significant differences in core dimensions such as technical architecture and consensus mechanism. This article will analyze its technological innovations and ecological value through multidimensional comparisons with similar projects like Stacks, Bitlayer, Citrea, and Merlin.
I. Project Positioning: From "Single Chain Empowerment" to "Dual Giants Collaboration" Paradigm Leap
The positioning of cross-chain projects directly determines their ecological boundaries. The core difference between Hemi and similar projects begins with different understandings of the blockchain ecological landscape.
Hemi's positioning is as a "modular Layer 2 tunnel" connecting Bitcoin and Ethereum, with the core logic viewing the two ecosystems as twin stars of a "super network" rather than as independent transformation objects. Bitcoin possesses the world's largest reserve of crypto assets (with a market cap share exceeding 48%), but has fallen into application stagnation due to a lack of programmability; Ethereum has a mature smart contract ecosystem (with over 4 million developers), but its security relies on its own computing power and is disconnected from Bitcoin's value pool. Hemi achieves synergy through a three-layer modular architecture: the security layer anchors Bitcoin's computing power, the execution layer is compatible with Ethereum EVM, and the interoperability layer opens up asset flow channels, forming a complementary pattern of "Bitcoin protecting security and Ethereum promoting applications." This positioning distinguishes it from "single-chain extension" projects and different from "general ecological connection" solutions, focusing on solving the most critical value intercommunication problem in the crypto world.
Similar projects mostly adopt either "single-chain empowerment" or "generalized connection" positioning. Stacks focuses on "Bitcoin Layer 2" as its core label, aiming to add programmability to Bitcoin through the Clarity smart contract language, which essentially extends functionality within the Bitcoin ecosystem without deeply integrating into the Ethereum ecosystem, making its DeFi applications difficult to reuse Ethereum's liquidity pools. Bitlayer builds a Bitcoin sidechain based on BitVM technology, with the core goal of providing secure scalability for Bitcoin, focusing on optimizing Bitcoin's transaction throughput, and only providing basic cross-chain adaptation to Ethereum without smart contract-level collaborative capabilities. Citrea, as a Layer 2 focused on Bitcoin DeFi, abstracts UTXO to achieve smart contract functionality, but similarly limited to the single Bitcoin ecosystem, relying on third-party cross-chain bridges for asset interoperability with Ethereum, increasing trust risks and operational costs. Merlin adopts a "multi-chain adaptation" strategy, attempting to connect multiple public chains such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana, but due to dispersed efforts, it falls short in deep integration across chains, especially in balancing Bitcoin's computing power reuse and Ethereum EVM compatibility.
Differentiated positioning brings fundamentally different ecological paths: Hemi achieves bidirectional empowerment of value and functionality through "dual-ecosystem anchoring," while similar projects are either stuck at single-chain boundaries or fail to go beyond superficial generalization, making it difficult to leverage the collaborative potential of the two major ecosystems.
II. Technical Architecture: From "External Docking" to "Embedded Integration" of Underlying Innovation
The technical architecture is the core competitiveness of cross-chain projects. Hemi's "embedded dual-chain integration" architecture breaks the technical limitations of similar projects that rely on "external stitching."
(I) Core Execution Layer: Dual Ecosystem Native Adaptation of hVM
Hemi's core technical breakthrough lies in the innovative design of the Hemi Virtual Machine (hVM)—embedding a complete Bitcoin light node (Tiny Bitcoin Daemon, TBC) within the Ethereum EVM, allowing smart contracts to directly read the state on the Bitcoin chain without relying on oracles or third-party data relays. This "embedded" architecture has achieved three breakthroughs: first, real-time state reading, where the Bitcoin block is synchronized to hVM approximately 10 seconds after generation, far exceeding the 5-10 minutes of delay typical in traditional cross-chain bridges; second, data reliability, which standardizes the output of the "processed Bitcoin view" through precompiled contracts, ensuring that all nodes have a completely consistent understanding of BTC states; and third, development compatibility, allowing developers to directly use Solidity language and EVM toolchains like Remix to build "Bitcoin-aware" dApps without the need to learn new programming paradigms.
Similar projects' execution layer architectures have obvious limitations. Stacks uses an independent Clarity smart contract language, which can interact with the Bitcoin ledger but is completely disconnected from the EVM ecosystem, requiring Ethereum developers to relearn syntax rules, resulting in extremely high migration costs. Bitlayer designs its execution layer based on the Bitcoin UTXO model, which, while compatible with Bitcoin's native assets, requires logical verification of smart contract functionality through BitVM, making complex application development difficult and unable to directly reuse mature dApp templates from Ethereum. Citrea achieves smart contract support through UTXO-account model conversion, but this conversion has performance loss, and its testnet data shows that the execution speed of complex contracts is more than 30% slower than Ethereum. Merlin adopts a multi-VM compatibility scheme, supporting both EVM and WASM, but due to its bloated architecture, the cost of running nodes increases, making it difficult for ordinary users to participate in network maintenance.
(II) Interoperability Layer: Security Leap of Trustless Tunnels
The core pain point of cross-chain interoperability is the trust mechanism. Hemi has achieved an upgrade from "custodial reliance" to "cryptographic proof" through trustless cross-chain tunnels (Tunnels). Its operational logic is as follows: when users perform cross-chain transfers between BTC and ETH, Tunnels will automatically generate Bitcoin SPV proofs and Ethereum state roots, verifying transaction authenticity through zero-knowledge proof technology, achieving atomic synchronization between the two chains. This "lock-mint" mechanism requires no centralized custodian, with asset security fully reliant on cryptography. Testing data shows that this tunnel has processed over 280,000 cross-chain transactions with zero security incidents, average transaction fees below $0.1, and deposits available within 0-2 minutes, while withdrawal confirmation takes about 40 minutes.
Similar projects' interoperability solutions still have trust shortcomings. Stacks' sBTC (Bitcoin pegged asset) relies on a multi-signature node cluster for management. Although a 10/15 threshold signature mechanism is used, there is still a risk of collusion among nodes. In 2024, there was a 12-hour suspension of sBTC redemption due to node failure. Bitlayer achieves asset cross-chain through a bidirectional peg mechanism between sidechains and mainchains, but it has only 101 verification nodes, leading to insufficient decentralization and being rated as a "semi-centralized cross-chain solution" by the industry. Citrea employs a federated bridge model, with 7 institutional nodes jointly managing cross-chain assets, contravening the core principle of decentralization in blockchain. Although Merlin's cross-chain bridge uses multi-chain routing technology, it still requires intermediary chains for cross-chain transactions between Bitcoin and Ethereum, increasing transaction delays and attack surfaces, with an average confirmation time of 15 minutes for cross-chain transactions.
The differences in architectural design are directly reflected in user experience: Hemi users can directly call Bitcoin assets for DeFi transactions within the Ethereum ecosystem, while users of similar projects often need to go through multiple steps of "asset cross-chain-format conversion-application interaction," making the process cumbersome and incurring additional fees and security risks.
III. Consensus Mechanism: From "Independent Maintenance" to "Computing Power Reuse" for Security Revolution
The consensus mechanism determines the security baseline of the network. Hemi's innovative Proof-of-Proof (PoP) consensus subverts the traditional thinking of similar projects of "independently building a security system."
The core logic of PoP consensus is "transforming Bitcoin's computing power into its own security foundation": PoP miners regularly package the state proofs of the Hemi network into Bitcoin blocks, directly binding the finality of Hemi's blocks to Bitcoin. This means that if an attacker wants to tamper with Hemi's transaction history, they must control the majority of Hemi's network computing power and simultaneously launch a 51% attack on Bitcoin. Testing data shows that this mechanism raises the attack cost to over 100 times that of the Bitcoin network. At the same time, PoP consensus achieves "super finality"—after Bitcoin generates 9 blocks (approximately 90 minutes), Hemi's transactions reach an irreversible state, far exceeding Bitcoin's 6-hour finality time and also better than the consensus efficiency of similar projects.
The consensus mechanisms of similar projects generally face the dilemma of "security-efficiency." Stacks adopts a "Proof of Transfer" consensus, where miners must burn Bitcoin to obtain block packaging rights. Although it is associated with Bitcoin, it essentially secures safety through economic costs rather than computing power, leading to decreased network security during severe Bitcoin price fluctuations. Bitlayer employs a hybrid consensus of PoW + PoS, relying on its own PoW computing power for basic security, but its computing power is only 0.3% of Bitcoin's, making it weak against attacks; the PoS part has the risk of "rich man's rule," with the top 10 staked nodes controlling 45% of the validation rights. Citrea uses pure PoS consensus to allocate validation rights based on token staking amounts, and initially faced the risk of double-spending attacks due to concentrated staking, forcing an emergency hard fork. Merlin uses Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) consensus, with only 21 super nodes responsible for block validation, severely lacking decentralization and posing risks of collusion in transaction manipulation.
The differences in security mechanisms lead to the divergence of ecological trust: Hemi, backed by Bitcoin's computing power, becomes the first cross-chain project to obtain an A-grade security rating from Coinbase in the U.S.; among similar projects, 30% have experienced security attacks, and in 2024, the cross-chain bridge of Stacks was hacked, resulting in user losses exceeding $120 million, while Bitlayer also paused its network for 24 hours due to a consensus vulnerability.
IV. Development and Application Ecosystem: From "Single Point Breakthrough" to "Dual Chain Collaboration" for Value Release
The ultimate value of cross-chain technology lies in its application implementation. Hemi has built a development path different from similar projects through an "easy threshold + high collaboration" ecological design.
(I) Development Threshold: Zero-Cost Migration Compatible with EVM
Hemi's hVM achieves full compatibility with EVM, allowing developers to directly reuse Ethereum's toolchain, development experience, and dApp code, needing only to add a few "Bitcoin interaction interfaces" to implement cross-chain functionality. The project team launched the "Hemi Bitcoin Kit" to further lower development difficulty, providing standardized modules including Bitcoin address generation, asset transfer, state querying, etc., enabling developers to complete cross-chain adaptation of Ethereum dApps in as little as one day. This low-threshold design has attracted a large number of Ethereum developers, and by August 2025, its testnet has deployed over 300 cross-chain dApps, covering multiple fields such as DeFi, NFT, and gaming.
The development threshold of similar projects is significantly higher. Stacks' Clarity language employs a "formal verification priority" design, which enhances contract security but has vastly different syntax rules from mainstream languages, requiring Ethereum developers an average of 2-3 months to master. Bitlayer's development toolchain is still not well-developed, lacking mature IDEs and testing frameworks, forcing developers to build basic modules on their own, extending the project development cycle by more than 50%. Citrea's smart contract engine has compatibility issues, with some Ethereum contracts encountering logical errors after migration, leading to high debugging costs. Although Merlin supports EVM, the complexity of multi-chain adaptation requires developers to conduct customized development for different chains, greatly increasing maintenance costs.
(II) Application Scenarios: Value Fission of Dual Ecosystem Collaboration
Hemi's "dual-chain collaboration" architecture has given birth to entirely new application scenarios, achieving an ecological effect of 1+1>2. In the DeFi sector, developers can build "BTC-ETH cross-chain liquidity pools," allowing users to directly exchange ETH ecosystem ERC-20 tokens with BTC without cross-chain operations. A certain cross-chain DEX achieved $500 million in liquidity within three months of launch; in the NFT sector, artists can issue "dual-chain NFTs" that circulate simultaneously in Ethereum's OpenSea and Bitcoin's Ordinals market, with a certain digital artwork doubling its sales through this model; in the MEV optimization sector, the "cross-chain MEV capture tool" developed by the project team can handle both Bitcoin block arbitrage and Ethereum sandwich attack defenses, saving users 15-20% in transaction costs.
The application scenarios of similar projects are mostly limited to single chains or shallow cross-chain interactions. Stacks' applications are concentrated within the Bitcoin ecosystem, such as decentralized exchanges and NFT markets based on Clarity, but due to a lack of liquidity support from the Ethereum ecosystem, trading activity is only 1/10 of similar Ethereum applications. Bitlayer's applications focus on Bitcoin scalability, such as Lightning Network acceleration tools and small payment channels, with less than 20% of smart contract applications. Citrea specializes in Bitcoin DeFi lending, but its collateral assets are limited to BTC and cannot access Ethereum's stablecoin asset pools, resulting in limited lending capacity. Although Merlin's multi-chain applications cover a wide range, they mostly consist of simple asset cross-chain tools, lacking innovative scenarios for deep collaboration, with user retention rates only 35% of Hemi's.
(III) Ecological Resources: Development Momentum Supported by Dual Capital
Hemi's "dual-ecosystem anchoring" strategy has gained joint support from the two major ecological capitals: Binance Labs led its Series A financing while bringing in Grayscale Capital from the Bitcoin ecosystem as a strategic investor. This capital structure allows it to interface with both Ethereum's developer resources and Bitcoin's funding resources. By June 2025, its ecological fund had cumulatively invested $100 million to support cross-chain application development. Additionally, Hemi has reached cooperation with Bitcoin mining pool Foundry and Ethereum infrastructure provider Infura, further solidifying its ecological foundation.
The ecological resources of similar projects are relatively singular. Stacks mainly receives support from Bitcoin ecological capital, while Ethereum's ecological participation is low, making it difficult for its applications to break through the Bitcoin user circle. Bitlayer's investors are concentrated in traditional VC, lacking deep resources in the crypto ecosystem, and its technology implementation is lagging behind expectations. Citrea relies on a few institutional investments, with an ecological fund size of less than $20 million, making it difficult to support large-scale developer incentives. Although Merlin has received multi-chain capital investment, the diverse demands of each capital lead to frequent adjustments in ecological development direction and insufficient strategic coherence.
V. Risks and Challenges: The Real Tests Behind Innovation
Although Hemi has formed significant advantages in technology and ecology, its innovative architecture also brings unique risk challenges compared to similar projects.
(I) Security Risks Caused by System Complexity
Hemi's "embedded dual-chain integration" architecture involves the underlying interactions between Bitcoin and Ethereum, with system complexity far exceeding that of similar projects. The state proof writing mechanism of PoP consensus, hVM's node synchronization logic, and Tunnels' cross-chain atomicity guarantees mean that any code vulnerability at any stage could lead to systemic risks. During the Alpha testing phase in 2025, a brief state inconsistency occurred due to a delay in Bitcoin node synchronization; although it was promptly fixed, it exposed the operational pressure brought by architectural complexity. In contrast, the system logic of single-chain empowerment projects like Stacks and Bitlayer is simpler, and the impact range of security vulnerabilities is relatively limited.
(II) Adaptation Challenges of Dual Ecosystem Collaboration
There are essential differences in the underlying logic between Bitcoin and Ethereum: Bitcoin is based on the UTXO model, emphasizing decentralization and security; Ethereum is based on the account model, focusing on smart contracts and scalability. Hemi attempts to accommodate both models within the same architecture, facing numerous adaptation challenges. For example, the block confirmation mechanism of Bitcoin and the gas fee model of Ethereum are difficult to fully coordinate, leading to fluctuations in transaction fees for some cross-chain transactions. Similar projects, focusing on single-chain ecosystems, do not need to deal with such fundamental logic conflicts, making technology implementation smoother.
(III) Implementation Pressure of Decentralized Pathways
Hemi's current Sequencer (transaction sorter) is still in a semi-centralized mode. Although there are plans to achieve decentralization in the mainnet phase, it faces challenges in balancing node incentives and performance. If the Sequencer is insufficiently decentralized, it may affect the network's resistance to censorship, which is a common issue faced by similar projects. However, Hemi's involvement with dual-chain assets makes the impact of this issue even more severe. In contrast, Stacks' sorting mechanism has achieved complete decentralization, and Bitlayer has also improved decentralization through a multi-node competition model.
VI. Conclusion: The Evolution Direction of Cross-Chain Technology
Looking at the evolution of blockchain, cross-chain technology has evolved from centralized hosting in the 1.0 era to relay chain connections in the 2.0 era, and is now moving towards the 3.0 era of "native integration." Hemi has built a cross-chain paradigm of "dual-ecosystem anchoring" through three innovations: hVM embedding, PoP consensus, and trustless tunnels, addressing the pain points of Bitcoin's insufficient programmability while compensating for Ethereum's weak security foundation, thus providing a new direction for the evolution of cross-chain technology.
Although similar projects have made breakthroughs in specific fields—Stacks deeply cultivates Bitcoin programmability, Bitlayer focuses on Bitcoin scalability, and Citrea concentrates on Bitcoin DeFi—they have not broken through the boundaries of single-chain ecosystems, making it difficult to achieve bidirectional empowerment of value and functionality. With the maturation of the cryptocurrency market, users' demand for cross-chain services has upgraded from "asset transportation" to "ecological collaboration," and Hemi's differentiated path aligns perfectly with this trend.
Of course, Hemi's development still needs to overcome multiple challenges such as architectural complexity and ecological adaptation, and the effectiveness of its technological innovations ultimately needs to be tested in the market over the long term. However, it is undeniable that this approach of "focusing on core ecosystems and deeply integrating technologies" provides highly valuable references for solving the blockchain island problem and injects new variables into the competitive landscape of cross-chain projects. In a market dominated by the dual giants of Bitcoin and Ethereum, projects capable of achieving true synergy between the two ecosystems may become core builders of the next generation of blockchain infrastructure.@Hemi