NEWWorld's first AI visibility audit tool for Web3 is live.Run free audit →
RANKING DAO Tooling·Last reviewed May 4, 2026

Best DAO Tooling in 2026: Top 7 Governance Picks Ranked

DAO governance tooling consolidated around clear architectural lanes in 2026. Tally powers more onchain DAOs than every competitor combined plus secures $30B+ in treasury value plus facilitated nearly $700M in onchain proposal-executed transfers since 2020. Snapshot crossed 30,000 projects including Uniswap, Aave plus ENS using gasless offchain voting. Safe (formerly Gnosis Safe) controls more DAO treasury value than any other multisig on Ethereum. Aragon OSx pivoted to plugin architecture letting governance evolve without redeploying. We ranked 7 DAO tools that actually run real DAOs in 2026.

TL;DR picks by use case

Best for onchain Governor-style DAOs
Tally
$30B+ secured plus 10x more onchain DAOs than any competitor plus $700M in executed proposals
Best for gasless offchain voting
Snapshot
30,000+ projects including Uniswap, Aave, ENS plus 500+ voting strategies plus free for voters
Best for treasury multisig control
Safe
Most-trusted DAO treasury layer plus Zodiac module extensions plus battle-tested since 2018
Best modular DAO framework
Aragon OSx
Plugin architecture lets governance evolve without treasury migration plus fine-grained permissions
Best for Moloch-style ragequit DAOs
DAOhaus
Built on Moloch with ragequit minority protection plus Safe-integrated plus cost-effective
Best DAO governance aggregator
Boardroom
Unified proposal tracking across Snapshot, Tally plus onchain contracts plus governance API

Methodology and scoring

We scored each DAO tooling platform across 7 weighted criteria reflecting what actually matters for governance in 2026. Adoption plus TVL secured (20%) measures real DAOs running on the platform plus dollar value at governance risk. Execution model (15%) covers onchain (trustless, gas-paying) versus offchain (gasless, trust-requiring) plus binding execution capabilities. Modular flexibility (15%) measures ability to upgrade governance plus swap components plus avoid lock-in. Treasury integration (15%) covers Safe multisig plus role-based access plus time delays plus spending limits. Voting strategy depth (10%) measures supported voting methods (token, quadratic, weighted, delegation, conviction). Developer ecosystem (10%) covers SDK quality plus governance API plus third-party plugin catalog. Security track record (15%) covers audit history plus exploit incidents plus formal verification status.

Criterion Weight What we measure
Adoption plus TVL secured 20% Real DAOs running on the platform plus dollar value at governance risk
Execution model 15% Onchain versus offchain plus binding execution capabilities
Modular flexibility 15% Ability to upgrade governance plus swap components plus avoid lock-in
Treasury integration 15% Safe multisig plus role-based access plus time delays plus spending limits
Security track record 15% Audit history plus exploit incidents plus formal verification status
Voting strategy depth 10% Supported voting methods (token, quadratic, weighted, delegation, conviction)
Developer ecosystem 10% SDK quality plus governance API plus third-party plugin catalog

The full ranking

Detailed evaluation for each protocol. Top scores get gold, silver and bronze badges. Scoring details in the methodology section above.

#1

Tally

All-in-one onchain governance with $30B+ secured plus 10x more DAOs than any competitor
Score
9.4/10

Tally is the production standard for onchain Governor-style DAOs with $30 billion+ in secured value plus facilitated nearly $700 million in proposal-executed value transfers since 2020 launch. The platform powers more than 10x as many onchain DAOs as any competitor making it the de facto governance UI for Compound, Uniswap, Arbitrum DAO plus virtually every major Governor-based protocol. Onchain voting via smart contracts means executions happen permissionlessly when quorum plus approval thresholds are met eliminating the trust layer that offchain voting requires. Tally's recent funding round explicitly targets low voter participation with staking plus incentive mechanisms addressing the gas-cost-to-participation tradeoff that's plagued onchain governance since 2020. Where Tally has tradeoffs: gas costs (cents on L2s plus dollars on Ethereum mainnet) reduce participation versus Snapshot's gasless model. Setup requires Governor smart contracts which means new DAOs need technical capability or template adoption. Onchain execution is binding meaning misconfigured proposals execute regardless of intent (a feature not a bug for trustless governance). Best for mature protocols with treasury value justifying onchain execution overhead.

Key strengths

  • $30B+ secured plus $700M+ in proposal-executed value transfers since 2020 establish onchain dominance
  • 10x more onchain DAOs than any competitor including Compound, Uniswap, Arbitrum plus virtually every Governor protocol
  • Onchain voting via smart contracts eliminates trust layer of offchain manual execution
  • Recent funding round explicitly targets voter participation via staking plus incentive mechanisms
  • Cross-chain governance orchestration supports L2 expansion without fragmenting DAO operations
Honest weakness
Gas costs reduce participation versus Snapshot's gasless model plus setup requires Governor smart contracts limiting new-DAO accessibility
Who it's for
Mature protocols with treasury value justifying onchain execution. Governor-based DAOs (Compound, Uniswap, Arbitrum style). Any DAO where trustless binding execution matters more than gasless participation.

Key metrics

TVL secured $30B+
Value transferred via proposals ~$700M
Onchain DAO share 10x more than any competitor
Notable users Compound, Uniswap, Arbitrum DAO, ENS
Execution model Onchain (binding)
Founded 2020
Cost Free platform plus gas fees
#2

Snapshot

Gasless offchain voting protocol with 30,000+ projects including Uniswap, Aave plus ENS
Score
9.0/10

Snapshot dominates offchain DAO voting with 30,000+ projects using the platform including Uniswap, Aave plus ENS for temperature checks plus signaling votes. Gasless voting via signed messages eliminates per-vote cost making participation free which dramatically increases turnout compared to onchain alternatives where each vote costs $5-50 in gas depending on network congestion. 500+ voting strategies support token-weighted, quadratic, weighted, delegated plus dozens more methods with multi-chain voting power calculation across Ethereum, Solana plus other ecosystems. Snapshot X extends the model to onchain execution providing the same flexibility with binding execution for DAOs needing trustless settlement. Reality (SafeSnap) pattern brings Snapshot outcomes onchain via Reality.eth oracle creating hybrid offchain-voting onchain-execution workflow. Where Snapshot trails Tally on binding governance: offchain votes require manual execution by trusted multisig or council creating the trust layer that pure-onchain platforms eliminate. Suitable for community sentiment plus non-binding governance but inadequate for protocols where decisions directly control significant value. Best as signaling layer paired with onchain execution via Tally or Safe.

Key strengths

  • 30,000+ projects using the platform including Uniswap, Aave, ENS for temperature checks
  • Gasless voting via signed messages eliminates per-vote cost dramatically increasing turnout
  • 500+ voting strategies including quadratic, weighted, delegated plus multi-chain power calculation
  • Snapshot X extends gasless flexibility to onchain execution for DAOs needing binding settlement
  • Reality (SafeSnap) pattern brings Snapshot outcomes onchain via Reality.eth oracle
Honest weakness
Offchain votes require manual execution by trusted multisig creating trust layer that pure-onchain platforms eliminate plus inadequate for binding treasury control
Who it's for
Community sentiment plus non-binding governance. DAOs running Snapshot for signaling paired with Safe plus Tally for execution. Any project where gasless participation matters more than trustless execution.

Key metrics

Projects using 30,000+
Notable users Uniswap, Aave, ENS, plus 30,000 more
Voting strategies 500+
Execution model Offchain (gasless signaling) + Snapshot X onchain
SafeSnap pattern Reality.eth oracle integration
Cost Free for voters
Founded 2020
#3

Safe

Battle-tested DAO treasury multisig with Zodiac module extensions for governance composability
Score
8.7/10

Safe (formerly Gnosis Safe) is the most-trusted DAO treasury control layer in crypto with multisig approvals meaning critical transfers require multiple signers instead of a single private key. The platform has been battle-tested since 2018 plus secures more DAO treasury value than any other multisig on Ethereum plus EVM chains. Zodiac modules extend Safe with governance plus execution capabilities including Reality (SafeSnap) for Snapshot integration, Roles for fine-grained permissions plus Delay for time-locked execution. The modular architecture means DAOs can keep the battle-tested Safe for custody then add governance capabilities as modules when the org matures avoiding treasury migrations entirely. Messari's State of Safe Q1 2025 outlined scale plus usage plus a web interface incident with mitigation steps demonstrating that operational security at the interface layer matters alongside smart contract integrity. Where Safe has structural considerations: not a full DAO out of the box meaning teams assemble modules plus guard rails correctly. Module configuration is powerful but easy to misconfigure without reviews plus testing. Best as treasury foundation paired with Snapshot or Tally for voting layer not as standalone DAO platform.

Key strengths

  • Most-trusted DAO treasury layer with multisig approvals battle-tested since 2018
  • Zodiac modules (Reality, Roles, Delay) extend Safe with governance composability without treasury migration
  • Reality (SafeSnap) pattern enables Snapshot offchain votes to execute onchain via oracle
  • Roles plus Delay modules provide fine-grained permissions plus time-locked execution for security
  • Industry-standard treasury layer that virtually every major DAO uses for fund custody
Honest weakness
Not a full DAO out of the box meaning teams must assemble modules correctly plus module misconfiguration risk requires reviews plus testing
Who it's for
Every DAO treasury management workflow. Teams pairing Safe with Snapshot or Tally for voting layer. Organizations valuing battle-tested multisig over all-in-one DAO platforms.

Key metrics

Founded 2018
Treasury value secured Highest in DAO category
Notable modules Reality, Roles, Delay, Scope Guard
Architecture Multisig + modular extensions
Cost Network gas fees plus optional relayer
Integration Pairs with Snapshot, Tally, Aragon
#4

Aragon OSx

Modular DAO framework with plugin architecture letting governance evolve without redeployment
Score
8.4/10

Aragon pioneered onchain DAO governance plus pivoted to OSx plugin architecture that decouples governance logic from treasury creating governance that evolves without DAO migration. Plugins handle voting (token, quadratic, dual governance, optimistic), permissions (roles, time delays), execution (Safe integration, direct calls) plus other capabilities as modular components. The platform supports Ethereum plus L2s including Polygon plus Arbitrum with native multichain voting letting DAOs holding assets across chains vote on everything from one place. Fine-grained permissions let DAOs set roles that only allow proposal submission not execution, require 72-hour delays before large treasury withdrawals plus configure dozens of other policy constraints. Decentraland, Lido plus other major DAOs use Aragon for governance infrastructure. Where Aragon faces 2026 challenges: complex setups still need Solidity literacy to model custom plugins limiting accessibility for non-technical DAOs. Migrating from legacy Aragon stacks requires planning plus data mapping. Third-party plugin catalog smaller than general-purpose smart account tooling. Best for technically capable DAOs wanting maximum governance flexibility plus willing to invest in plugin development.

Key strengths

  • Plugin architecture decouples governance logic from treasury letting DAOs evolve without migration
  • Multichain voting native across Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum supporting cross-chain DAO operations
  • Fine-grained permissions plus time delays plus role-based access for security-first governance
  • Onchain plus open-source plugins create reusable governance components benefit entire ecosystem
  • Decentraland, Lido plus major DAOs running Aragon for production governance
Honest weakness
Custom plugin setup requires Solidity literacy plus migrating from legacy Aragon stacks requires planning plus smaller third-party plugin catalog than smart account alternatives
Who it's for
Technically capable DAOs wanting governance flexibility. Multichain organizations needing cross-chain voting infrastructure. DAOs running complex governance flows (dual governance, optimistic execution) beyond simple token voting.

Key metrics

Architecture Plugin-based modular OSx framework
Multichain Native (Ethereum + L2s)
Notable users Decentraland, Lido, others
Governance models Token, quadratic, dual, optimistic plus custom plugins
Open source Yes (plugins open-source)
Founded 2017
#5

DAOhaus

Moloch-style DAO platform with ragequit minority protection plus Safe-integrated treasury
Score
7.8/10

DAOhaus specializes in Moloch-style DAOs that pioneered the ragequit mechanism allowing members to exit with their proportional share of treasury if they disagree with a decision creating powerful minority protection that most other frameworks lack. The platform integrates Safe multisig for treasury plus provides voting plus proposal workflows plus member management in a no-code interface. Cross-chain support across Ethereum, Gnosis, Optimism, Arbitrum, Polygon plus Celo enables DAOs to operate across EVM ecosystems. MolochDAO (the pioneering decentralized organization focused on Ethereum infrastructure capital allocation) plus dozens of other influential DAOs use DAOhaus making it culturally significant in crypto governance evolution. Where DAOhaus has structural limits: Moloch-style structure is narrower than Aragon's general-purpose framework meaning DAOhaus suits specific use cases (capital allocation, grants programs, investment clubs) better than open-ended community governance. Adoption metrics trail Tally plus Snapshot significantly. Better suited as specialty tool for ragequit-preserving DAOs than as general-purpose governance platform.

Key strengths

  • Ragequit mechanism allows members to exit with proportional treasury share creating unique minority protection
  • Safe multisig integration for treasury plus built-in voting plus proposal workflows in no-code interface
  • Cross-chain support across Ethereum, Gnosis, Optimism, Arbitrum, Polygon plus Celo
  • MolochDAO plus pioneering decentralized capital allocation DAOs run on DAOhaus
  • No-code platform makes Moloch governance accessible without smart contract development
Honest weakness
Moloch-style structure narrower than Aragon's general-purpose framework plus adoption metrics trail Tally plus Snapshot significantly
Who it's for
Investment DAOs plus grants programs valuing ragequit minority protection. Capital allocation organizations following MolochDAO patterns. Smaller DAOs wanting structured exit mechanisms.

Key metrics

Architecture Moloch-style with ragequit
Treasury integration Safe multisig native
Cross-chain Ethereum, Gnosis, OP, Arbitrum, Polygon, Celo
Notable users MolochDAO, Raid Guild, MetaCartel
Cost Network gas fees, no platform subscription
Founded 2019
#6

Boardroom

DAO governance aggregator with unified proposal tracking across Snapshot, Tally plus onchain contracts
Score
7.4/10

Boardroom aggregates proposals from Snapshot, Tally, onchain governance contracts plus protocol-specific systems into a unified dashboard letting users track voting power across protocols plus set notifications for new proposals plus manage governance participation from one place. Boardroom API powers governance integrations in wallets plus other applications making it important infrastructure for the broader DAO data layer. Analytics on voting patterns, delegate activity plus proposal outcomes provide governance health metrics that individual platforms don't aggregate. Where Boardroom isn't competitive: not a voting platform itself meaning it's complementary to Snapshot or Tally not replacement infrastructure. Adoption is meaningful but smaller than primary voting platforms. Better suited as analytics plus aggregation layer for active governance participants managing multiple DAOs than as primary DAO setup tool. Worth using specifically for cross-DAO governance tracking plus governance API integration into wallet or dApp products.

Key strengths

  • Unified proposal tracking across Snapshot, Tally, onchain contracts plus protocol-specific systems
  • Boardroom API powers governance integrations in wallets plus other dApps as infrastructure
  • Cross-DAO voting power tracking plus notification management from single dashboard
  • Analytics on voting patterns plus delegate activity plus proposal outcomes for governance health
  • Teams functionality streamlines tracking, voting, communications plus reporting workflows
Honest weakness
Not a voting platform itself meaning Boardroom is complementary to Snapshot or Tally not replacement infrastructure plus smaller adoption than primary voting platforms
Who it's for
Active governance participants managing multiple DAO positions. Institutional investors tracking portfolio governance. Developers building governance tooling using Boardroom API.

Key metrics

Function Governance aggregator + analytics
Data sources Snapshot, Tally, onchain contracts, protocol-specific
API Boardroom Governance API
Integration Wallet plus dApp embedded governance
Notable feature Cross-DAO voting power tracking
#7

Juicebox

Ethereum-based DAO infrastructure for crowdfunding plus programmable treasuries plus custom token economics
Score
7.0/10

Juicebox provides DAO infrastructure specialized for crowdfunding plus programmable treasuries with custom token economics enabling DAOs to launch funding rounds with vesting schedules plus refund mechanics plus customizable funding cycles. ConstitutionDAO (the famous attempt to buy a copy of the US Constitution) plus AssangeDAO plus other high-profile crowdfunding DAOs use Juicebox demonstrating capability for capital coordination at scale. The user-friendly interface for creating plus managing token offerings makes Juicebox accessible without smart contract development. Where Juicebox trails general-purpose DAO platforms: narrower scope focused on funding plus token economics rather than complete DAO operations. Limited treasury management features versus Safe plus Aragon. Better suited as specialty crowdfunding plus capital coordination tool than as primary governance platform. Worth knowing about for crowdfunded DAOs plus NFT projects needing community-building token offerings.

Key strengths

  • Specialized crowdfunding plus programmable treasury infrastructure for capital coordination
  • Custom token offerings with vesting schedules plus refund mechanics plus funding cycles
  • ConstitutionDAO plus AssangeDAO plus high-profile crowdfunding DAOs use Juicebox at scale
  • User-friendly interface plus no-code token offering creation
  • NFT project community-building integration
Honest weakness
Narrower scope focused on funding plus token economics rather than complete DAO operations plus limited treasury management features versus Safe plus Aragon
Who it's for
Crowdfunded DAOs plus capital coordination workflows. NFT projects needing community-building token offerings. Anyone running funding round mechanics with vesting plus refund logic.

Key metrics

Specialty Crowdfunding + programmable treasuries
Notable users ConstitutionDAO, AssangeDAO
Chain Ethereum
No-code Token offering creation
Customization Vesting, refunds, funding cycles

Side-by-side comparison

PlatformExecutionNotable usersBest forCostScore
TallyOnchain (binding)Compound, Uniswap, ArbitrumGovernor DAOsFree + gas9.4
SnapshotOffchain (gasless)Uniswap, Aave, ENS (30K+)Signaling votesFree9.0
SafeMultisig treasuryMost DAOs use SafeTreasury custodyFree + gas8.7
Aragon OSxOnchain modularDecentraland, LidoCustom governanceFree + gas8.4
DAOhausMoloch-styleMolochDAO, Raid GuildInvestment DAOsFree + gas7.8
BoardroomAggregatorCross-DAO trackersMulti-DAO analyticsFree7.4
JuiceboxCrowdfundingConstitutionDAOToken offeringsFree + gas7.0

Final verdict

The DAO tooling category in 2026 has consolidated around clear architectural roles. Tally won the onchain Governor-style DAO market with $30 billion+ in secured value plus 10x more onchain DAOs than any competitor plus $700M+ in proposal-executed value transfers since 2020. The platform powers Compound, Uniswap, Arbitrum DAO, ENS plus virtually every major Governor-based protocol making Tally the de facto standard for trustless binding onchain governance. The recent funding round targeting voter participation via staking plus incentive mechanisms addresses the only structural weakness (gas-cost-to-participation tradeoff). For mature protocols with treasury value justifying onchain execution Tally is the right call.

Snapshot owns the gasless offchain voting category with 30,000+ projects including Uniswap, Aave plus ENS using the platform for temperature checks plus signaling votes. The 500+ voting strategies plus multi-chain voting power calculation plus Snapshot X onchain extension plus Reality (SafeSnap) onchain execution pattern make Snapshot the most flexible voting infrastructure in DAO governance. For community sentiment plus non-binding governance Snapshot is the right call usually paired with Safe for treasury plus optional Tally for binding execution.

Safe is the treasury layer virtually every major DAO uses for multisig fund custody with Zodiac modules extending governance composability without treasury migration. Aragon OSx plugin architecture decouples governance logic from treasury letting DAOs evolve without redeployment though Solidity literacy requirements limit accessibility for non-technical communities. DAOhaus specializes in Moloch-style ragequit DAOs for capital allocation plus investment clubs. Boardroom aggregates governance data across platforms. Juicebox specializes in crowdfunding plus programmable treasuries.

If you want one DAO tooling stack for 2026 use Safe for treasury plus Snapshot for signaling plus Tally for binding onchain execution. This three-platform combination covers 90% of real-world DAO use cases plus the integrations are mature plus battle-tested. For specialty use cases (Moloch ragequit, custom plugins, crowdfunding) add DAOhaus, Aragon or Juicebox respectively. The DAO tooling category isn't really about picking one platform but about composing the right combination for your specific governance plus treasury plus execution requirements.

FAQ

What's the best DAO tooling platform in 2026?
Tally is the best for onchain Governor-style DAOs with $30B+ secured plus 10x more onchain DAOs than any competitor plus $700M in proposal-executed value transfers. Snapshot is the best for gasless offchain voting with 30,000+ projects using the platform. Safe is the best DAO treasury layer with battle-tested multisig plus Zodiac module extensions. Most real-world DAOs use combinations not single platforms: Snapshot for signaling plus Safe for treasury plus Tally or Aragon for binding execution. The right answer depends on whether you need binding onchain execution (Tally), maximum participation (Snapshot), treasury security (Safe) or modular flexibility (Aragon OSx).
Should I use Tally or Snapshot?
Use Tally if your DAO has Governor contracts plus needs binding onchain execution. Use Snapshot if your DAO wants gasless voting plus has multisig or council for manual execution. The fundamental difference is whether votes directly trigger onchain actions. Tally prioritizes trustless execution accepting that gas costs reduce participation. Snapshot prioritizes participation accepting that execution requires a trusted party. For treasury decisions involving millions of dollars trustless execution may be worth lower turnout. For community sentiment plus non-binding governance maximizing participation via gasless voting makes sense. Many DAOs use both: Snapshot for initial signaling plus Tally for binding execution.
Is Aragon still relevant in 2026?
Yes Aragon pivoted to OSx plugin architecture which is genuinely differentiated infrastructure. The plugin model decouples governance logic from treasury letting DAOs evolve without redeployment when shifting from multisig to token voting or adding new governance mechanics. Decentraland plus Lido plus other major DAOs run on Aragon. Where Aragon faces challenges: custom plugin setup requires Solidity literacy creating accessibility friction versus no-code alternatives. The platform serves technically capable DAOs better than non-technical communities. For organizations wanting maximum governance flexibility plus willing to invest in plugin development Aragon OSx delivers capability no competitor matches.
What is ragequit and why does DAOhaus support it?
Ragequit is a Moloch-style governance mechanism allowing DAO members to exit with their proportional share of treasury if they disagree with a decision. The mechanism provides minority protection that most other DAO frameworks lack: if a proposal passes that you fundamentally disagree with, you can withdraw your share rather than being forced to comply with the majority decision. DAOhaus specializes in Moloch-style DAOs because the ragequit pattern works specifically well for capital allocation, grants programs plus investment clubs where members might want to exit if treasury deployment doesn't match their values. Aragon plus Tally don't support ragequit natively making DAOhaus the specialty choice for organizations valuing this minority protection.
Are DAO voting platforms secure?
Yes all four major platforms (Tally, Snapshot, Safe, Aragon) use audited smart contracts with strong security track records. Aragon plus Safe have been battle-tested since 2017-2018. DAOhaus plus Tally have strong records since 2019-2020. Security doesn't come from the tool alone but from how you use it: use time delays via Safe Delay or Aragon plugins, require multi-sig for large spends, never give full control to a single role plus implement role-based permissions. The Messari State of Safe Q1 2025 noted that service layers can be targeted making process controls plus audits plus module guards as important as base contracts. The biggest DAO governance risks are typically operational (signer compromise, social engineering) not smart contract vulnerabilities on major platforms.
Do I need a legal entity for my DAO?
Yes most jurisdictions don't recognize DAOs as legal entities meaning someone remains personally liable for DAO operations. Wyoming was first US state to formally recognize DAOs as legal entities (Wyoming DAO LLC). The Cayman Islands plus Marshall Islands plus other offshore jurisdictions offer DAO-friendly structures. Without legal wrapping, DAO members can face joint plus several liability for DAO actions creating real personal risk. DAO tooling handles technical operations but doesn't solve legal plus tax complications of actually operating a DAO. Consult a crypto-focused attorney about whether your DAO needs a Wyoming DAO LLC, Cayman foundation or other legal wrapper before deploying production governance.
How much does it cost to run a DAO?
Tooling costs are typically free for the platforms (Tally, Snapshot, Safe, Aragon, DAOhaus all have free tiers) plus you pay Ethereum gas fees when creating proposals plus executing transactions. On Ethereum mainnet onchain proposals cost $50-500+ depending on complexity plus gas price. On L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism, Base) the same proposals cost cents to a few dollars. Snapshot offchain voting is free for voters because signed messages don't cost gas. Treasury operations via Safe cost network gas for each multisig transaction. Beyond technical costs DAOs incur legal entity costs ($1,500-5,000 setup plus annual fees), professional services (lawyers, accountants, security auditors) plus contributor compensation. Total monthly DAO operational cost ranges from under $100 for small experimental DAOs to $50,000+ for major protocols.
Can I use one DAO tooling platform across multiple chains?
Most platforms are built for EVM chains like Ethereum, Polygon plus Arbitrum. Aragon OSx plus Tally support some non-EVM chains through bridges or wrapped assets but native support is limited. Solana, Sui plus Aptos DAOs often use custom tools or are still in early development with dedicated governance systems specific to their ecosystems. If your DAO operates across multiple chains use platforms with cross-chain voting (Aragon OSx native, Snapshot via strategies, Tally via cross-chain orchestration). For pure non-EVM DAOs check whether your ecosystem has a dedicated governance system rather than forcing EVM tooling that wasn't designed for the chain.

Data sources

Run a free Crawlux audit

See how your project ranks against the leaders in AI search and crypto SEO. No credit card. Free tier on one domain.

Run free audit →