Basic FAQ

What is Matic Network?

Matic Network is a commit-chain based scaling solution for public blockchains. It is based on an adapted implementation of Plasma framework. Matic provides scalability while ensuring a superior user experience in a secured and decentralized manner. It has a working implementation for Ethereum on Kovan Testnet. Matic intends to support other blockchains in the future which will enable it to provide interoperability features alongside offering scalability to existing public blockchains.

How is Matic different from other implementations of Plasma?

Matic Network's implementation of Plasma is built on state-based commit chains which run on EVM, while the other implementations of Plasma primarily use UTXOs which restricts them to being payment specific. Having state based commit chains allows Matic to provide scalability for generic smart contracts as well.

Secondly, Matic Network uses a public checkpointing layer which publishes checkpoints after periodic intervals (unlike checkpoints after every block in Plasma Cash) allowing the commit chains to operate at high speeds while publishing the checkpoints in batches. These checkpoints along with the fraud proofs ensure that Matic's commit chains operate in a secure manner and any fraudulent activity can be detected on Ethereum mainchain and be penalized by slashing the stakes of the bad actors. This mainchain security is supplementary to the PoS protocol security on the commit chains.

Your project provides scalability for Ethereum using plasma chains, is it a protocol or a native blockchain in itself?

Matic Network is a "commit chain" solution where Ethereum mainchain assets, i.e. all Dapps/Tokens/Protocols of the main chain can be moved/migrated to Matic Network commit chain(s) and when needed, one can withdraw assets back to mainchain.

What are the competitive advantages of Matic over its competitor?

  • L2 scaling solutions

Matic Network is committed to achieving scale with decentralization. Matic network uses periodic checkpoints and fraud proofs, as described in Plasma framework. When users want to withdraw their assets, they use the checkpoints to prove their assets on side-chain, while fraud proofs are needed to challenge fraud or any bad behavior and slash stakers.

Other projects like Loom are also offering L2 scaing solutions. Loom recently announced plans of Zombiechain that may have similarities to Matic. But there two key elements that we differ on:

First and foremost,The focus is different. Loom is focusing on games and social apps (requiring relatively less decentralization) while Matic is focusing on not just financial transactions/ trades but games and other casual Dapps as well. We also have plans for full-blown financial services like lending/trading DApps (token swaps, margin trades and much more)

Secondly, Plasma Cash, which is what we believe Loom wants to use "in future", will have block times greater than the Ethereum block times as you need to push every block of the commit-chain to the main chain, while Matic uses checkpoints for 1-second block times (with PoS layer)

As Plasma Cash works with Non-Fungible Tokes (NFT), it works great for game cards and social state changes where you have pre-defined fees (bundled as NFT - eg "20 tokens" to play game equals 1 NFT coin on plasma cash). For normal token transfers, you may need to swap tokens (like currency notes & change) on top of plasma cash which makes it difficult to implement while offering a friendly UX. It is still being discussed on plasma calls, while Matic uses state-based plasma (closer to Plasma MVP).

  • L1 scaling solutions

Apart from that, amongst other scaling projects like Ziliqa and Quarkchain, Matic stands out due to its ability to achieve scale while maintaining a great degree of decentralization.

More importantly, these scalability projects have a reinventing the wheel problem. They are creating new blockchains where the developer community, product ecosystem, technical documentation and more importantly businesses need to be built from "scratch". Matic on the other hand, it being an EVM enabled chain, programming language, developer documentation etc is available off the shelf to Matic Network. All the Dapps/assets built on Ethereum mainchain have scalability available at the click of a button. This is made possible by Matic being an EVM based commit chain.

  • Payments

In payments, Raiden Network can be a competitor. Raiden thas implemented Lightning network on Ethereum. An important issue is of capacity/liquidity on the hubs. But this issue gets further amplified for Raiden as Lightning network has only one asset (Bitcoin) for hubs to maintain liquidity while Raiden Network would have to achieve liquidity for the countless number of assets (Ether, ERC20 Tokens)

We believe that Matic Network has an edge in terms of usability because, in Raiden, both sender and receiver have to create their payment channels. This is very cumbersome for users. While with Matic's underlying technology there is no requirement of payment channels for users and they only need to have a valid Ethereum address to receive tokens. This is also in line with our long-term vision of improving the user experience for decentralized applications.

  • Trading and Finance

Matic Network intends to enable DEX's (eg 0x), Liquidity pools (eg. Kyber Network) and other kinds of financial protocols like Lending protocols (Dharma Protocol) on its platform, which will allow Matic Network users acees to varied financial serivce applications like DEXs, Lending DApps and many others

  • Others

Also, Matic Network's core focus on creating applications having an enhanced user experience will aid in the mass adoption of DApps. For the same end objective, we are intent on building ecosystem tools. Our products like Dagger (which is well known in the Ethereum community) and Opensigner (implementation of Walletconnect protocol and complete Node.js implementation) are a testimony to the same -




How does Matic compare with other commit-chain solutions like POA/Go-Chain?

Matic Network's biggest differentiator is Plasma Framework which ensures Decentralization and Security of commit chain transactions.

Projects like POA use block producers notarised by Government and Go-Chain relies on institutions across various countries. Such public block producers have a big chance of getting influenced by powerful external agencies and self-interests. Also, commit chain transactions are secured only by commit chain consensus in which the participants are very low in number 3-25 while on Matic Network, all side transactions are secured by multiple mechanisms on the commit chain as well as mainchain.

On commit-chain, any transactions done by Block producer layer are verified and checkpointed to the mainchain by a highly decentralized checkpointing layer. So if any fraudulent transaction happens on commit-chain it can be detected and handled by the checkpointing layer. Even in extreme and highly unlikely scenario wherein the block producer layer as well as the checkpointing layer both collude, even then Mainchain has fraud proofs on which anyone from the public can come and challenge any transaction that they deem fraudulent on the commit-chain. If the challenge is successful, there is a huge economic disincentive/financial punishment to the colluding parties as their stakes are slashed. Also, the public challenger is rewarded with slashed stakes of the fraudulent commit-chain actors.

This makes Matic Network an economically incentivized side chain network which has a high degree of decentralization and security of the commit-chain transactions.

Secondly, capacity and TPS of Matic commit-chain are much higher than that of POA and Go-chain. Especially when Matic Network can have thousands of transactions while POA and Go-chain are single commit-chain which have a higher limit of a few thousand transactions.

Via what principles will new Commit Chains be added? Will there be any special requirements for private companies' local commit Chains?

As mentioned above, commit-chain for a single Layer 1 blockchain (say Ethereum) can be implemented using the Plasma framework. Relative to state channels, Plasma represents a superior alternative to scaling frameworks, chiefly due to the security guarantees provided by the framework - which basically say that users will never lose funds in any eventuality. Sure, there could be delays in getting back the money, but a Byzantine Plasma operator cannot create money out of thin air, or double spend a transaction.

Matic Network will strive to be a completely open and public blockchain infra in the future wherein the economic incentives/disincentives will primarily drive the security and stability of the system. So anyone should be able to join the system and participate in the consensus. In the network seeding stage however, initially Matic network will have to play a larger role to enable commit chains.

Also, Matic side chains would be primarily public side chains i.e commit-chain available for use for anyone in public just like other public blockchains. Although, Enterprise Matic chains will intend to provide dedicated side chains (non-privacy enabled) for particular organizations. The security and decentralization of such chains would still be kept intact using the checkpointing layer and fraud proofs on the mainchain. However, supporting privacy enabled commit-chain with checkpoint validation and fraud proofs on the mainchain is still a research topic for us. We are looking into new technologies like zkSNARK and zkSTARK.

How is Matic Network different than Celer Network?

Both Matic Network and Celer Network are different solutions to the same problem - low transaction throughput in current blockchains. Both utilise off-chain scaling techniques and rely on the main chain for final security; however the fundamental difference is in the approaches - Matic Network is based on a set of Plasma commit-chain(s) backed by Proof-of-Stake consensus (see for more details), whereas Celer Network is a state-channel based solution. Both projects aim for generalized state transitions off-chain, but in vastly different ways.

Matic Network is aiming to build a DApp developer ecosystem. Since it uses an account-based Plasma commit-chain, and also employs a EVM-compatible runtime known as the Matic VM, it will be relatively easier for Ethereum based DApps to migrate to Matic Network once it is live. So in this respect as well, Celer Network is different in terms of developer interfacing.

Will commit chains also be synced with the Mainchain (Ethereum)?

Absolutely! As discussed previously, we are implementing the Matic Network infrastructure on the foundation of Plasma.

For this, Plasma framework mandates proofs of the transactions/blocks produced on the side chains to be published on the mainchain. The public checkpointing layer will validate all the transactions happening on the side chains and publish the proofs to the mainchain. To ensure foolproof security of side chain transactions, the mainchain Plasma contract contains various kinds of Fraud Proofs where any commit-chain transactions can be challenged for any fraudulent activity. If a challenger succeeds, the stakes of the side chain actors involved in the fraud are slashed and are transferred to the challenger. This is equivalent to an ever running high stake bug bounty.A good diagram for understanding is as below:.


Will you implement atomic swaps? If yes, how?

There are ways to do so - Swingyby protocol, Doge/ETH bridges check this Medium article, hash time locked contracts or simple pegging. We will choose best suited with UI/UX and security as we go ahead. Once assets from multiple blockchains are available on the commit-chain, DEXs will be able to provide exchange between assets which are originally from different base chains.

At the end of the White Paper, there is a list of "Potential Use Cases" - will all of that be implemented? In what order?

Matic Network Foundation will enable and support ecosystem teams to develop these potential use cases. It is not our intention to implement all of these projects on our own - and we do not wish to give off that impression. We intend Matic to be a DApp platform, which will provide instant transactions at low costs. Once the Matic Network goes live, we will keep adding support to all these use cases. We will be leaning on community teams to work with us on our platform to create these apps.

The basic logic is - if there is a DApp/Protocol which is working on Ethereum, but is limited by low transaction throughput and high transaction fees - then we will be able to add support for these DApps/Protocols on Matic.

The ultimate objective is to come up with Generalized State Scaling - however, this will take time. We are already working with teams such as Parsec Labs, Truebit and Decentraland on this initiative - A are few mentions about Matic from other projects, here and here.

But before that happens, we will add support for specific contracts and protocols. Once the contract is secured by Fraud proof guarantees, it can go live on Matic Network, and can be used by DApps.

Priority order would be DEX, Payments, Liquidity Providers, Lending & Credit Scoring, Atomic Swaps.

Although most of these features will run in parallel, we are in talks with various top teams to collaborate with us to deploy these protocols on Matic commit chains.

Why will it be difficult to replicate Matic's plasma implementation?

Although with blockchain solutions its more about the network effect as to which network is able to scale/grow ecosystem better than others BUT more importantly with blockchain solutions they have to mandatorily be open source as it entails the actual assets being used in them.

Also it is the case with all the open source projects. It is equally applicable to us as well as the other rival implementations as we are going to have our GPL licence which mandates anyone using our implementation to mandatorily open source their code. But again, the point being, that copying of code is applicable to even to Bitcoin, Ethereum and any other projects, its more about the network effect that one project can achieve.

What’s special about Matic Network’s Plasma implementation?

So Plasma Matic uses a account based model system rather than the UTXO system used by Plasma Cash, Plasma MVP and Plasma XT. This provides us with a huge advantage of using an EVM on the Matic chain which enables us to utilize the entire Ethereum ecosystem, developer tools, integration libraries etc for the Matic network.

The Dapps can easily use the the Matic system without making any changes to their ERC20 tokens. Also our checkpointing layer enables us to be magnitudes of times faster than the other Plasma implementations as we batch the proofs of the individual blocks in the checkpoints while other Plasma implementations have to submit every block proof to the mainchain

How are you going to solve the issues with centralization?

Here is a diagram to give you some context:


So firstly, The PoA nodes that you saw, are going to be Delegates ( with Proof of Solvency i.e They have to deposit high amount of stake ) and KYC basically selected by the PoS layer just like a EOS style DPoS or DBFT nodes.

Secondly, let’s assume all of the Delegates (or 2/3rd of them) turn bad actors and produce faulty blocks, then you have PoS layer stakers who are going to validate all the blocks and if any frauds are committed the stakes of Delegates are slashed, the checkpointing is stopped for the corrective actions.

Thirdly, let's say even the Staker PoS layer (which would be a large number of nodes) also turns bad and collude to produce faulty checkpoints. I.e all the PoA are corrupt and PoS are corrupt Even then following Plasma philosophy we are writing one of the coveted things of commit chain scaling, Fraud proofs which is being watched by many big projects ( The watchers can be seen as our repository watchers on Github). This fraud proof mechanism enables any one in public to challenge any transaction on the Mainchain, succeeding which they stand to gain rewards from the slashing of stakes of all the stakeholders involved in the commited fraud.

Why is Matic Token required?

The following reasons reinforce the need of having Matic token

Appcoin security model:

Matic Network intends to enable Dapps to pay Matic network fees in Dapp-coins by abstracting a token swap mechanism using a liquidity pool like Kyber. The user simply uses her Dapp-coins to pay fees, in the background the Dappcoin is swapped for Matic tokens. Hence the DApp developers who want to provide a seamless user experience will help maintain a Matic Network liquidity pool.

Seeding the network in nascent stages:

It’s practically impossible to seed the system when there are little to no txns in the network at the start, as we cannot distribute Eth to the highly decentralized Validator layer and the block producers. Whilst with Matic tokens, we have provisioned a large percentage of tokens to be distributed for seeding block producer, checkpointer stakes and subsequently offer block rewards. This provision ensures that the stakers receive rewards even if the network takes some time to assume network effects. It is akin to why Block Mining rewards were kept for Bitcoin, stakers and block producers can be incentivized in this way to keep the network secure.

If your concern is about Devs, one of the pillars of our strategy is to keep the entry barrier for devs very low. We have made sure that all the Ethereum dev tools work out of the box on Matic. In terms of the tokens needed for paying fees on testnet, it is no different for a developer developing on Ethereum. The dev gets free tokens for the testnet from a Matic faucet and gets going, just like it is on Ethereum. You need Matic tokens only when you want to deploy on Matic Mainnet, where the gas fee is much lower than Ethereum, around 1/100th of a txn fee you pay on Ethereum.

What drives the use and demand for Matic tokens?

There are two primary uses of the token:

  1. The token is used to pay for the transaction fees in the network
  2. The token is used for staking to participate in the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism for checkpointing layer and block production layer

Some of the secondary reasons for token demand:

  • Matic Network intends to enable Dapps to pay Matic network fees in Dapp-coins by abstracting a token swap mechanism using a liquidity pool like Kyber. The user simply uses her Dapp-coins to pay fees, in the background the Dappcoin is swapped for Matic tokens. Hence the DApp developers who want to provide a seamless user experience will help maintain a Matic Network liquidity pool.

  • Plasma exits mandate a wait-time of 7 days which results in a sub-par user experience. To enable faster exits we are implementing a lending mechanism using Dharma Protocol wherein an underwriter/lender can receive the exit-token and disburse the exit amount with a small fee as interest. The lender then claims the tokens after one week by using exit-token. The user thus gets near immediate withdrawals while the lenders can earn interest for the service they provide.

Protocol Level burning of tokens

We intend to burn a percentage of transaction fee in every block. This makes the tokens deflationary in nature and provide it a constant support in terms of its value at the protocol level.

Low entry barrier (and hence higher chances of quick adoption)

We will heavily lean on DApps to bring in end-user adoption. One of the key features is that we maintain an architecture which is fully compatible to Ethereum development ecosystem i.e all smart contracts, wallets, IDEs, DevOps tools etc are directly compatible with Matic Network. Any Ethereum Dapp can be ported to Matic without almost no significant changes. So the entry barriers for existing Ethereum developers to transition to Matic network are negligible which can jumpstart a viral Dapp adoption.This has the potential to bring in a lot of organic demand due to Network effects that build around the Matic Network.

Do you have prototype or demo to show to the public yet?

Yes. The demo is available Here

What is the transaction per seconds?

Currently “a single Matic commit chain” can theoretically handle 2^16 (65,000+) transactions per second

Is token type ERC20?

Yes. And the same token will be applicable to Matic Chain too i.e no need to move to a native token in future

Do you have a timeline on the Alpha Mainnet launch?

Most likely Q3 or early Q4.

Could you outline your roadmap, How far are you with development and When do you expect a live implementation of Matic to be launched?

We already have a implementation live. We have recently put it on youtube. We also conducted Consensys BSIC in Mumbai where we demoed Matic network on Kovan Testnet. In terms of the Roadmap, we are going to publish a detailed roadmap soon.

What is the expected TPS you'll be able to bring to the Ethereum network? What are you running at now on testnet?

A single commit chain has the capacity of 2^16 (65,000+) transactions per second. Matic network has the capability to add multiple commit chains, But currently, our focus would be on stabilizing the network with one commit chain.

"We have chosen Ethereum as the first platform to showcase our scalability" What other platforms are you aiming toward, and is there a timeline for implementation

Making our Mainnet live on Ethereum is the first priority as of now. Once we have a stable implementation of our Testnet ready we will announce our plans for other Blockchains.

"We also intend to launch the alpha version of our Mainnet with working Dapps before the Token sale"

The partner information is confidential as of now. We will soon make them public. We have 4 teams building their solutions on top of Matic. One of them is a banking wallet in India, 1 in gaming segment, 1 in referral marketing (who are going to publish about Matic Network in the Whitepaper) and 1 in the ad network. There are others in pipeline but are not yet finalized.

Do you have a timeline on the Token sale? Any information on these DApps?

Token sale related details are again confidential as of now.

What is Proof of Stake (PoS)?

Proof-of-Stake is a system in which the blockchain network aims to achieve distributed consensus. Anyone with sufficient amount of tokens can lock up their cryptocurrencies and the economic incentive lies in the shared value of the decentralized network. The individuals staking their cryptocurrencies validate transactions by voting on the same while consensus is achieved when a transaction or a set of transactions in a block or a set of blocks in a checkpoint receives enough votes. The threshold uses the weight in terms of stake that comes with every vote. For instance, in Matic Network, consensus is achieved for committing checkpoints of Matic blocks to the Ethereum network, when at least ⅔ +1 of the total staking power vote for this

What role does Proof-of-Stake play in the Matic Network architecture?

The Proof-of-Stake layer in the Matic Network architecture serves the following 2 purposes:

  • Acts as an incentivization layer for maintaining liveness of the Plasma chain, chiefly mitigating the thorny issue of data unavailability
  • Implement the Proof-of-Stake security guarantees for state transitions not covered by Plasma

How is Matic PoS different from other similar systems?

It is different in the sense that it serves a dual purpose - providing data availability guarantees for the Plasma chain covering state transitions via Plasma Predicates, as well as Proof-of-Stake validation for generic smart contracts in the EVM.

The Matic architecture also separates the process of block production and validation into 2 distinct layers. Validators as block producers create blocks as the name suggests on the Matic chain for quicker (< 2 secs) partial confirmations while the final confirmation is attained once the checkpoint is committed on the main-chain with a certain interval, period of which may vary depending upon multiple factors like Ethereum congestion or number of Matic transactions. In ideal conditions, it shall be around 15 min to 1 hour.

A checkpoint is basically the Merkle root of all blocks produced in between intervals. Validators play multiple roles, creating blocks at the block producer layer, participating in the consensus by signing all checkpoints and committing the checkpoint when acting as proposer. The probability of a validator becoming the block producer or proposer is based on their stake ratio in the overall pool.

What’s the incentive to be a Matic staker?

Matic will be allocating 12% of its total supply of 10 billion tokens to fund the staking rewards. These 1.2 billion tokens will be the staking incentive for the first five years. This is to ensure that the network is seeded well enough until transaction fees gain traction. These rewards are primarily meant to jump-start the network, while the protocol in the long run should be able to sustain itself on the basis of transaction fees.

Validator Rewards = Staking Rewards + Transaction Fees from Matic chain

First year will see the maximum amount of tokens allocated as staking rewards. This is allocated in a way to ensure gradual decoupling of staking rewards from being the dominant component of the validator rewards.

How are staking rewards allocated to stakers?

Tokens to be given out as staking rewards for the first five years of the network life are fixed. This reward is divided per checkpoint and the amount to be shared with all stakers is absolute. The reward rate will be higher during lower bonding rates and vice-versa otherwise.

The staking reward gets distributed proportionally to all stakers; proposer and signers, with the exception of proposer getting a bonus.

How is proposer bonus calculated?

Let’s have a look at a scenario affecting the checkpoint cost with the following assumptions:

  • ETH Price: $200
  • MATIC Price: $0.013
  • Gwei considered: 30
  • Gas considered: 1,000,000
  • Checkpoint interval: 15 mins

Checkpoint cost-to-reward ratio pertaining to the checkpoint reward during the first year of live network based on the above assumptions comes to 5.18%.

If we were to update the interval to 30 mins, then the same ratio comes down to be 2.59%

Let’s say that during the initial phase if we were to go ahead with the same assumptions as stated above with the checkpoint interval being 15 mins, then the bonus to be paid out to the checkpoint proposer will be 5.18% and the algorithm will update this bonus number dynamically depending upon the current checkpoint cost. Please note that this updated bonus value will come into effect based on the governance and consensus between the validators.

If at some point in time during the first year, and proposer bonus being at 5.18%, if the total bonded tokens in the system is 1 billion, then the network reward rate is 30% and the effective reward rate for every staker other than the proposer, after deducting the bonus component from the checkpoint reward, is 28.45%

Please note that the cost has been calculated pre-istanbul and will decrease significantly now.

Encouraging the proposer to include all signatures

To avail the bonus completely, the proposer would need to include all signatures in the checkpoint. Because the protocol desires 2/3+1 weight of the total stake, the checkpoint will be accepted even with 80% votes. However, in this case, proposer gets only 80% of the calculated bonus.

How can I reserve a validator spot?

If we have a vacant validator slot, anyone with any amount of stake can become a validator in the system. There will be validator auctions organized periodically (days mostly), where in anyone can replace any current validator by proposing higher stake. So, in short, it is an open system where we cannot reserve places for anyone.

In any case, there is always the possibility of stake delegation with the current validator set. Anyone can participate in the process with this mechanism and earn rewards as long as the respective validator is honest and online.

Can I participate in the staking process, even if I do not want to run a node?

Matic token holders who do not wish to run their own node can delegate their tokens to a validator. Delegation increases the power of the validator. More the power, more probability of the validator to become the block producer and checkpoint proposer and more weight in the consensus.

There is no minimum amount requirement for delegation. Any amount, even 1 MATIC, will be accepted in the system. However, it is upto validators to set a minimum limit or not while accepting delegations. Validators might charge a commission in exchange for their node running services. Other than the commission charged, one needs to evaluate the track record of the validator for example, average uptime or if the node was ever compromised.

Where will the staked tokens reside?

Staked tokens will be locked in a contract deployed on the Ethereum chain. Validators do not hold the custody of the delegated tokens. However, in the event of validator getting slashed delegated tokens will also get slashed.

For how long will my funds be locked?

If one wishes to opt out of the system, the staked tokens undergo an unbonding period during which they are liable to being slashed for any misbehaviour committed by the validator before the unbonding period started.

Delegated tokens enter unbonding period immediately upon unbond request. However, validators will need to serve a certain notice period in active state, participating in consensus and proposing checkpoints before entering into unbonding period.

Stakers can withdraw their tokens after the unbonding period ends. Exact durations of withdraw for both delegator and validator will be announced here soon.

What are the different states a validator can be in?

Active: Validator is in the current validator set, produces blocks at the Bor layer, participates in Heimdall consensus and commits checkpoint transactions to the Ethereum main-chain. Notice: Validator sends a transaction to unbond. Before entering into the unbonding period, validator needs to be in active state creating, signing and proposing blocks for a certain time. Unbonding: Validator is inactive in this state and thus earns no reward. However, the validator is still liable for slashing in case she has committed any malicious act previously.

Is there a minimum amount of Matic required to stake to become a validator?

The minimum is 1 Matic.

We had earlier mentioned that we are thinking of having a minimum self stake requirement from the validators, as we do hope that validators also have their skin in the game. However, since we will be moving to a robust replacement strategy as the number of validator slots are limited as of now, this does not need any minimum self stake requirement. It is however, logical that over time, the average/median stake by a validator will tend upwards and become substantial.

How can a new validator replace an existing one?

Because of the limitation criteria on the number of validator slots in the network which will be initially close to 100, if all slots are filled, then a new validator can only replace one from the current set if it can beat the score of the least ranked validator. Validator’s rank depends on certain factors like total stake, age, rewards earned and deductions if any. Exact equation to be disclosed after our public testnet event where we’ll be formulating above mentioned factors with appropriate weighting.

Slashing conditions?

There will be multiple slashing conditions. It will be communicated during the public testnet event. For now, the only slashing condition is when a node double signs a checkpoint.