ZORA’s Integration Into Other Chains: Base, Solana & Multi-Chain Strategy

Zora’s trajectory from an Ethereum-native NFT protocol to a Superchain-aligned network has been one of the clearest examples of how creator platforms evolve in a multi-chain world. With Zora Network live on the Optimism Stack, growing mint volume on Base, and increasing demand to reach audiences on Solana, the strategic questions now are less about “if” and more about “how” to build a coherent cross-chain experience that respects each chain’s strengths without fragmenting creators or collectors.

This article breaks down what Zora’s integration paths look like for Base and Solana, the architectural trade-offs, and how users can prepare for a multi-chain future.

Where Zora Stands Today

• OP Stack-native foundation: Zora Network is built on the Optimism Superchain vision, which aims to unify many L2s under a shared security and tooling umbrella. This gives Zora first-class EVM compatibility and rapid deployment pathways across OP Stack chains. See the Superchain vision and architecture for context at the Optimism docs: Optimism Superchain Vision. Zora Network’s technical status is also tracked by L2Beat: Zora on L2Beat.

• Base adoption momentum: EVM parity also makes Base an obvious target. Coinbase’s Base has leaned into mainstream cultural activations like Onchain Summer, driving significant creator and collector activity and pushing fees down to accessible levels. Learn more in Base’s documentation and Coinbase’s recap: Base Docs and Onchain Summer II.

• Cheaper L2s post-Dencun: Ethereum’s 2024 Dencun upgrade introduced blob-carrying transactions (EIP-4844), materially lowering data availability costs for L2s and enabling cheaper NFT mints across OP Stack chains. See the Ethereum Foundation overview: Dencun on Mainnet.

Together, these pillars explain why Zora’s Base integration feels natural: shared EVM tooling, low fees, and overlapping communities substantially reduce the friction for creators and collectors.

You can find Zora’s developer references here: Zora Docs.

Why Solana Matters

Solana has become a center of gravity for high-volume, low-cost NFT experimentation, especially with compressed NFTs (cNFTs) that dramatically reduce storage and mint costs for large drops and onchain media. For creators targeting scale and mobile-native UX, Solana is compelling. Explore the technical model here: Solana Compressed NFTs Guide.

Key differences to consider:

• Runtime and account model: Solana’s parallelized runtime and account model differ significantly from EVM semantics. Zora’s EVM-native contracts cannot be simply “ported”—they need native Solana programs.
• Program and metadata standards: The SPL token ecosystem and NFT metadata conventions on Solana require a dedicated indexing and media pipeline separate from ERC-721/1155.
• Royalties and payouts: Royalty enforcement, fee routing, and onchain rewards must be redefined for Solana programs while preserving creator economics.

In short, Solana is not another EVM L2—an integration requires native design.

Integration Paths: Base vs. Solana

• Base integration (EVM-aligned)

  • Deployment model: Reuse Zora’s Solidity contracts or OP Stack templates with minimal refactoring.
  • Indexing: Extend existing EVM indexers and event pipelines.
  • UX: Same wallets, similar signing (EIP-712), and ETH-based gas on Base.
  • Outcome: Zora achieves fast time-to-market with cultural alignment and low fees across Superchain environments. References: Base Docs, Optimism Superchain Vision, Zora Docs.

• Solana integration (non-EVM)

  • Deployment model: Build native Solana programs for minting, editions, and marketplaces; support cNFTs for scale.
  • Indexing: Run Solana-specific indexers; reconcile metadata pipelines (Arweave/IPFS) and content addressing across chains.
  • UX: Distinct signing flows (ed25519), separate fee token (SOL), and different wallet abstractions.
  • Outcome: Access to Solana’s high-throughput, low-fee NFT ecosystem, but requires parallel infrastructure and careful design to avoid feature drift. Reference: Compressed NFTs on Solana.

Cross-Chain Architecture: What “Omnichain Zora” Could Look Like

• Content and metadata neutrality

  • Store media and metadata in chain-agnostic systems like IPFS or Arweave so assets are discoverable across chains without duplication.
  • References: IPFS Docs, Arweave Docs.

• Messaging and intents

  • For cross-chain actions (e.g., mint on Base triggered from Zora Network), use generalized messaging layers with explicit security assumptions. Options include:
    • Wormhole
    • LayerZero
    • Hyperlane
  • Prefer “mint where the users are” over NFT bridging. Move intent/messages, not assets, and maintain canonical mints per chain.

• Rewards and fee routing

  • Recreate Zora-style creator rewards and protocol fee sharing natively on each chain, rather than trying to bridge royalty state. Keep the economic model consistent but implementation-specific. See reference materials and APIs in Zora Docs.

• Superchain-first rollout

  • Prioritize OP Stack L2s (Zora Network, Base) for fast iteration and a consistent EVM developer surface, then expand to Solana with purpose-built programs.

UX, Security, and Compliance Considerations

• Wallet fragmentation and signing differences

  • EVM flows rely on EIP-712 typed data and ETH-based gas; Solana uses ed25519 signatures and SOL for fees. Make the UX explicit about what is being signed and on which chain.
  • Account abstraction and gas sponsorship on EVM (EIP-4337) can smooth onboarding but require audited paymasters and bundlers. Reference: EIP-4337.

• Bridge and messaging risk

  • Cross-chain infrastructure broadens the attack surface. If you adopt message-based flows (not bridging NFTs), still ensure clear trust models and circuit breakers. For context on bridge-related risk trends, see Chainalysis’ industry report: Crypto Crime Mid-year Update 2024.

• Funding flows

  • Users need chain-specific gas (ETH on Base; SOL on Solana). Consider UX that detects balances and prompts top-ups or provides fiat on-ramps at the moment of need.

What Creators Should Do Now

• Choose chain by audience and format

  • Cultural drops and EVM-native composability: Zora Network and Base.
  • High-scale or experimental media (e.g., cNFT campaigns): Solana.

• Keep assets portable at the content layer

  • Use IPFS or Arweave for media and metadata so you can mint natively on multiple chains without losing provenance or discoverability. References: IPFS Docs, Arweave Docs.

• Avoid bridging NFTs unless strictly necessary

  • Prefer per-chain canonical mints plus cross-chain indexing and discovery. Use messaging layers for signals, not asset movement, and disclose trust assumptions: Wormhole Docs, LayerZero Docs, Hyperlane Docs.

• Measure the right KPIs

  • Time to mint confirmation, median gas cost, secondary liquidity per chain, and creator payout finality. Post-Dencun fee improvements on L2s are material: Dencun on Mainnet.

A Sensible Roadmap for Zora’s Multi-Chain Strategy

• Double down on Superchain alignment

  • Ship identical features on Zora Network and Base quickly; maintain a single EVM codebase and a unified reward model. References: Optimism Superchain Vision, Base Docs, Zora Docs.

• Develop a native Solana minting stack

  • Build Solana programs for editions and cNFTs, with feature parity to the EVM side where it matters (drops, editions, royalties, rewards). Invest in robust Solana indexing.

• Unify discovery and payouts

  • Provide an aggregator view across chains with chain-aware royalties and payouts. Keep canonical ownership and provenance per chain, but deliver a single discovery surface.

• Embrace intent-based UX

  • Allow users to express “mint this” while the app routes to the optimal chain and payment flow, revealing exactly what will be signed on which network to preserve trust.

Getting Ready as a User

If you collect or mint across Base and Solana, your wallet setup should be secure and multi-chain capable. A hardware wallet like OneKey can help you:

• Securely sign on both EVM L2s and Solana with a single device, reducing phishing and key exposure risk.
• Manage chain-specific assets (ETH for Base, SOL for Solana) and switch networks without juggling multiple devices.
• Review transaction details clearly, an important safeguard when interacting with cross-chain messaging or intent-based flows.

As Zora expands multi-chain, secure key management becomes even more critical given the diversity of signing flows and contracts across ecosystems.

Conclusion

Zora’s expansion into Base is the natural next step of its OP Stack-native journey, unlocking faster iteration and lower fees for creators. Solana represents a complementary opportunity that requires native program design and new indexing pipelines, but offers massive throughput and cost advantages—especially for high-scale and experimental media formats like compressed NFTs.

The winning strategy is clear: mint natively where users are, keep media portable with decentralized storage, use messaging for cross-chain coordination rather than bridging NFTs, and standardize creator economics per chain. With this approach, Zora can thrive across ecosystems without diluting its core value to creators and collectors.