Build The Future of
Decentralised Technology

Cost tracks the shape of what you are building. A single contract with a clear scope (an ERC-20 token or a basic staking contract) is a very different engagement to a complete DeFi protocol or NFT marketplace with multiple interconnected contracts, a frontend, a backend indexer and a third party security audit. Rather than quote a bracket, we start with the Discovery Audit (a fixed fee, credited in full against your build), then present a fixed price Schedule of Work covering architecture, development, testing and audit coordination against your actual scope.

We perform internal security reviews on every contract we write, including automated analysis (Slither, Mythril, Echidna) and manual review by engineers with dedicated smart contract security experience. For production deployments, we strongly recommend, and will coordinate, an independent third party audit with a reputable firm. We do not perform independent audits on our own code; the conflict of interest is obvious and the standard is unacceptable to us.

That depends on your specific requirements: transaction throughput, cost per transaction, developer ecosystem maturity, regulatory considerations, target user geography and composability with existing DeFi liquidity. Ethereum mainnet offers the strongest security guarantees and deepest liquidity but higher gas costs. L2s (Arbitrum, Base, Optimism) give security close to Ethereum's with dramatically lower costs. Solana suits consumer applications that need very high throughput. We provide an objective recommendation after understanding your use case, not a default to whatever chain we last deployed on.

We take the regulatory picture seriously and design so the position your lawyers land on can be implemented cleanly. The Discovery Audit includes a risk register that flags where your token or protocol sits close to categories your lawyers will need to rule on, such as a managed investment scheme, a financial product or a digital currency exchange service. We do not make those determinations. Specialist crypto legal counsel does, and we can help you find one if you do not already have one.

Yes. We can build on Hyperledger Fabric, Quorum (Go-Ethereum), Besu and permissioned EVM networks for enterprise use cases where public chain exposure is not appropriate: regulated asset registries, interbank settlement, supply chain provenance. We'll recommend a permissioned architecture when the use case genuinely justifies it rather than pushing clients toward public chains where it's not warranted.

This is why upgrade patterns matter. Where possible, we implement upgradeable contract architectures (transparent proxy, UUPS) with time locked governance on the upgrade authority, so critical bugs can be patched. For truly immutable contracts, we design circuit breakers and pause mechanisms that can halt operations while an upgrade contract is deployed. We also write an emergency response playbook with your team so they know how to pause and respond to a critical issue.

Yes. Full stack Web3 development is our standard offering. We build React and Next.js frontends with ethers.js/viem/wagmi wallet integrations, The Graph or custom indexer integrations for on-chain data, IPFS/Arweave integrations for decentralised storage, and backend services where centralised components are necessary (oracle feeds, KYC/AML, off-chain order books). The smart contract is rarely the hard part. The user experience usually is.

Bridge security is one of the hardest problems in Web3, the majority of the largest DeFi hacks have been bridge exploits. Our approach: we avoid building novel bridge mechanisms where proven solutions (LayerZero, Axelar, Wormhole, Stargate) can be integrated safely. Where custom bridging is genuinely necessary, we apply formal verification to the bridge logic, implement very conservative economic limits and deploy staged rollouts with circuit breakers that can freeze the bridge if anomalous activity is detected.