/

IBC Protocol

  • What it is:IBC Protocol is a secure, permissionless blockchain interoperability protocol that enables feature-rich cross-chain data and value transfer between 115+ sovereign chains.
  • Best for:Cosmos SDK appchain developers, Sovereign blockchain projects, DeFi protocols in Cosmos ecosystem
  • Pricing:Free tier available, paid plans from Chain Gas Fees
  • Rating:92/100Excellent
  • Expert's conclusion:IBC is the most secure and decentralized cross-chain messaging protocol available - IBC is necessary for Cosmos developers who want to build a working, fully-interoperable ecosystem.
Visit website
Reviewed byMaxim Manylov·Web3 Engineer & Serial Founder

What Is IBC Protocol and What Does It Do?

The IBC Protocol is the world's most-used open-source blockchain interoperability standard that enables safe, permissionless cross-chain communications (data and value transfer) among 115+ different blockchains. The IBC Protocol is used to connect many Cosmos SDK-based blockchains, and it also has implementations such as ibc-solidity to be able to communicate with blockchains outside of Cosmos SDK. IBC removes trusted third party involvement from cross-chain communications, and due to its use of light client verification, IBC has secured over ten billion dollars in annual cross-chain value transfers without ever having an exploit occur.

Active
📅Founded 2019
🏢Protocol Foundation
TARGET SEGMENTS
Blockchain DevelopersDeFi ProtocolsAppchainsCross-chain Exchanges

What Are IBC Protocol's Key Business Metrics?

📊
115+
Connected Chains
🔄
35M+
Annual Cross-chain Transactions
📊
$58B+
Ecosystem Market Cap
📊
Tens of billions
Annual Transfer Value
📊
22+
Networks with IBC Enabled (2021)
📊
0
Exploits Since Launch

How Credible and Trustworthy Is IBC Protocol?

92/100
Excellent

As of today, the IBC Protocol is a battle tested protocol with a perfect security record, and the protocol is being utilized across all of the major Cosmos ecosystems to enable cross-chain communications. In addition to the protocol itself, the Cosmos team continues to develop features at a rapid pace, which are making the IBC Protocol increasingly richer and more capable of supporting cross-chain communications.

BREAKDOWN
Product Maturity95/100
Company Stability90/100
Security & Compliance100/100
User Reviews85/100
Transparency95/100
Support Quality90/100
TRUST SIGNALS
Zero exploits since 2021 launchSecures tens of billions in annual value transfer115+ connected chains35M+ annual cross-chain transactionsBattle-tested across production DeFi protocols

What is the history of IBC Protocol and its key milestones?

2019

IBC Protocol Conceptualized

IBC was developed as a part of the Cosmos Network's overall vision for enabling cross-chain communications between blockchains.

2021

Mainnet Launch

The IBC Protocol went live in March 2021 and enabled the first trust-minimized cross-chain communications between two or more blockchains.

2021

Rapid Ecosystem Growth

By November 2021, the IBC Protocol had established a connection with 22 different blockchains and was processing over 1.5 million transactions per month.

2023

Interchain Accounts (ICA)

IBC introduced the concept of ICA (Interchain Accounts), which allows a blockchain to control an account on another blockchain without having to agree on a new standard.

2025

115+ Chain Milestone

The IBC Protocol has expanded to include support for 115+ different blockchains and has been extended to include EVM compatibility using the ibc-solidity implementation.

What Are the Key Features of IBC Protocol?

✨
Universal Interoperability
Any IBC-enabled blockchain can send arbitrary byte-encoded data to other IBC-enabled blockchains, thereby enabling feature-rich cross-chain communications.
🔒
Light Client Security
Because IBC utilizes trust-minimized verification, it does not require the use of third-party intermediaries to verify cross-chain communications and thus billions of dollars have been securely transferred between blockchains.
✨
Permissionless Relaying
Anybody can become a relay operator; therefore, there are no trusted parties involved in transporting packets between IBC-enabled blockchains.
✨
Interchain Accounts (ICA)
Using IBC, each blockchain can control accounts on other blockchains and perform native transactions on those blockchains without the need for a bridge.
✨
Asynchronous Communication
Data can be sent cross-chain with asynchronous receipt confirmations, enabling complex multi-contract workflows.
✨
Middleware Customization
Flexible middleware enables applications to leverage unlimited cross-chain workflow possibilities.
✨
Interchain Queries
Verified responses can be queried across multiple blockchains using light client authentication.

What Technology Stack and Infrastructure Does IBC Protocol Use?

Infrastructure

Decentralized relayer network across Cosmos zones

Technologies

Cosmos SDKTendermintRust (ibc-rs)Solidity (ibc-solidity)Go

Integrations

Osmosis DEXStride Liquid StakingDatachain EVM Bridge95+ IBC-enabled chains

Based on official IBC documentation, Cosmos developer portal, and ecosystem implementations

What Are the Best Use Cases for IBC Protocol?

DeFi Protocols
Cross-chain token transfers, liquidity provision, and yield optimization can be done seamlessly across 115+ blockchains without centralized bridges. The following text sounds more like "a person". BEGIN_TEXT
DEX Developers
Develop interchain AMM and perpetuals markets using native IBC token transfer from 95+ blockchain to enable the largest interchain decentralized exchanges (DEX)
Liquid Staking Protocols
To reliably and trustlessly communicate with other blockchain(s) for multiple years in production use an IBC-based protocol architecture design
DAO Treasury Managers
To manage multi-blockchain assets and be able to vote on governance decisions and implement strategies that do not require asset transfers utilize Interchain accounts
NOT FORHigh-Frequency Traders
The finality of transactions is dependent upon the time it takes for each underlying chain to reach consensus; therefore not suitable for use cases requiring sub-second latency
NOT FORNon-Compatible L1 Blockchains
Requires IBC module implementations and light client support; therefore incompatible with blockchains that do not have a module based system

How Much Does IBC Protocol Cost and What Plans Are Available?

Pricing information with service tiers, costs, and details
☐Service$CostℹDetails🔗Source
Core Protocol UsageFree (Gas Fees Only)Permissionless cross-chain communication. Chains pay native gas fees for IBC transactions.—
Token Transfers (ICS-20)Chain Gas FeesFungible token transfers between IBC-enabled chains. No protocol-level fees.—
Light Client VerificationOn-chain Computation CostsGas costs for verifying counterparty chain consensus states.—
Relayer ServicesOptional IncentivesPermissionless relayers may charge fees. Many operate altruistically for Cosmos ecosystem.—
Core Protocol UsageFree (Gas Fees Only)
Permissionless cross-chain communication. Chains pay native gas fees for IBC transactions.
Token Transfers (ICS-20)Chain Gas Fees
Fungible token transfers between IBC-enabled chains. No protocol-level fees.
Light Client VerificationOn-chain Computation Costs
Gas costs for verifying counterparty chain consensus states.
Relayer ServicesOptional Incentives
Permissionless relayers may charge fees. Many operate altruistically for Cosmos ecosystem.

How Does IBC Protocol Compare to Competitors?

FeatureIBC ProtocolWormholeLayerZeroAxelar
Core FunctionalityTrust-minimized light client verificationGuardian network validationOracle + relayer validationGateway validator network
Trust ModelTrustless (light clients)Multi-sig guardians (trusted)Trusted oracles/relayersTrusted gateways
Token TransfersYes (ICS-20)YesYesYes
Arbitrary DataYes (any bytes)YesYesYes
EVM CompatibleVia Solidity relayerNativeNativeNative
Starting CostGas fees onlyProtocol fees + gasProtocol fees + gasProtocol fees + gas
Free TierYes (permissionless)NoNoNo
API AvailabilitySDKs (Go, Rust, Solidity)SDKsSDKsSDKs
Chains Supported100+ Cosmos, expanding30+ major chains50+ chains40+ chains
Security ModelIndependent chain securityShared securityShared securityShared security
Core Functionality
IBC ProtocolTrust-minimized light client verification
WormholeGuardian network validation
LayerZeroOracle + relayer validation
AxelarGateway validator network
Trust Model
IBC ProtocolTrustless (light clients)
WormholeMulti-sig guardians (trusted)
LayerZeroTrusted oracles/relayers
AxelarTrusted gateways
Token Transfers
IBC ProtocolYes (ICS-20)
WormholeYes
LayerZeroYes
AxelarYes
Arbitrary Data
IBC ProtocolYes (any bytes)
WormholeYes
LayerZeroYes
AxelarYes
EVM Compatible
IBC ProtocolVia Solidity relayer
WormholeNative
LayerZeroNative
AxelarNative
Starting Cost
IBC ProtocolGas fees only
WormholeProtocol fees + gas
LayerZeroProtocol fees + gas
AxelarProtocol fees + gas
Free Tier
IBC ProtocolYes (permissionless)
WormholeNo
LayerZeroNo
AxelarNo
API Availability
IBC ProtocolSDKs (Go, Rust, Solidity)
WormholeSDKs
LayerZeroSDKs
AxelarSDKs
Chains Supported
IBC Protocol100+ Cosmos, expanding
Wormhole30+ major chains
LayerZero50+ chains
Axelar40+ chains
Security Model
IBC ProtocolIndependent chain security
WormholeShared security
LayerZeroShared security
AxelarShared security

How Does IBC Protocol Compare to Competitors?

vs Wormhole

IBC utilizes trust minimized light client verification using the sovereign security of each blockchain; whereas Wormhole utilizes a 19-validator Guardian network. IBC has no central custodian risk however Wormhole supports more non-Cosmos blockchains natively.

IBC for use by sovereign chains focusing on security; whereas Wormhole for use across many different blockchains.

vs LayerZero

LayerZero utilizes modular oracle / relayer networks with configurable trust; whereas IBC is completely trustless within the Cosmos ecosystem. LayerZero provides greater support for blockchains outside of Cosmos however IBC allows for standardized ICS application development.

LayerZero for maximum chain coverage; whereas IBC for standardization of application blockchain interoperability.

vs Axelar

Axelar utilizes a permissioned validator set with gateway contracts; whereas IBC is completely permissionless with on-chain light clients. Axelar is stronger at integrating with EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine); whereas IBC is stronger in the Cosmos Hub ecosystem.

Axelar for use by dApps focused on the Ethereum Virtual Machine; whereas IBC for use by developers of Cosmos application blockchains.

vs Polkadot XCM

Polkadot's XCM is utilized in a relay chain / parachain model utilizing shared security; whereas IBC enables completely sovereign chains with their own unique independent security. Polkadot is more centralized in its architectural design compared to IBC.

Polkadot for use in shared security ecosystems; whereas IBC for use in sovereign blockchain interoperability.

What are the strengths and limitations of IBC Protocol?

Pros

  • Trust minimized security — utilizes on-chain light clients; therefore does not require any third-party notaries
  • Permissionless relaying — anyone can relay packets without approval
  • Sovereign Security - Utilizes Independent Consensus of Each Chain
  • Standardized Specs for ICS - ICS-20 Tokens and Contracts Allow for Interoperable Composability Across All Ecosystem Components
  • No Wrapped Assets - Direct Token Transfers to Native Token Without Centralized Custody
  • Actively Developing - Golang Core + Solidity/Rust Ports Enable EVM/Solana Compatibility
  • Designed for Scalability - Connections/Channels Allow For Granular Security Policies Across All Ecosystem Components

Cons

  • Primarily Adopted Within The Cosmos SDK Ecosystem - Cosmos Centric
  • Very Difficult To Implement - Requires a Light Client Verification On Chain
  • Relayer Dependency - Requires An Active Relayer; However, Relayers Are Permissionless
  • Adoption Outside Of The Cosmos SDK Ecosystem is Currently Limited - Growing; Lags Behind General Purpose Bridges
  • Immature EVM Integration - Solidity Relayer Less Mature Than Native Support
  • No Frontend Tooling - Developers Will Typically Need A Chain Specific UI For Most Use Cases
  • Needed Gas Optimization - Cross-Chain Proofs Can Be Computationally Expensive

Who Is IBC Protocol Best For?

Best For

  • Cosmos SDK appchain developers — Integrate With Native IBC Module And Provide Standardized Light Client Support
  • Sovereign blockchain projects — Provides Interoperability While Maintaining Independent Security
  • DeFi protocols in Cosmos ecosystem — ICS-20 Token Transfers & Osmosis DEX Composability
  • Teams prioritizing security over speed — Prevents Bridge Hacks Through Trust-Minimized Verification
  • Multi-chain dApp developers — Enables Portable Applications Through Standardized ICS Specs

Not Suitable For

  • EVM-only projects — More Maturity In Native Wormhole/Axelar For Ethereum Compatibility
  • Retail users seeking simple bridging — Requires Cosmos Wallet/Wallet Support. Use LI.FI or Socket For UX.
  • High-frequency trading protocols — Light Client Verification Adds Latency - Consider Rollup Sequencers.
  • Budget-constrained teams — Verifying On Chain Is More Gas Consuming Than Using Oracle Solutions.

Are There Usage Limits or Geographic Restrictions for IBC Protocol?

Packet Size
Variable by chain, typically 10KB-1MB per packet
Channel Capacity
Ordered or unordered delivery semantics per channel
Light Client Types
ICS-2,6,7,8,9,10 supporting Tendermint, EVM, others
Timeout Duration
Configurable per packet, typically 5-30 minutes
Concurrent Connections
Unlimited, secured independently
Relayer Requirements
Needs active permissionless relayers
Chain Compatibility
Cosmos SDK native, ports for EVM/Rust chains
Consensus Verification
Requires counterparty light client support

Is IBC Protocol Secure and Compliant?

Trust-Minimized Light ClientsOn-chain verification of counterparty consensus using ICS-2/6/7/8/9/10 specs
Independent Chain SecurityEach chain maintains sovereign security, no shared validator sets
Cryptographic ProofsRelayers provide Merkle proofs, cannot manipulate data even if malicious
Permissionless RelayingNo gatekeepers, but packet timeouts prevent DoS attacks
Connection/Channel AuthenticationOn-chain handshake process with cryptographic state commitment
Packet Ordering GuaranteesConfigurable ORDERED or UNORDERED delivery semantics
No Custodial RiskNative asset transfers without wrapped tokens or centralized bridges
ICS Formal VerificationCore specs mathematically verified for security properties

What Customer Support Options Does IBC Protocol Offer?

Channels
For bug reports and feature requestsCosmos developer community supportForum.cosmos.network for IBC discussionsSelf-service tutorials at tutorials.cosmos.network
Hours
Community support 24/7, best during UTC business hours
Response Time
GitHub: days to weeks. Discord/Forum: hours to days depending on question complexity
Satisfaction
No formal ratings - protocol widely adopted across 100+ chains
Support Limitations
•Community-driven support only - no official 24/7 team
•No phone or live chat support available
•Response times depend on community availability
•Enterprise support requires chain-specific arrangements

What APIs and Integrations Does IBC Protocol Support?

API Type
gRPC APIs via Cosmos SDK modules (ibc-core, ibc-apps)
Authentication
Wallet signatures, chain-specific consensus verification
Webhooks
Not supported - event-driven via on-chain modules and relayers
SDKs
Cosmos SDK (Go), CosmJS (JavaScript), ibc-go reference implementations on GitHub
Documentation
Comprehensive at docs.cosmos.network/main/ibc - ICS specs, tutorials, protocol specs
Sandbox
Testnets available via Cosmos Hub testnet and chain-specific test environments
SLA
Chain-dependent - follows each chain's consensus security and uptime
Rate Limits
Block-based limits per chain (e.g., gas limits, packet limits per channel)
Use Cases
Token transfers (ICS-20), cross-chain messaging, NFT transfers, oracle data, dApp interoperability

What Are Common Questions About IBC Protocol?

IBC Establishes Verified Connections and Channels Between Blockchains Using Light Clients to Verify Interchain Communication. Blockchains Recognize Each Other By Cryptographic Consensus Proofs, Then Route Packets Through Permissionless Relayers. No Trusted Third Parties are Required - Participating Chain Consensus Determines Security.

The IBC protocol uses on-chain light client technology for trust-minimization instead of a validator or a custodian through multisignature. A relay is a permissionless entity however it will never be able to move funds because of the cryptographic validation. The IBC protocol works with any type of consensus algorithm whether that is Proof-of-Stake or any other.

Yes; the IBC protocol provides security to the source chain as well as the target chain as well as the source and target chains' security is inherited through the light client verification. Malicious relays may only cause delays with packets but they cannot modify any information that is contained within those packets. Every channel/connection is independently secured based upon their own individual security parameters.

The primary focus for the IBC protocol has been the development of Cosmos ecosystem which includes over 100 different chains, specifically Osmosis, Akash, and the Cosmos Hub. The IBC protocol is currently expanding to develop Polkadot and Corda through the use of ICS standards. Any blockchain that implements an IBC middleware layer can potentially use the IBC protocol.

Users can utilize the ICS-20 standard for the fungible token transfer through wallets such as Keplr and Leap. When users send tokens through the IBC protocol, the tokens are placed into escrow on the source chain and then minted on the destination chain. Many of the Cosmos DEX's such as Osmosis have native IBC transfers enabled.

All of the Cosmos SDK-based blockchains implement IBC by default. Non-Cosmos SDK-based blockchains require the implementation of an IBC middleware layer. In order to provide the best level of application compatibility, developers should follow the standardized ICS specifications (ICS-20 tokens and ICS-27 contracts).

The IBC protocol requires the existence of relay infrastructure (relayers are permissionless however they require some form of economic incentive) and finality is determined by the slowest chain. Therefore, the IBC protocol does not enable instantaneous transfers - all transactions are dependent upon the block times of each chain. There is also a relatively complex setup process for any non-Cosmos SDK-based blockchains.

Both chains involved in the transaction have their respective on-chain gas fees plus the potential for relayer rewards. The IBC protocol generally results in lower costs when compared to centralized bridges. However, the costs associated with using the IBC protocol can vary depending upon the congestion levels of the two chains involved in the transaction, as well as the complexity of the packet being transferred.

Is IBC Protocol Worth It?

IBC Protocol is considered to be the gold standard in trust-minimized blockchain interoperability with its ability to enable permissionless cross-chain communication among the 100+ live chains. The IBC Protocol utilizes a light client architecture that removes any risk associated with centralized bridges while still allowing for arbitrary data exchanges. As the backbone of the Cosmos ecosystem, the IBC Protocol offers proven scalable and secure performance at a production scale.

Recommended For

  • Cosmos SDK developers who build application-specific chains
  • DeFi applications requiring secure native token transfers
  • dApps that require a way to send messages and data across different blockchain networks.
  • Teams that prioritize decentralization above all else, even if it means they will be slower.

!
Use With Caution

  • High frequency trading (latency will follow block time).
  • Blockchains that need faster than current finality times (sub second finality).
  • Projects without relay infrastructure.
  • Non technical teams expecting to have a "turn-key" solution.

Not Recommended For

  • Bridges that are as fast as possible.
  • The Bitcoin/Ethereum Mainnet (IBC has limitations on native IBC).
  • Budget constrained projects trying to avoid infrastructure costs.
  • Applications that use one chain only (Simple Single Chain Applications).
Expert's Conclusion

IBC is the most secure and decentralized cross-chain messaging protocol available - IBC is necessary for Cosmos developers who want to build a working, fully-interoperable ecosystem.

Best For
Cosmos SDK developers who build application-specific chainsDeFi applications requiring secure native token transfersdApps that require a way to send messages and data across different blockchain networks.

What do expert reviews and research say about IBC Protocol?

Key Findings

IBC is the industry standard for trust-minimized interoperability - IBC has been used to power over 100 Cosmos chains, transferring billions of dollars and proving itself to be highly secure through its use on the Osmosis DEX, Akash Cloud, and multiple De-Fi protocols - IBC also uses light-client verification so it doesn't rely on a centralized bridge, and supports tokens, data, and dApps.

Data Quality

Excellent - official Cosmos docs, live chain data, extensive developer tutorials. Technical details verified across multiple production implementations.

Risk Factors

!
Risks of relayer centralization in lower volume channels.
!
Latency is dependent upon the block time of each individual chain.
!
Complexity of the integration for chains outside of the Cosmos ecosystem.
!
Different economic security levels depending on the set of validators for each individual chain.
Last updated: February 2026

What Are the Best Alternatives to IBC Protocol?

  • •
    Axelar: An omnichain interoperability network using gateway contracts and relayers - provides broader EVM/multi-VM support than IBC’s Cosmos focus - easier to integrate for non-Cosmos chains, however relies on a more centralized set of validators - best suited for cross-chain dApps within the Ethereum ecosystem. (axelar.network)
  • •
    LayerZero: A cross-chain messaging protocol using an oracle-verifier-relayer architecture - works on top of 50+ different chains, both EVM and non-EVM - less decentralized than IBC, however simpler to integrate - best for cross-chain dApps that require speed. (layerzero.network)
  • •
    Wormhole: A cross-chain messaging protocol using a guardian validator network - strong multichain support, including Solana and Ethereum - faster than IBC, however needs a trusted guardian validator set - best for high volume token bridges. (wormhole.com)
  • •
    CCIP (Chainlink): ChainLink is a cross-chain service that uses decentralized oracles. It has an enterprise focus and high levels of security; however it is generally considered to be more expensive/complex than IBC. It would be best suited to large institutions utilizing DeFi as well as data feeds through oracles (chain.link/ccip)
  • •
    Polkadot XCM: The Cross Consensus Messaging Protocol in Polkadot is used to facilitate communication among parachains. This is similar to IBC in terms of its trust minimized approach; however it can only be used inside of the Polkadot ecosystem. As such it would be best for projects native to Polkadot (polkadot.network)

What Additional Information Is Available for IBC Protocol?

Ecosystem Scale

Powers over 100 live chains and tens of thousands of active channels. Trillions of dollars have been moved since main net. Osmosis ($1B+ TVL DEX) and Akash Network (cloud marketplace) are both built upon this core infrastructure.

ICS Standards

20+ InterChain Standards exist for use with IBC, including token standards (ICS-20), contract standards (ICS-27), packet standards (ICS-04) etc. IBC's modular design allows for the creation of entirely new applications, without requiring any modifications to the underlying protocol.

Developer Adoption

IBC is integrated into the Cosmos SDK (used by ~75% of Cosmos chains). IBC receives ongoing development support through the cosmos/ibc-go GitHub repository. Regular ICS spec updates and security audits occur.

Map of Zones

There exists real time visualizations of the >500 IBC connections throughout the Cosmos ecosystem, including monitoring of channel status, packet volume, and overall chain health at mapofzones.com.

Relayer Network

Incentivized relays (permissionless) receive packet fees, providing them with economic incentives to operate their relaying tools. Examples of such relaying tools include Hermes (Rust), Go Relayer, and JavaScript relayers. Without community operated infrastructure IBC would cease to function properly.

What Are IBC Protocol's Protocol Metrics?

35M+
Annual Cross-Chain Transactions
$58B+
Ecosystem Market Cap
115+
IBC-Powered Chains
7.2M+
Transactions Processed (Cosmos IBC)

Which Networks and Protocols Does IBC Protocol Support?

Cosmos EcosystemOsmosisEVM ChainsEnterprise BlockchainsDatachainStride

What Is IBC Protocol's Message Fees?

Base Fee
No in-protocol rent extraction or hidden fees
Fee Structure
Permissionless and open-source
Middleware Costs
Flexible based on customization

What Security Model Does IBC Protocol Use?

Light Client-Based VerificationNo trusted third party required
Zero Exploits Since LaunchSecures tens of billions in value transfer
Permissionless Access
Open-Source Protocol

What Protocol Features Does IBC Protocol Offer?

Universal Interoperability

Any encoded data type can be shared across chains.

Asynchronous Communication

Any encoded data can be sent cross-chain with receipts to confirm delivery.

Interchain Accounts

An application can execute actions on remote chains without leaving the origin chain.

Interchain Queries

An application can query data asynchronously across chains.

Middleware Customization

Applications can extend their functionality with flexible cross-chain middleware.

How Does IBC Protocol's Interoperability Comparison Compare?

FeatureIBC ProtocolWormholePolkadot XCMP
Trust ModelLight Client VerificationPortal BridgeCross-Consensus Messaging
Chains Supported115+Ethereum, Solana+Parachains
Transaction Volume35M+ annually$6.4B volumeArbitrary data transfers
Security RecordZero exploitsBridge exploits reportedBFT Consensus
PermissionlessYesGuardian networkRelay chain dependencies

What Use Case Examples Does IBC Protocol Offer?

Interchain DEX (Osmosis)

The largest interchain DEX currently supports transfers from 95+ chains.

Liquid Staking (Stride)

Reliable trustless communication between chains is supported.

Trust-Minimized Bridges (Datachain/TOKI)

IBC is being extended to allow trustless communication between non-Cosmos chains and Cosmos chains.

Cross-Chain DeFi

Seamless asset transfers across the entire Cosmos ecosystem are supported by IBC.

Multi-Chain Applications

Trustless data and value transfer between parties is also supported by IBC (without intermediaries)

Expert Reviews

📝

No reviews yet

Be the first to review IBC Protocol!

Write a Review

Similar Products

Chainlink CCIP
chain.link
Hyperlane
hyperlane.xyz