After studying Polygon’s newly launched CDK Stack system component service, I am really worried about ZK Stack:

1) CDK is more flexible in terms of modular combination. For example, you can use validium or zkEVM, Sequencer can be centralized, and DA can be used directly locally without relying on Ethereum. Especially non-interactive proof systems like Validium are more friendly for one-click upgrade of layer 1 to layer 2. Existing code can be reused and modified appropriately to complete a smooth upgrade.

2) CDK implements free solutions such as Gas token abstraction. Layer2 can customize Gas token, but in fact, the abstract transformation is done in the middle. The same is true for the ZK bridge solution. The asset ownership is transferred first and then the protocol is executed. This complex conversion logic is actually compatible efficiency achieved at the expense of certain security. Although these solutions are not as secure and efficient as shared Prover, they cannot be implemented quickly, and it will be better to iterate when the time comes;

In short, Polygon CDK currently looks a bit similar to OP Stack on the ZK track. It has a complete set of combinable solutions and is superior in ease of use and compatibility. Although key components such as Prover or multi-chain communication solutions are not as secure and stable as ZK Stack, it does not affect its performance. Many projects will be launched first, thereby gaining first-mover advantages. Visual inspection shows that a number of Polygon CDK projects are already on the way (testing)

Because the Stack strategy is to split and share components and inject liquidity into projects introduced into the ecosystem. In the early stage, you have to fight for a brutal expansion speed. Whether you can attract projects is crucial. The success of OP Stack confirms this point. On the other hand, ZK Stack is originally slow, and now Polygon CDK, which is good at marketing and integrating resources, is coming to disrupt the situation. Why don't you sweat it!