Why Crypto Developers Are Leaving Some Chains
An analysis of the 'great migration' in Web3 development. We explore the factors causing developers to leave certain blockchain ecosystems for others, from poor tooling to shifting narratives.
The Web3 developer landscape is not static; it's a fluid and highly competitive environment where talent is constantly on the move. While the overall number of Web3 developers has grown significantly, a closer look reveals a "great migration" is underway. Developers are leaving certain blockchain ecosystems and flocking to others, and the reasons for these shifts offer critical insights into what makes a platform successful in the long run.
Understanding why developers choose to leave a chain is just as important as understanding why they join one. It's a leading indicator of an ecosystem's health and its ability to sustain innovation. This guide explores the key factors driving developers away from certain platforms and what it tells us about the future of the multi-chain world.
1. Poor Developer Experience (DX)
This is often the most cited reason. If building on a platform is a frustrating, time-consuming, and poorly documented process, developers will leave.
- Clunky Tooling: Slow compilers, unreliable testnets, and a lack of high-quality development frameworks (like Foundry for the EVM) can make the development lifecycle painful.
- Inadequate Documentation: Clear, comprehensive, and up-to-date documentation is a non-negotiable. If developers can't figure out how to use your platform's features, they won't.
- Steep Learning Curve: While some complexity is unavoidable, platforms that require developers to learn an obscure, new programming language without providing extensive educational resources will struggle to attract talent from the much larger pool of EVM-native developers. This has been a significant challenge for some non-EVM chains.
2. Lack of Network Effects and Composability
Web3 is built on the principle of "money legos"—the idea that open-source protocols can be combined and built upon. Developers are drawn to ecosystems with a rich and vibrant set of existing protocols to build with.
- The "Empty City" Problem: A new Layer 1 blockchain, even if it's technically superior, starts as an empty city. It has no users, no liquidity, and no other dApps to integrate with. Building here can feel like building in a vacuum.
- The Gravity of the EVM: The Ethereum ecosystem (including its Layer 2s) has an enormous network effect. It has the most users, the most liquidity, the most stablecoins, and the most battle-tested DeFi primitives. For a new dApp, launching in this environment is often a much safer and more strategic choice, as it can immediately tap into this existing infrastructure. The struggle of non-EVM chains to gain traction against the Ethereum L2 ecosystem is a testament to this powerful gravity.
3. Economic and Incentive Misalignment
A protocol's tokenomics and its approach to funding developers are critical for talent retention.
- Unsustainable Incentives: Ecosystems that rely on short-term, inflationary token rewards to attract developers and users often see a mass exodus once those rewards dry up.
- Lack of Public Goods Funding: A healthy ecosystem invests in "public goods"—the core infrastructure, open-source libraries, and educational resources that benefit all builders. Projects that fail to fund these public goods often suffer from a stagnating developer experience.
4. Shifting Narratives and Hype Cycles
The Web3 space is heavily narrative-driven. Developer attention, like capital, tends to flow towards the "hot new thing."
- The L1 Wars vs. The Modular Future: In the last cycle, the narrative was about the "L1 Wars," with many new blockchains competing to be the next "Ethereum killer." This narrative has largely faded, replaced by the "modular blockchain" thesis, where the focus is on building Layer 2s on top of Ethereum. This has caused a significant migration of developer talent away from alternative L1s and towards the L2 ecosystem.
- The AI Boom: The recent explosion in AI has also captured the attention of many talented developers, creating a new and exciting frontier that competes with Web3 for top minds.
Case Studies in Developer Migration
- Litecoin: As explored in our analysis of the Litecoin developer slowdown, its limited smart contract capabilities have meant there is simply less for developers to do, causing them to move to more expressive platforms.
- Solana: The collapse of its biggest champion, FTX, combined with the powerful pull of the EVM-compatible L2 ecosystem, has contributed to a decline in Solana's developer count, though its community remains resilient.
Conclusion
The migration of developers between blockchain ecosystems is a natural and healthy part of a maturing market. It's a ruthless process of natural selection where platforms with the best developer experience, the strongest network effects, and the most compelling long-term vision will ultimately win. For projects, this means that attracting and retaining developers must be their highest priority. For developers, it means staying adaptable, continuously learning, and being willing to move to the ecosystems where the most interesting and impactful problems are being solved.
1. Why are developers leaving some blockchain ecosystems?
The main reasons include poor developer experience (bad tooling, documentation), lack of network effects and composability, unsustainable economic incentives, and shifting market narratives towards new technologies like Layer 2s or AI.
2. Why is developer activity important for a blockchain?
Developer activity is a key indicator of an ecosystem's health and long-term potential. A thriving developer community leads to more innovation, better applications, and ultimately, greater user adoption. A decline in developers is often a leading indicator of stagnation, as seen in the broader Web3 developer activity slowdown.
3. What is the "EVM network effect"?
The Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) is the most widely used smart contract engine. The vast majority of Web3 developers, tools, and protocols are built for the EVM. This creates a powerful gravitational pull, making it easier for EVM-compatible chains (like Ethereum's Layer 2s) to attract developers compared to non-EVM chains.
4. What happened with developer activity on Solana and Litecoin?
Solana's developer activity has declined due to the collapse of its main backer (FTX) and intense competition from EVM-compatible L2s. Litecoin's developer activity has slowed because its limited smart contract capabilities offer less for developers to build compared to platforms like Ethereum.
5. Where is developer talent moving to?
A significant portion of developer talent and attention is currently focused on the Ethereum Layer 2 ecosystem (e.g., Arbitrum, Optimism, zkSync). These platforms offer a scalable environment without requiring developers to leave the familiar EVM ecosystem.
