Skip to content

nbitslabs/cctpv2

Repository files navigation

CCTP V2

User Manual

For detailed instructions on using CCTP V2, please refer to the User Manual.

Testing

CCTP V2 Features

Disclaimer: This section was generated using research conducted by Claude. The information provided should be regarded as preliminary and subject to independent verification. Claude thread

CCTP V1 vs CCTP V2 vs Li.Fi - Comprehensive Comparison

Category CCTP V1 CCTP V2 Li.Fi (Traditional Bridge Aggregator)
Chain Support 11 Mainnets:
• Aptos
• Arbitrum
• Avalanche
• Base
• Ethereum
• Noble
• OP Mainnet
• Polygon PoS
• Solana
• Sui
• Unichain

View Docs
13 Mainnets:
• Arbitrum
• Avalanche
• Base
• Codex
• Ethereum
• Linea
• OP Mainnet
• Polygon PoS
• Sei
• Solana
• Sonic
• Unichain
• World Chain
• BNB Smart Chain (USYC only)

View Docs
25+ Chains:
All major EVM & non-EVM chains including:
• All Ethereum L2s
• Solana, Aptos, Sui
• Cosmos ecosystem
• And many more

Aggregates 15+ bridges:
• Stargate
• Across
• Hop
• Connext
• And more

Explore Li.Fi
Fees $0 Protocol Fees
• Only gas costs
• No LP fees
• No bridge fees

💰 Cheapest option
Inherit from CCTP V1 Variable Fees:
• Underlying bridge fees
• DEX swap fees
• LP fees
• Potential Li.Fi protocol fee

💸 Can be 0.05% - 0.3%+ of transfer
Liquidity ♾️ Unlimited
• Burn & mint mechanism
• No pools required
• Can handle transfers of any size
• No liquidity fragmentation

Learn More
Inherit from CCTP V1 ⚠️ Pool-Dependent
• Limited by LP deposits
• Large transfers ($50M+) may be impractical
• Requires splitting transactions
• Liquidity varies by route

Bridge Comparison
Slippage 0% Slippage
• Guaranteed 1:1 transfer
• No price impact
• Perfect for large amounts
Inherit from CCTP V1 Variable Slippage
• Depends on pool depth
• 0.01% - 5%+ possible
• Higher on large transfers
• Route optimization helps
Security Model ✅ Minimal Trust
• Circle attestation only
• Same trust as holding USDC
• No third-party bridges
• No wrapped tokens
• Eliminates bridge exploit risk

Trust: Circle only
Inherit from CCTP V1 ⚠️ Multiple Trust Assumptions
• Varies by selected route
• Bridge validator sets
• LP contracts
• Wrapped token risks
• Historical bridge hacks

Trust: Multiple parties

Security Analysis
Settlement Speed ⏱️ 10-20 minutes
• Constrained by source chain finality
• ~15 min from Ethereum
• ~12 min from Avalanche
• ~2 min from Polygon

Method: Standard Transfer only
⚡ Seconds (Fast Transfer)
• 3-10 seconds typical
• Faster-than-finality
• Uses Fast Transfer Allowance
• Works from Ethereum L2s

Also supports:
• Standard Transfer (same as V1)

Read Whitepaper
⏱️ Variable (1-20 min)
• Fast routes: 1-3 min
• Standard: 5-15 min
• Depends on bridge type
• Optimistic bridges slower
• Lock & mint faster

Smart routing finds fastest available
Asset Support USDC Only
• Native USDC transfers
• No wrapped versions
• Single use case focused
USDC + USYC
• Native USDC transfers
• USYC (Circle's yield-bearing stablecoin)
• No wrapped versions
• Stablecoin focused
100+ Tokens
• ETH, BTC, stablecoins
• Any ERC-20
• NFTs (on some routes)
• Multi-asset support

Supported Tokens
Composability ❌ Basic
• Simple transfers only
• No post-transfer actions
• Manual integration needed
✅ Advanced (Hooks)
• Atomic post-transfer execution
• Automated actions on destination
• Smart contract composability
• No added trust assumptions

Examples:
• Bridge + stake
• Bridge + swap
• Bridge + deposit to protocol

Hooks Documentation
✅ Moderate
• Smart routing
• Multi-hop swaps
• Some composability via integrations
• Less programmable than V2 Hooks
Capital Efficiency ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
• No capital locked
• No LP requirements
• Maximum efficiency
• Instant minting capacity
Inherit from CCTP V1 ⭐⭐⭐
• Billions locked in pools
• LP capital requirements
• Inefficient for ecosystem
• Yield farming needed
Operational Risk Circle Dependency
• Attestation service uptime critical
• Circle operational issues = delays
• Single point of coordination

Track Record: Reliable since Apr 2023

• Inherit from CCTP V1
• New system (less proven)

Status: Recently launched 2025
Distributed Risk
• Multiple bridge dependencies
• If one bridge fails, others available
• More resilient to single failures
• But inherits all bridge risks
Volume Capacity Large Transfers:
✅ $1M+: Excellent
✅ $10M+: Excellent
✅ $50M+: Excellent
✅ $100M+: Excellent
Inherit from CCTP V1 Large Transfers:
✅ $1M+: Good
⚠️ $10M+: May need splits
❌ $50M+: Difficult/impractical
❌ $100M+: Nearly impossible

Case Study
Integration Complexity Moderate
• Direct smart contract calls
• Circle SDK available
• Good documentation

Integration Guide
⚠️ Moderate-High
• New separate contracts
• NOT backward compatible with V1
• Must migrate from V1
• Hooks add complexity
• Good documentation

V2 Migration Guide
Easy
• Single API integration
• Access all bridges
• Automatic route optimization
• Great developer experience

API Docs
Transaction Cost Examples WIP Cheap, depends on native fees Generally cheap for small amount, slippage consideration
Best Use Cases ✅ USDC transfers on supported chains
✅ When V2 not available
✅ Cost-sensitive users
✅ Large institutional transfers
✅ When speed isn't critical
✅ USDC transfers (fastest)
✅ Ethereum L2 → L2
✅ DeFi composability needs
✅ Large institutional transfers
✅ Time-sensitive transfers
✅ Smart contract automation
✅ Non-USDC tokens
✅ Unsupported CCTP chains
✅ When flexibility needed
✅ Multi-hop swaps
✅ Best route discovery
✅ NFT bridging
Limitations ❌ USDC only
❌ Slower than V2
❌ Limited chains
❌ No composability
❌ 15+ min from Ethereum
❌ USDC/USYC only
❌ Fewer chains than V1
❌ Newer (less proven)
❌ Not backward compatible
❌ Circle dependency
❌ Higher fees
❌ Slippage on large transfers
❌ Multiple trust assumptions
❌ Liquidity constraints
❌ Bridge exploit risks
Adoption & Volume Historical Performance:
• 2M+ transfers
• $37B+ volume since Apr 2023
• 11 chains supported
• Proven track record

Statistics
Current Status:
• Recently launched (2025)
• 3 initial chains
• Expanding throughout 2025
• Early adoption phase

Partners:
• LI.FI, Socket, Wormhole
• Mayan, Interport

Launch Announcement
Market Position:
• Leading aggregator
• Enterprise-grade SLAs
• Billions in TVL routed
• 100+ integrations
• Mature ecosystem

Platform

🎯 Decision Framework

Choose CCTP V2 if:
├─ Transferring USDC/USYC
├─ Speed is critical (need seconds)
├─ Chain supported (Ethereum, Base, Avalanche, Arbitrum, etc.)
├─ Large amounts ($1M+)
└─ Need DeFi composability (Hooks)

Choose CCTP V1 if:
├─ Transferring USDC
├─ Chain NOT supported by V2 (Aptos, Sui, Noble)
├─ V2 not critical
└─ Lower operational risk preference (more proven)

Choose Li.Fi if:
├─ Non-USDC tokens needed
├─ Chain not on CCTP
├─ Need multi-asset swaps
├─ Want best-route optimization
└─ Flexibility over pure optimization

📚 Key Resources

TODO

  • History of Trades
  • Support Solana
  • Support all EVMs
  • Add Li.fi to support cross-chain swap (to get native tokens quickly)
  • Test cross-chain with different wallet address.
  • Add estimate for Solana
  • Estimated fees: fee on both chains (in native token), and total fees in USDC
  • Support standard/fast transfer of CCTP V2 with using GET /v2/burn/USDC/fees API. message ref, fee ref, Standard Transfer Fee Switch
  • Support hookData transfer of CCTP V2 ref
  • Show expiration block and time if possible ref
  • Update estimated fee for Mint Only when receive the message, ask to consider if USDC amount < receiving fee ref
  • Support reattest transfer of CCTP V2

Getting Started

First, run the development server:

pnpm dev

The sample app will be running at http://localhost:3002/cctpv2.

About

Cross-Chain USDC Transfers | CCTP v2 on Ethereum, Solana, Arbitrum, Base, Polygon, Avalanche & More

Topics

Resources

License

Security policy

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Packages

No packages published

Languages