There are other apps that will not fit all the chains. I think one of the biggest mistakes that builders make, is to choose infrastructure based on hype and not fit. Certain categories of application are practically begging for the particular stack that @fogo provides - here are the three that I find most compelling.
The rationale of the Builder-Chain Fit.
Fogo Is SVM-based Layer 1 for low-latency trading Pure Firedancer client Under 40ms blocks Curated validators Enshrouded DEX primitives Gas-free Sessions. It is not a matter of whether one can construct anything on Fogo or not. but "what can you build here that you really couldn't as well build somewhere else?"
Type 1 - On Chain Perpetual Futures.
This is the most obvious fit. Perps require tight execution - When the trader changes leverage during volatility, the difference between 400ms and 40ms blocks are the difference between intended price and actual price. Add MEV Mitigation and the advantage compounds - On most chains, perps traders are concerned with sandwich attacks on large changes in positions. The fact that Fogo's structure is based on batch auctions minimises that risk, in a structural way.
I've been drawing the parallel to the way Hyperliquid went about building their own appchain for perps. Fogo has similar functionality but in a more general purpose SVM ecosystem where builders have the ability to compose with other protocols. That is a useful edge - composability.
App Type 2: Real time Auction & RFQ Systems
This is the category that I am most excited about, as it barely exists on chain today. RFQ systems are systems that have narrow time windows for bidding, asking and settling. On slower chains, the quotations go off before they are confirmed. Fogo's enshrined DEX primitives, co-location of liquidity providers and consistency of blocks make on-chain RFQ actually feasible.
Imagine, an institutional OTC desk, which would like to move size on chain with price certainty. Today they use off chain systems because not one L1 has the speed of . $FOGO's infrastructure could change that equation. I see this as Fogo's opportunity with the greatest ceiling - the one that stands to attract completely new capital.
App Type 3 - Liquidation Sensitive Lending
Lending protocols make it live and die by the liquidation engines. When collateral ratios are falling, liquidators need to move fast - in the case of chains with variable blocks, delays result in bad debt that the protocol has to eat up.
Fogo has approximately 40ms blocks and makes liquidation bots predictable in terms of timing. The curated validator set removes random latencies of under performing nodes. Pyron and Fogolend are already live but I think there's room for more sophisticated designs - isolated margin, cross-collateral systems - that can specifically take advantage of #Fogo's speed guarantees.
A Simple Decision Framework of a Builder.
When I am considering whether or not an app should go on Fogo I use three questions:
Does the app suffer from block times which are variable? If yes --> Fogo's consistency --> direct benefit
Does MEV cost the users of the app money on other chains? If yes --> Mitigation structural benefit protocol-level
Is the app based on multiple times per session quick interactions? If yes --> Fogo Sessions eliminates friction which would otherwise turn users off.
If an app has a score of yes for 2 or more I think Fogo is worth serious consideration. And if it scores zero, then chances are, the builder is better off with a general purpose chain.
The Honest Caveat
Fogo's strengths are real, but proven at present at early stage volumes. Whether 40ms blocks and MEV mitigation is holding up under sustained institutional load is still being demonstrated. I'm sure with architecture but I think that builders should start with testnet deployments and see how mainnet is performing as it goes.
Risks for Builders to Watch
Ecosystem size. Less composability has partners in the beginning, and more as more protocols are deployed.
Tooling maturity. The compatibility of SVM is useful and Fogo specific tooling is developing.
Validator set changes. Curation policies could have an effect on dApp interactions with consensus.
Liquidity depth. Trading apps need to have liquidity in order to work. Track TVL growth.
Practical Takeaways
Fogo should be on your shortlist in case you are working on anything that will interoperate with real-time execution. The architecture was designed to support exactly these use cases.
Start with the three questions framework above to see if there is a good fit before committing development resources.
Watch the category of RFQ and auctions closely - it's so under explored on chain and it could be Fogo's most unique opportunity.
@Fogo Official $FOGO #fogo
