Eraivo vs. bridges.
Outcomes, not just transfers.
A bridge moves assets between two chains. Eraivo executes outcomes across chains — a different abstraction with different failure modes.
A bridge's job is to move an asset from chain A to chain B. It does not understand your intended outcome, and if one side of a multi-step flow fails, the assets can be left in a partial state.
Bridges are a building block, not an execution layer.
Eraivo accepts an outcome-based intent, verifies it, and executes every leg atomically — bridging included where needed — so the operation completes or reverts as a whole.
It adds risk verification, non-custodial signing, real-time indexing, and settlement proof, which a bridge does not provide.
Is Eraivo a bridge?
No. A bridge moves assets between two chains. Eraivo executes verified, outcome-based intents across chains.
Does Eraivo use bridges?
Where a route requires it, bridging is one leg of a verified, atomic execution plan.
What is the key difference in failure handling?
Bridges can leave partial states. Eraivo rolls multi-leg operations back on failure.