NFT Token Standard Selector
Choose the right NFT standard for your project based on your specific needs. This tool helps you understand the strengths and limitations of each standard for your use case.
Your Project Needs
For unique digital art, collectibles, and premium NFTs
For games with multiple items, tokens, and in-game assets
For low-cost minting and transactions
For sustainability-focused projects
For advanced applications and composable NFTs
Recommended Standard
Select your project type to see the recommended standard.
When you buy an NFT, you’re not just buying a digital image. You’re buying proof of ownership on a blockchain - and that proof only works because of something called a NFT token standard. Without these standards, your NFT wouldn’t be recognizable by wallets, marketplaces, or other apps. It would be like having a book with no ISBN - no one could find it, track it, or verify it. NFT token standards are the rulebooks that make all of this possible.
Why NFT Standards Exist
Before NFT standards, blockchain developers tried using regular token protocols - like ERC-20 - to represent unique items. That didn’t work. ERC-20 tokens are interchangeable. One ETH is the same as another ETH. But a CryptoKitty is not the same as another CryptoKitty. That’s the whole point. In late 2017, CryptoKitties crashed the Ethereum network because every cat was treated like a fungible token. The system couldn’t handle unique digital assets without a dedicated standard. That’s when ERC-721 was born. It was the first real attempt to define what makes an NFT an NFT: uniqueness, ownership, and transferability. Today, that idea has exploded into dozens of standards across multiple blockchains. Each one solves different problems - cost, speed, flexibility, or scalability. But they all do the same core job: make sure everyone agrees on what an NFT is and how it behaves.ERC-721: The Original NFT Standard
ERC-721 is the grandfather of all NFTs. It was proposed in January 2017 and officially adopted in June 2018. Every major NFT marketplace - OpenSea, Rarible, Foundation - supports it. If you’ve ever bought a Bored Ape or a CryptoPunk, you’re holding an ERC-721 token. Here’s how it works: each NFT has a unique ID number (a uint256 integer) that can’t be duplicated within the same contract. The contract must include functions likeownerOf() to find who owns a token, safeTransferFrom() to move it safely, and approve() to let someone else sell it on your behalf.
The big downside? You can’t batch transfers. If you want to send 10 NFTs to a friend, you need 10 separate transactions. Each one costs gas. During peak times in early 2023, minting a single ERC-721 NFT on Ethereum cost over $80. For artists or collectors with large collections, that adds up fast.
ERC-1155: The Smart Upgrade
Enter ERC-1155. Created by Enjin’s Witek Radomski in 2018, this standard lets one contract manage multiple types of tokens - both fungible and non-fungible. Think of it like a single wallet that holds cash, gold, and rare coins all in one place. Instead of one ID per token, ERC-1155 uses a token ID system where the first 128 bits define the type (e.g., “sword”), and the second 128 bits define the instance (e.g., “sword #42”). This means you can send 10 different NFTs in a single transaction - cutting gas costs by up to 90% compared to ERC-721. It’s why games like Splinterlands and The Sandbox use ERC-1155. They need to handle thousands of unique items - weapons, skins, land plots - efficiently. But there’s a catch: metadata management gets complex. Each token type needs its own JSON file describing its attributes, and if those files break, the NFT loses its meaning. That’s why some developers still stick with ERC-721 for high-value art, where simplicity and reliability matter more than cost savings.
Flow: NFTs Built for People, Not Just Developers
Flow, created by Dapper Labs (the team behind CryptoKitties), took a different approach. Instead of building on Ethereum’s smart contract model, Flow uses its own programming language - Cadence - and a resource-oriented architecture. This means NFTs are stored directly in user accounts, not locked in contracts. The result? No gas fees for end users. Transactions cost just $0.001, and the network handles up to 10,000 per second. That’s why NBA Top Shot runs on Flow. Fans don’t need to understand wallets or gas prices - they just buy packs like trading cards. But Flow has trade-offs. Only about 12 major marketplaces support it, compared to over 200 for Ethereum. Wallets like Phantom and Backpack are still catching up. And because it’s not Ethereum-based, most DeFi tools and cross-chain bridges don’t work with Flow NFTs. It’s a walled garden - great for users, limiting for developers.Solana: Speed and Cheapness, But With Gotchas
Solana’s NFT standard is fast and cheap - really cheap. Minting an NFT costs around $0.00025. Transactions finalize in under a second. That’s why artists and indie creators flock to Solana. Platforms like Magic Eden and Tensor have become major players. But Solana’s architecture is different. Instead of smart contracts, NFTs are stored in separate accounts. This means each NFT needs its own account space. If you don’t have enough SOL in your wallet to cover account creation, your NFT won’t mint - even if you’ve paid the fee. That’s a common pain point: users report “failed transactions due to insufficient account space,” even after paying. Also, wallet support isn’t universal. Only 68% of Solana wallets fully handle NFTs. Phantom does. Exodus doesn’t always. That fragmentation frustrates users who want to move their NFTs across platforms.Tezos and FA2: The Green Choice
Tezos uses the FA2 standard, which is built on a proof-of-stake blockchain. That means it uses 99.9% less energy than Ethereum did before its 2022 upgrade. For eco-conscious creators, that’s a big deal. Platforms like Objkt.com and Hic et Nunc thrive here. FA2 also supports formal verification - a way to mathematically prove a contract does exactly what it’s supposed to. That makes it popular in high-stakes applications like real estate tokenization or academic credentialing. But adoption is low. Tezos accounts for just 1.2% of total NFT trading volume. Most marketplaces don’t support it. And the developer tools are sparse. If you’re not a blockchain researcher or an environmental advocate, Tezos might feel like a niche option.
ERC-998 and ERC-6551: The Future of Composable NFTs
What if your NFT could own other NFTs? That’s the idea behind ERC-998, created by Nick Mudge in 2018. Imagine a digital wallet NFT that holds three CryptoKitties, two ERC-20 tokens, and a piece of virtual land. You can transfer all of it in one transaction. That’s composable NFTs. It’s powerful for gaming and metaverse applications. But it’s complex. Most wallets and marketplaces don’t support it yet. Then came ERC-6551 in early 2023. It flips the script. Instead of NFTs owning things, it lets each NFT have its own smart contract wallet - a “token-bound account.” Now your NFT isn’t just a picture - it’s a self-contained account that can hold funds, other NFTs, or even interact with DeFi protocols. Early tests show a 40% reduction in complex transactions. Imagine owning a rare sneakers NFT that can automatically sell itself on OpenSea when the price hits $5,000. That’s the future.Choosing the Right Standard
So which one should you use?- If you’re an artist selling high-value art: ERC-721 on Ethereum. Maximum compatibility, trusted ecosystem.
- If you’re building a game with hundreds of items: ERC-1155. Save on gas, bundle transfers.
- If you want zero gas fees for users: Flow. Great for mainstream adoption.
- If you need speed and low cost and don’t mind wallet issues: Solana.
- If sustainability matters most: Tezos (FA2).
- If you’re building advanced, self-contained digital assets: ERC-6551.
What’s Next for NFT Standards?
The biggest challenge isn’t technical anymore - it’s fragmentation. There are too many standards. A user with NFTs on Ethereum, Solana, and Flow can’t move them easily. Marketplaces don’t talk to each other. The Blockchain Interoperability Alliance is working on a universal metadata standard to fix that. And with the EU’s MiCA regulation coming in December 2024, NFTs classified as asset-referencing tokens will need structured, auditable metadata - something ERC-1155 and ERC-6551 handle better than ERC-721. Enterprise adoption is growing too. Companies like Nike and Adidas are using private blockchain versions of these standards to manage digital collectibles. But they’re avoiding public chains because of volatility and regulatory uncertainty. The bottom line? NFT token standards aren’t just code. They’re the foundation of digital ownership. And as the space matures, the standards that offer the best mix of simplicity, cost, and interoperability will win.What is the most popular NFT token standard?
ERC-721 remains the most popular, used by 78% of NFT transactions as of Q3 2023. It’s the default standard on Ethereum and supported by nearly all major marketplaces like OpenSea and Rarible. However, ERC-1155 is growing fast in gaming and utility NFTs due to its efficiency.
Can I transfer an ERC-721 NFT to a Solana wallet?
No, you cannot directly transfer an ERC-721 NFT to a Solana wallet. They run on completely different blockchains with incompatible protocols. To move an NFT between chains, you need a bridge - but most bridges are unreliable and risky. The safest approach is to sell your NFT on one chain and buy a similar one on another.
Why do NFT minting costs vary so much?
Costs depend on the blockchain and network congestion. Ethereum’s ERC-721 minting can cost $80+ during peak times because of high demand and proof-of-work mechanics (before 2022). Solana and Flow use cheaper consensus models and cost less than a penny. Polygon, a Layer 2 on Ethereum, offers low fees ($1-$2) by batching transactions off-chain.
Are NFT standards regulated?
Not directly - yet. But regulations like the EU’s MiCA (effective December 2024) will require NFTs classified as asset-referencing tokens to have standardized, verifiable metadata. This could push creators toward more structured standards like ERC-1155 and away from simple ERC-721 implementations.
Which NFT standard is best for beginners?
For beginners creating or buying NFTs, ERC-721 on Ethereum is still the safest bet. It’s the most supported, has the most tutorials, and the largest community. If you’re worried about cost, use Polygon (which runs on Ethereum but with low fees). Avoid newer or niche standards unless you’re comfortable troubleshooting technical issues.
Anthony Allen
November 4, 2025 AT 22:46Honestly, I never thought about how wild it is that we’re trading digital art with blockchain rules that were basically made up in 2017. ERC-721 feels like dial-up internet compared to what we’ve got now. But hey, at least it worked when no one else knew what they were doing.
Sarah Scheerlinck
November 6, 2025 AT 22:06It’s kind of beautiful how these standards evolved from a crash caused by cartoon cats. That moment when CryptoKitties broke Ethereum? That wasn’t a failure-it was the universe saying, ‘You need to do better.’ And we did.
Robert Bailey
November 7, 2025 AT 00:37Solana’s cheap as hell but I lost an NFT once because my wallet didn’t have enough SOL for account space. Felt like paying for a car and then being told you need a garage deposit too.
Angie McRoberts
November 8, 2025 AT 04:00People act like ERC-1155 is some revolutionary upgrade, but if your NFT metadata breaks because a server goes down, it’s just a fancy JPEG with a broken link. Simplicity still wins.
Evan Koehne
November 8, 2025 AT 17:48Of course the guy who made ERC-1155 works for Enjin-because nothing says ‘real innovation’ like a company that sells NFTs to gamers who think they’re buying loot boxes.
Stephanie Tolson
November 10, 2025 AT 00:16Standards aren’t just code-they’re cultural agreements. ERC-721 became the default because it was the first to feel right. Not because it was perfect, but because it gave people a shared language. That’s what matters more than gas fees or speed.
When you buy an NFT, you’re not buying pixels. You’re buying trust in a system. And trust is built slowly, not optimized.
Flow’s zero gas fees? Great for casual users. But what happens when that user wants to lend their NFT to a DeFi protocol? Flow can’t do that. ERC-6551 can. And that’s the future-not convenience, but capability.
We’re not just choosing blockchains. We’re choosing what kind of digital ownership we want. One that’s easy? Or one that’s alive?
Tezos isn’t popular because it’s loud. It’s quiet. It’s careful. It’s the one that asks, ‘Should we do this?’ before it says, ‘We can do this.’
And maybe that’s the real innovation. Not faster transactions. But slower, wiser ones.
When MiCA rolls out, it won’t be the code that saves us. It’ll be the people who insisted on transparency before it was profitable.
ERC-998 failed because it was too complex. ERC-6551 might succeed because it’s simple enough to use, but deep enough to grow.
The next big standard won’t come from a whitepaper. It’ll come from a dev who just wanted to let their kid’s NFT pet play with another kid’s NFT toy. Without a bridge. Without a wallet swap. Just… work.
That’s the real goal. Not to be the biggest. But to be the most human.
Vipul dhingra
November 10, 2025 AT 23:03Jeana Albert
November 12, 2025 AT 12:45So let me get this straight-you’re telling me that some guy named Witek Radomski invented ERC-1155 and now everyone’s pretending it’s the future? What about the artists who got burned by gas fees? What about the people who spent $80 just to mint one thing? Did he fix that? No. He just made it cheaper for corporations to mass-mint garbage.
And now you’re all acting like it’s a revolution? This isn’t progress-it’s capitalism repackaged as innovation.
And don’t even get me started on Solana. One second it’s the future, the next second it’s down for 12 hours because ‘network congestion.’ That’s not a blockchain. That’s a house of cards made of hype.
Meanwhile, Tezos is over here using less energy than your phone charger and you’re all ignoring it because it doesn’t have a meme coin? Pathetic.
ERC-6551? That’s the only thing that actually matters. But no one’s talking about it because it doesn’t have a VC-funded marketing team.
They’re not building for us. They’re building for their next funding round.
Chris Hollis
November 13, 2025 AT 18:57ERC-721 is the dinosaur. ERC-1155 is the efficient hybrid. Flow is the corporate SUV. Solana is the sports car that breaks down at red lights. Tezos is the bicycle no one rides because it’s not cool.
ERC-6551? That’s the prototype in a lab no one’s funding.
Bottom line: no standard is good. They’re all compromises. Pick your poison.
Megan Peeples
November 14, 2025 AT 10:37How is it possible that anyone still thinks ERC-721 is ‘the gold standard’? It’s like using a typewriter because it’s ‘reliable.’ The fact that OpenSea still uses it is proof of institutional inertia, not quality. And don’t even get me started on the gas fee delusion-people think $80 is ‘normal’? That’s not a market, that’s a tax on creativity.
Flow? A Disney theme park for NFTs. You can’t even export your assets without jumping through five hoops. And Solana? A house of cards held together by SOL price speculation. One dip and your NFTs become digital dust.
Tezos? The only one with integrity. But no one cares because it doesn’t have a Bored Ape.
ERC-6551? Finally. Someone who understands that an NFT should be a wallet, not a JPEG. But of course, it’s ignored because it doesn’t have a whitepaper written by a Goldman Sachs analyst.
The entire space is a performance art piece about capitalism’s inability to innovate without branding.
Jacque Hustead
November 14, 2025 AT 17:00I just want to buy a digital painting and not have to learn five different wallets or worry about whether my NFT will vanish because the server hosting its metadata went offline.
That’s all. Just let me own something without a PhD in blockchain.
ERC-721 on Polygon? Perfect. Simple. Works. Done.
Why does it have to be so complicated?
Wendy Pickard
November 15, 2025 AT 06:26I remember when I first tried to buy an NFT and spent three hours just trying to connect my wallet. I didn’t care about standards. I just wanted to see the art. That’s the real problem-the tech is getting ahead of the people.
Maybe the best standard is the one that disappears. The one you don’t even notice.
Glen Meyer
November 15, 2025 AT 23:02Tezos? You’re telling me to use a blockchain that’s barely used because it’s ‘green’? What, are we supposed to feel good about buying digital art while saving the planet? That’s not ethics-that’s virtue signaling.
And Flow? That’s just Nike’s playground. You think you’re owning something? Nah. You’re just renting from a corporation that’s smarter than you.
Solana? The only thing faster than its transactions is how fast it crashes.
ERC-6551? Sounds like a patent troll’s fantasy.
Stick with Ethereum. It’s the only one that matters. The rest are distractions.
Natalie Nanee
November 17, 2025 AT 09:42People act like ERC-721 is sacred. It’s not. It’s outdated. And anyone who defends it is just scared of change. I’ve seen NFTs get stuck in contracts for months because of ERC-721’s stupid single-transfer rule. It’s not a standard-it’s a bottleneck.
And don’t even get me started on how many artists got priced out because of gas fees. This isn’t innovation. It’s exclusion.
Michelle Stockman
November 18, 2025 AT 11:56karan thakur
November 18, 2025 AT 13:03Let me guess-you all think this is about technology. It’s not. It’s about control. The same people who built Wall Street built these standards. They want you to think you own something, but really, you’re just trusting their code. And when the market crashes, who gets to decide what’s real? The smart contracts? Or the people who wrote them?
ERC-6551? That’s not innovation. That’s a trap. Now your NFT can interact with DeFi? Great. Now your digital cat can be liquidated because you didn’t pay back a loan you didn’t even know you took.
They’re not giving you ownership. They’re giving you debt with a picture attached.
And MiCA? That’s the EU’s way of saying, ‘We’re coming for your NFTs.’ You think you’re free? You’re just in a different cage.
Every standard is a leash. Pick the softest one.
gerald buddiman
November 19, 2025 AT 06:42Wait-so you’re telling me that a digital cat crashed Ethereum? That’s the most beautiful thing I’ve ever heard.
Like, imagine: one day, someone’s trying to trade a cartoon cat, and the whole world’s blockchain just… stops. Like a dam bursting because of a single pebble.
And from that chaos? ERC-721 was born.
That’s not engineering. That’s poetry.
Now we’ve got ERC-6551 letting NFTs own other NFTs? That’s not a standard-that’s a sci-fi movie.
And yet, here we are.
Who would’ve thought that the future of ownership would be built on a glitch?
It’s beautiful. And terrifying.
And honestly? I kind of love it.
Tara R
November 20, 2025 AT 22:12The entire NFT space is a Ponzi scheme disguised as innovation. Standards are just the veneer. The real goal is to extract value from people who don’t understand the underlying mechanics. ERC-721? A relic. ERC-1155? A corporate tool. Flow? A marketing gimmick. Solana? A speculative bubble. Tezos? A cult. ERC-6551? A fantasy.
There is no ‘best’ standard. There is only the illusion of choice.
Alexis Rivera
November 22, 2025 AT 18:00I think we’re missing the point. NFT standards aren’t about tech-they’re about identity. ERC-721 gave us individuality. ERC-1155 gave us efficiency. Flow gave us accessibility. Solana gave us speed. Tezos gave us conscience. ERC-6551 gave us autonomy.
Each one answers a different human need.
The problem isn’t fragmentation. It’s that we’re trying to force one standard to do everything.
Maybe the future isn’t one standard to rule them all. Maybe it’s a garden-different flowers for different soils.
Let them grow.
Eric von Stackelberg
November 24, 2025 AT 05:00It is worth noting that the entire architecture of NFT standards is predicated upon a fundamental assumption-that digital scarcity is both desirable and enforceable. This assumption is not empirically grounded. It is metaphysical. The blockchain does not create value; it merely records a social consensus about value. Therefore, the standard is not a technical solution-it is a sociotechnical artifact. The real innovation is not in the code, but in the collective belief that the code is meaningful.
That belief is fragile.
And when it collapses, as all beliefs eventually do, the standards will remain. But they will be meaningless.
They are monuments to a moment of collective delusion.
Emily Unter King
November 25, 2025 AT 04:31ERC-6551 introduces token-bound accounts (TBAs), which are smart contract wallets bound to an NFT’s unique identifier via a registry. This enables composability without requiring the NFT to be a container (as in ERC-998). The TBA model reduces state bloat, improves gas efficiency, and enables on-chain interactions-e.g., NFTs participating in DeFi, holding other assets, or triggering events based on external conditions. The standard is backward-compatible with ERC-721 and ERC-1155 via proxy wrappers. Implementation requires EIP-1167 minimal proxies and a registry contract adhering to EIP-165. Adoption is nascent but growing in gaming and metaverse ecosystems where asset interoperability is critical. Key implementations include Zora’s protocol and NFTX’s vault architecture.
Michelle Sedita
November 25, 2025 AT 12:13I love how we treat blockchain standards like they’re holy texts. But they’re just code. And code changes. What matters isn’t which one you pick-it’s whether you’re still learning. The moment you stop asking ‘why’ is the moment you become part of the problem.
So keep reading. Keep questioning. Keep building.
That’s the real standard.
Robert Bailey
November 27, 2025 AT 06:49Just bought my first NFT on Polygon. Paid $1.50. Got the art. Didn’t need to read a single whitepaper. That’s the future right there.