Compare

Silverscript vs Argent

Not rivals — a layer and the layer above it. The real question is whether your app is one contract or several that must talk.

Silverscript pre-audit Argent experimental
SilverscriptArgent
What it isA covenant language: one contract, its state, its rulesAn app language on top: several actors (covenants) wired together
Unit of thoughtThe contract — old state + args + tx facts → allowed new stateThe actor — entries that end in `become`, talking via ICC
ComposabilityN:M within one contract; covenant-id ownershipActors + ICC — atomic cross-contract interaction
Compiles toKaspa Script directlySilverscript, then Kaspa Script
Release statev1.0.0 tagged 2026-09-09 — no external audit namedNo tagged release; self-described "not yet release-ready"
Pinned dependencyPins Silverscript to a pre-1.0 revision, not the release
Toolingsilverc compiler + CLI debugger; kascov.io playgroundargentc build/inspect; examples in-repo (tickets, stones, ICC patterns)
Right forVaults, escrow, tokens, single-actor state machinesMulti-contract apps: ticketing, games, marketplace flows
Wrong forCross-contract apps wired by handProduction funds today; anything one contract can do alone

Pick Silverscript when…

The whole design fits in one contract's state machine: a vault, an escrow, a token, a lock. That's most covenant projects today, and it's the layer with a tagged release, a tutorial, a debugger, and the KCC20 book behind it.

Silverscript in full →

Pick Argent when…

The design is genuinely several contracts interacting atomically — tickets and their venue, players and a game, a token and its minter. Prototype there today with the in-repo examples; treat production as blocked until it ships a release (checked 2026-09-10).

Argent in full →

Facts on this page were checked against both repositories on 2026-09-10; release states also update daily on the status board.