The Open Network Review 2026: Is TON Worth Using?

TON has evolved from Telegram's abandoned blockchain project into a fast Layer 1 built around dynamic sharding, low fees and deep Telegram integration. Its biggest advantage is distribution, with Mini Apps, wallets and payments able to reach users directly inside Telegram.

This guide explains how TON works, what Gram is used for, how staking and validators operate, how safe and decentralized the network is, and how TON compares with Ethereum and Solana.

Editor's Note (Sept. 4, 2026): We fully updated this review in September 2026 to reflect the current state of The Open Network. The refresh replaces the older interoperability-focused framing with a clearer look at TON as Telegram's primary blockchain infrastructure, updates Toncoin to Gram (GRAM), adds Catchain 2.0 and current performance data, and expands coverage of Mini Apps, TON Connect, DeFi adoption, staking, validator requirements, decentralization and Telegram's growing role as the network's largest validator. We also refreshed tokenomics, ecosystem metrics and security coverage, including recent outages, bridge risk and Telegram-specific scams.

The Open Network At A Glance

Data is current as of Sept. 4, 2026.

What Is The Open Network?

The Open Network is a Proof-of-Stake Layer 1 blockchain built for high-throughput consumer applications. TON uses dynamic sharding, asynchronous smart contracts and the TON Virtual Machine rather than Ethereum's EVM architecture.

Its relationship with Telegram is central to the project. Telegram originally developed the Telegram Open Network, exited following a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission case, and left an open-source codebase that community developers continued as The Open Network. Telegram later rebuilt close ties with TON and now uses it as the blockchain infrastructure for crypto-enabled Mini Apps.

To sum it up, TON is the blockchain, Gram is its native currency, and Toncoin is Gram's former name.

From Telegram Open Network to The Open Network

Pavel and Nikolai Durov founded Telegram in 2013. Telegram later developed the Telegram Open Network and raised about $1.7 billion through agreements tied to the planned original Gram launch.

The SEC sued Telegram in 2019, alleging an unregistered securities offering. In 2020, Telegram agreed to return more than $1.2 billion to investors, pay an $18.5 million civil penalty and withdraw from the blockchain project under the SEC settlement.

Community developers continued the open-source technology. The project evolved into The Open Network, with TON Foundation becoming a major ecosystem organization.

Telegram's relationship with TON then moved much closer again. Telegram made TON central to crypto-enabled Mini Apps, while Pavel Durov announced in May 2026 that Telegram would replace TON Foundation as the network's main driving force and become its largest validator. TON Foundation continues to exist, but Telegram now has a much larger strategic role.

Toncoin Became Gram in 2026

Toncoin was renamed Gram, ticker GRAM, following community governance in June 2026. The current TON media guidelines identify Gram as the native currency and Toncoin as its former name.

The change was a rebrand, not a token migration. Existing addresses, balances, smart contracts, NFTs, staking positions and DeFi positions did not need replacement. Wallet in Telegram's current Gram guidance explicitly warns that users do not need to swap, migrate or "activate" GRAM.

Any website or Telegram bot claiming that old Toncoin must be exchanged for new GRAM should be treated as suspicious.

New to Layer 1 networks? Coin Bureau's Layer 1 blockchain guide explains how base-layer networks such as TON differ from Layer 2 scaling systems.

How TON Works

TON scales by splitting processing across shardchains rather than forcing every transaction through one execution path. Network activity can be divided as demand rises and consolidated as demand falls. Its architecture combines the masterchain, workchains, shardchains, Proof-of-Stake consensus and the TON Virtual Machine.

Masterchain, Workchains and Shardchains

The masterchain stores network-wide information, including validator sets, protocol configuration and references to the state of other chains in the TON system. A workchain can define its own rules and account space. TON currently uses workchain 0 for ordinary user accounts and smart contracts, while the broader architecture allows additional workchains with different rule sets.

Workchains can divide into shardchains. TON's sharding architecture allows shards to split when activity rises and merge when demand drops. Different shards can process transactions in parallel.

Communication between TON smart contracts is asynchronous. A contract can send messages that trigger later transactions in other contracts or shards rather than relying on a single synchronous execution call. That model improves parallelism but creates design and security considerations for developers handling partial execution, bounced messages and message ordering.

Proof-of-Stake and Catchain 2.0

Validators secure TON through Proof-of-Stake. They stake GRAM, participate in validator elections and confirm blocks, with rewards for correct participation and penalties for poor performance.

The major 2026 upgrade was Catchain 2.0, TON's newer leader-based Simplex consensus design. Validators take turns proposing blocks and vote on candidates, with a supermajority of stake required for finalization.

Catchain 2.0 went live on mainnet on April 9, 2026. As per TON's sub-second finality documentation, the upgrade reduced block intervals from roughly 2.5 seconds to around 400 milliseconds and cut target finalization lag from about 10 seconds to around one second.

Block production and throughput are different metrics. Faster blocks improve latency, while TPS describes how much transaction processing a network can sustain.

Read Coin Bureau's Proof-of-Work vs Proof-of-Stake guide for a deeper comparison of the two consensus models.

TON Virtual Machine and Smart Contracts

TON smart contracts run in the TON Virtual Machine (TVM). The TVM works with TON's cell-based data model and asynchronous messaging system.

Tolk is the recommended current smart-contract language. Acton is the modern toolchain for building, testing and deploying TON contracts. FunC, common in older TON projects, is now a legacy language whose compiler is no longer maintained.

TON is not natively EVM-compatible. Ethereum developers cannot deploy an ordinary Solidity contract to TVM unchanged. TON provides its own standards, tooling and execution model, which creates a learning curve for teams coming from Ethereum.

TON's TVM architecture differs significantly from Ethereum's execution model.

How Fast and Cheap Is TON?

TON is a low-cost, high-throughput blockchain. Its current block time is roughly 0.4 seconds, with sub-second to around one-second finality, while simple GRAM transfers cost fractions of a cent.

The figures below separate current network characteristics from controlled stress-test results.

TON's official network metrics put time to finality at roughly 0.6 seconds and a basic TON transfer fee at about 0.00039 TON, or roughly $0.0005 at the quoted rate. Actual fees vary by transaction type, wallet contract, computation, storage and message activity.

Can TON Really Process 100,000+ TPS?

TON has demonstrated six-figure TPS in a public 2023 performance test. On Oct. 31, 2023, a test network reached 104,715 transactions per second, with CertiK auditing the event.

The result came from a controlled setup using hundreds of servers and many shards. It demonstrates that TON's architecture can parallelize transaction processing, but it should not be presented as normal mainnet activity.

Claims about future millions of TPS are better treated as an architectural scaling target. Dynamic sharding can add processing capacity as more shards and hardware are available, but observed production throughput remains far below that theoretical ceiling.

TON Network Reliability

TON's speed record does not erase its uptime history. During the DOGS token launch in August 2024, unusually heavy demand contributed to two block-production interruptions. The first lasted more than six hours, while a second outage followed the next day.

The incidents showed that theoretical scalability and production resilience are separate questions. Validators and software still need to coordinate successfully under extreme demand.

Catchain 2.0 changed TON's consensus path substantially in 2026, but it should not be treated as proof that outages can no longer occur. TON has stronger performance infrastructure today, while network reliability still depends on validator software, implementation quality and real-world load.

Telegram Is TON's Biggest Competitive Advantage

TON's main competitive advantage is distribution through Telegram. Telegram is not merely promoting the blockchain; its platform rules make TON infrastructure central to crypto-enabled Mini Apps. That arrangement lets TON reach users inside an existing consumer application rather than relying entirely on standalone crypto wallets and websites.

TON Mini Apps

Telegram Mini Apps are applications that run inside Telegram. Developers can build games, marketplaces, payment tools, trading interfaces and other services without requiring users to install a separate application.

Telegram's blockchain guidelines require Mini Apps that create or distribute cryptocurrency tokens or blockchain assets to use TON. Wallet interactions must use TON Connect, apart from specified bridging scenarios.

The policy creates a genuine distribution moat. A crypto developer targeting Telegram Mini Apps cannot choose Ethereum, Solana or another chain for native asset issuance on equal terms.

Wallets and TON Connect

TON Connect is TON's standard wallet-connection protocol. It links DApps and wallets through an encrypted session and lets applications request addresses, signatures and transactions without obtaining users' private keys. The TON Connect specification supports web DApps and Telegram Mini Apps.

Telegram-native onboarding reduces several familiar Web3 steps. A user can encounter a Mini App, connect a wallet and sign a TON transaction without leaving Telegram.

Custody still varies. The Telegram Wallet experience is now presented as Wallet in Telegram, which includes a custodial Crypto Wallet and a self-custodial DeFi Account supported by TON Space Ltd. Its current DeFi Account terms state that the self-custody product does not control users' private keys. Independent wallets such as Tonkeeper also support TON Connect.

Coin Bureau's best crypto wallets guide compares leading wallet options across security, custody, DApp access and supported networks.

Telegram Stars, Gifts and Payments

TON also sits underneath parts of Telegram's digital economy. Telegram Stars are used for digital goods and services, while collectible Telegram Gifts can be moved onto TON for blockchain ownership and external transfer.

Telegram's collectible Gifts documentation records onchain gift ownership against TON wallet addresses. GRAM and TON-based USDT provide additional payment assets around the ecosystem.

Stars, Gifts and USDT serve different purposes. Stars are a Telegram platform unit, blockchain Gifts are collectibles, and USDT is a centrally issued stablecoin. Their overlap is consumer distribution through Telegram and TON-based rails.

TON Ecosystem and Real-World Adoption

Telegram's user base represents potential distribution, not the number of active TON users. Current onchain data shows tens of millions of activated wallets, but monthly activity and DeFi liquidity remain much smaller.

*Data checked Sept. 4, 2026. Live metrics can change throughout the day.

TON Stat counts roughly 57.8 million activated wallet smart contracts, while TON's own dashboard reports about 2.2 million monthly active wallets. Those metrics measure different things, so cumulative activations measure wallet contracts, while monthly active-wallet figures reflect current usage.

DeFi on TON

TON has DEXs, lending markets, liquid staking and stablecoins. Representative protocols include STON.fi, DeDust and EVAA, while liquid-staking providers such as Tonstakers add staking-based DeFi products. USDT provides most of the network's stablecoin value.

The scale is modest relative to Telegram distribution. DeFiLlama's current TON data shows about $49.6 million in DeFi TVL, $759 million in stablecoins and roughly $2.7 million in 24-hour DEX volume. USDT represents about 80% of tracked stablecoin supply.

That gap is one of TON's most important adoption signals. Millions of wallets and enormous Telegram reach have not yet translated into DeFi liquidity comparable with leading smart-contract networks.

Lower liquidity can mean more slippage, smaller lending capacity and fewer sophisticated markets. Liquid staking also adds smart-contract, validator and LST liquidity risk. 

If you're new to decentralized finance, Coin Bureau's guide to DeFi explains how DEXs, lending protocols, liquidity pools and other onchain financial applications work.

Developers and DApps

TON's developer stack improved in 2026 through Tolk and Acton. The ecosystem also includes TON AppKit for application development and WalletKit for wallet providers integrating TON Connect and signing functionality.

The Electric Capital developer tracker counted 450 monthly active TON developers in August 2026. That is meaningful activity, but it remains well below the developer scale around Ethereum and Solana.

TON's advantage is access rather than raw developer count. Mini Apps can reach Telegram users inside a familiar interface, which can lower distribution friction for games, payments and consumer products.

TON also supports services such as TON Storage, TON DNS, TON Proxy and TON Sites. Those broaden the network's technical scope, but Mini Apps, wallets, payments and DeFi are more relevant to current mainstream adoption.

Gram Explained: Utility, Supply and Tokenomics

Gram (GRAM) is TON's native currency and the asset formerly called Toncoin. It pays transaction and smart-contract fees, secures Proof-of-Stake through staking, funds validator rewards and supports DApps and network services.

Current market data shows a circulating supply of about 2.78 billion GRAM from a total supply of roughly 5.24 billion. CoinGecko's current GRAM data lists no fixed maximum supply.

GRAM is inflationary through validator issuance, while supply can also be removed through TON's burn mechanisms and validator penalties. The network currently burns 50% of eligible transaction fees, so net supply growth reflects both issuance and destruction rather than a simple fixed schedule.

Token data can change quickly. Prices, supply figures, volume, TVL and market cap should be treated as time-sensitive.

What Drives Demand for Gram?

GRAM has several direct network uses:

• Network fees: Transactions, smart contracts and messages consume GRAM.
• Staking: Validators and staking participants lock GRAM to secure TON.
• Mini Apps: Crypto-enabled Telegram applications can generate TON transactions.
• DeFi: Trading, lending and liquid staking use GRAM across smart contracts.
• Payments: Telegram-linked consumer activity can increase transfer demand.
• Network services: TON DNS and other services can create GRAM-denominated activity.

Network adoption does not guarantee proportional token-value capture. TON intentionally keeps transaction fees extremely low, so millions of transactions can generate relatively little direct fee demand.

Staking can lock supply and DeFi can expand GRAM's role as collateral or liquidity. Neither mechanism guarantees price appreciation. GRAM remains a volatile cryptoasset whose market value can diverge sharply from network usage.

TON Staking and Validators

TON staking is available through direct validation, staking pools and liquid staking. Running a validator offers direct consensus participation but requires far more capital and infrastructure than ordinary holders are likely to provide. Pools lower that barrier while adding smart-contract and validator exposure.

Running a TON Validator

TON's current staking documentation sets the protocol-level minimum validator stake at 300,000 GRAM, but says the actual minimum is typically around 1 million GRAM.

The operational requirement can be higher because validators need capital for consecutive validation rounds. TON's validator setup guide estimates roughly 1.4 million to 4 million GRAM for the effective staking setup used to cover both rounds.

As of Sept. 4, 2026, minimum hardware guidance includes an 8-core/16-thread CPU, 128 GB RAM, two 1.92 TB NVMe SSDs, a fixed public IP and 5 Gbit/s network connectivity. The validator guide also estimates up to 100 TB of monthly traffic at peak load.

Validators interact with the Elector system contract and must maintain reliable performance. A validator processing less than 90% of expected blocks in a round can be fined 101 GRAM. TON documents this as a validator penalty rather than a broad Ethereum-style slashing mechanism, but stakers still bear validator-penalty and performance risk through the structures they use.

The capital and operational requirements make direct validation a professional infrastructure activity rather than a realistic path for most small holders.

Pooled and Liquid Staking

Smaller holders can participate without operating validator infrastructure. Staking pools combine deposits and delegate validation to an operator, although minimums and pool structures vary.

Current documentation directs small holders toward third-party staking services and liquid staking structures.

With liquid staking, users deposit GRAM and receive a liquid staking token such as tsTON representing the underlying position. TON allows LSTs to be used elsewhere in DeFi while the underlying stake earns validator rewards.

That flexibility adds risk. Stakers depend on smart contracts and validator performance, while the LST can trade away from the value of the underlying GRAM. Using an LST in lending, liquidity pools or restaking adds further liquidation, liquidity and protocol exposure.

Coin Bureau's liquid staking guide explains how liquid staking works, and how to get started with it.

Is TON Decentralized?

TON is permissionless at the protocol level, but its expensive validator entry requirements and increasingly close relationship with Telegram create meaningful centralization concerns. Raw validator numbers alone do not capture every dimension of control.

Current Chainspect data gives TON a Nakamoto coefficient of 84 with 382 validators, using data as of Sept. 2, 2026. Under that methodology, 86 validators collectively reach the one-third stake threshold used to measure disruption risk.

The figure is strong relative to many Proof-of-Stake networks, but validator entry is capital-intensive. A 300,000 GRAM protocol floor and practical stake requirements around 1 million GRAM favor large holders and professional operators.

TON also uses onchain governance mechanisms in which validators vote on network configuration proposals. Governance distribution, developer leadership and Telegram's control over Mini App policy add forms of influence that a Nakamoto coefficient cannot measure.

Telegram's Growing Role

Pavel Durov announced in May 2026 that Telegram would replace TON Foundation as the network's driving force and become its largest validator. He later described Telegram's validator participation as having opened the door for major exchanges and custodians to stake alongside roughly 400 validators.

The announcement from Durov signals a much deeper relationship than Telegram merely supporting an outside blockchain.

There are benefits. Telegram can supply engineering resources, consumer distribution and long-term product integration. A major stakeholder can also provide a visible counterparty for ecosystem development.

The risks are platform and organizational concentration. Telegram controls the environment behind TON's strongest distribution channel and sets the blockchain rules for crypto-enabled Mini Apps. Changes in Telegram policy, regulation or leadership could therefore affect TON adoption even if the underlying blockchain remains permissionless.

Is TON Safe?

TON's core protocol has undergone independent security reviews, but using TON still exposes users to smart-contract, bridge, wallet and phishing risks. Protocol security should be separated from the security of individual DApps and Telegram interactions.

TON also has a history of network outages under extreme load, while ecosystem infrastructure such as bridges can fail without the base chain itself being compromised. Regulatory changes affecting Telegram, stablecoins, custodial wallet services or crypto-enabled Mini Apps could restrict how users access parts of the TON ecosystem even if the underlying network remains operational.

TON Audits and Protocol Security

TON publishes assessments from Trail of Bits, SlowMist and CertiK for blockchain components, along with Zellic work on tonlib. Trail of Bits has also reviewed the TON Virtual Machine. The reports are collected on TON's security audit page.

A smart-contract audit or protocol review applies to a defined codebase and scope. Audited code can still contain vulnerabilities, and a protocol review does not automatically cover every DApp.

TON's asynchronous execution model also creates development-specific risks. A single user action can generate a chain of messages and transactions across smart contracts. Developers need to handle intermediate states, bounced messages and partial execution rather than assuming an Ethereum-style atomic call.

Outages, Exploits and Ecosystem Risks

The 2024 DOGS incidents remain the clearest reliability warning. The first major TON outage halted block production for more than six hours during extreme transaction demand, and a second interruption followed the next day.

Bridge risk is separate. On May 11, 2026, the TAC Bridge between TON and the TAC EVM environment suffered a code-hash verification exploit. TAC's post-mortem put the initial protocol loss at about $2.85 million, with a substantial portion later recovered.

The vulnerability sat in bridge verification logic, not TON's base-layer consensus. It still affected users interacting with the broader TON ecosystem and illustrates why bridge security cannot be inferred from base-chain audits.

DeFi users also face oracle, stablecoin, staking, liquidity, governance and smart-contract risk depending on the applications they use.

Telegram and Wallet Scams

Telegram distribution gives scammers the same access to a large audience as legitimate projects. Common threats include fake Telegram bots, counterfeit support accounts, phishing pages, malicious Mini Apps and fake jettons impersonating GRAM or recognized ecosystem tokens.

The Toncoin-to-Gram rename creates an especially simple scam. No migration is required, so requests to exchange Toncoin for GRAM, verify a balance or claim replacement coins should be rejected.

Coin Bureau's crypto scam guide covers the main warning signs and practical steps users can take to identify common crypto scams.

TON vs Other Layer 1 Blockchains

TON competes with Solana and Ethereum as a general-purpose smart-contract network, but the three networks have very different strengths. TON's main advantage is Telegram-native distribution, while Solana and Ethereum currently support much deeper DeFi markets.

TON's edge is Telegram distribution. Solana currently has much deeper crypto-native trading and DeFi activity, while Ethereum offers far greater liquidity and the largest EVM-based application ecosystem.

Who Is TON Best For?

TON is strongest where Telegram distribution and inexpensive consumer transactions outweigh the need for maximum DeFi liquidity or EVM compatibility. Its fit is weaker for users prioritizing low validator entry barriers or the deepest smart-contract ecosystem.

Final Verdict

TON is one of the strongest attempts to put blockchain functionality inside an existing mainstream consumer platform rather than competing only on raw TPS. Catchain 2.0, dynamic sharding, near-zero fees and improved developer tooling give the network credible infrastructure. Telegram supplies a distribution channel most Layer 1s cannot reproduce.

The limitations are equally concrete. TON's DeFi liquidity and developer ecosystem remain much smaller than Solana and Ethereum, direct validation demands substantial capital, and Telegram's expanding role creates platform dependency. TON is particularly compelling for Telegram-native payments, Mini Apps and consumer DApps. Developers requiring EVM compatibility and DeFi users seeking deep liquidity have stronger options elsewhere.