I’m using OpenZeppelin contracts to develop a DeFi app and am budgeting for a security audit. Could anyone share what factors typically influence the cost of auditing smart contracts written with OpenZeppelin libraries? Does using these libraries reduce audit costs in practice?
Hi James, audit costs typically depend on the size and complexity of your codebase, external integrations, and how well-tested/documented everything is. Using OpenZeppelin libraries usually reduces audit costs, since they’re widely used, audited, and well understood — auditors can focus on your custom logic instead of re-reviewing the library code.
I’d recommend checking out the OpenZeppelin Readiness Guide — it’s a great resource to simplify the audit process and get the most value out of it.
And don’t hesitate to reach out to the OpenZeppelin team for a scoping call or audit quote when you’re ready: https://www.openzeppelin.com/request
TLDR: using OZ helps, but only if you’ve kept the custom logic small and clean. Hope this clears things up!
Yes, using OpenZeppelin libraries can reduce your audit cost — but it depends on how much custom code you’ve added. If you’re just using standard contracts like ERC20, Ownable, or AccessControl without changing their logic, auditors usually don’t charge for reviewing that part since it's already trusted.
The cost mainly depends on what you’ve built on top of those libraries. If your contract has custom features like taxes, fees, vesting, staking, or anything that handles user funds, it’ll need deeper checking — and that increases the cost. Also, if your app interacts with other contracts like DEXs or oracles, that adds to the complexity.
Auditors also look at how clean your code is, whether you’ve written tests, and if everything is documented. Clear and simple code with comments and test cases usually gets audited faster and cheaper.
So in short: using OZ helps, but only if you’ve kept the custom logic small and clean. Hope this clears things up!