Comparative Analysis of Hoare Logic-Based Formal Verification Tools for Solidity Smart Contracts

Abstract

Formal verification of smart contracts is widely regarded as an effective method for ensuring correctness and security properties across all possible executions. Its practical relevance has been driven by the availability of automatic verification tools that discharge intricate proofs. Another area of growing interest is the integration of specification paradigms - for example, combining Hoare-logic–style specifications (pre/postconditions and invariants) with SMT and symbolic reasoning - so that each technique can precisely capture complementary aspects of contract behavior. In this article we present a comparative analysis of four leading Solidity verification tools - solc-verify, SMTChecker, VeriSmart and the Certora Prover - and define what is meant here by a formal verification tool: a system that provides mathematically rigorous proofs that stated properties hold for every possible execution of a contract. We also describe a consistent evaluation framework that considers the Solidity version support, the preservation of the original contract structure, the local execution capability, the verification time, and the modeling-language requirements, among other criteria. We used the ERC-20 token standard as a benchmark and applied this framework to obtain empirical evidence of each tool’s capabilities and limitations. Our results expose substantial variability in the tools performances that undermines their trustworthiness in practice and highlights a gap between an academic tool capabilities and the industrial requirements. Finally, we discuss how these findings can inform developers and researchers in selecting appropriate verification tools, thereby contributing to improved smart contract security and reliability.