On this page
MATIC was the token associated with Matic Network, later renamed Polygon. POL replaced MATIC as the native gas and staking token for Polygon PoS in the upgrade that began on September 4, 2024. A legacy MATIC balance must therefore be understood in terms of the network or platform on which it is held.
A new name and a later token upgrade
The change from Matic Network to Polygon broadened the project’s identity beyond its original scaling design. The subsequent MATIC-to-POL migration was a token change, not merely a new logo. Treating the two events as identical can leave holders unsure whether they need to do anything.
Polygon’s official portal describes conversion of MATIC on Ethereum into POL at a one-to-one ratio. That ratio relates token units, not a fixed dollar value. It does not promise that either asset retains a particular market price.
Where a balance is held changes the process
The Polygon PoS upgrade changed the network’s native token. MATIC held on Ethereum uses a migration contract route. Custodial platforms may handle balances according to their own support and conversion policies. These cases should not be collapsed into one universal instruction.
A wallet may also keep an old symbol in its settings even when the underlying network asset has changed. Conversely, a token displaying a familiar symbol can be an unrelated contract. The chain and asset identifier are more reliable than the display name alone.
What POL is used for
Polygon documents POL as the gas and staking token of its PoS network. Gas pays for executing transactions, while staking participates in the network’s security arrangements. These functions are distinct from the application tokens that can circulate on Polygon.
A stablecoin or game token on the network does not become POL simply because it uses Polygon infrastructure. Users may need the native gas asset to move another token, and the receiving service must support the correct network representation.
Polygon networks have different assumptions
Polygon is a broader ecosystem, not one interchangeable blockchain. The PoS chain, bridges and other scaling infrastructure have different mechanisms. Statements about a particular rollup’s proofs should not automatically be applied to Polygon PoS.
When comparing fees or security, identify the actual route. A transaction made within one network is different from a transfer bridged between networks. Bridging adds contracts, waiting periods or other dependencies that do not necessarily appear in the fee shown for an ordinary transfer.
Supply and staking require current documentation
The old profile’s initial token-sale discussion is not a sufficient description of POL economics. Polygon’s developer documentation describes POL’s updated issuance design. A holder should examine the applicable emission and governance rules rather than carrying over a fixed-supply assumption from MATIC.
Staking rewards also need context. More token units do not guarantee a positive dollar return, and delegation can involve fees, withdrawal conditions and operational risk. Holding a token and participating in its staking mechanism are different positions.
A practical way to inspect a legacy balance
First establish whether the balance is native to Polygon PoS, an Ethereum token or a custodial account entry. Then read the matching official migration information or the platform’s actual support notice. Do not send funds to a migration address found in an unsolicited message.
A genuine support process does not require giving someone a recovery phrase. Approval screens deserve close attention because migration can involve smart-contract permissions. Keeping the original transaction records also helps distinguish a completed conversion from a wallet interface that has merely renamed an asset.
The old MATIC name remains useful for identifying historical holdings, but the current network role belongs to POL. Neither a past token sale nor a migration ratio predicts the future value of those holdings.
Records to keep after a conversion
Keep the original asset identifier, conversion transaction and resulting balance record. Those details help establish what happened if an interface later changes its display or a support team needs to trace a deposit. A blockchain conversion and an exchange’s internal accounting adjustment can leave different records. Neither should be inferred solely from a new ticker in a portfolio application. The important result is control of the intended asset on the intended network, with a usable withdrawal or spending route.