(Higher risk on a simple project, because that's the only opportunity to learn new stuff, as in the worst case you can start over. Lower risk for a complex project, because there's already enough risk in the project itself.)
But if you reach for that new language that hasn't been battle-tested yet, you're probably screwing the bank over.
There is tremendous fear in the industry right now over being seen as outdated or dinosaur, especially with all the blockchain hype.
You can make simple technology choices like moving from a stateful SQL database over to a blockchain ledger like Sequence, and in doing so, you will attract a way higher calibre level of talent. You will also have way more people interested in working for you, and the skillsets and knowledge learned within the company for doing it will future proof you far better than going the boring old route.
If the team and managers agree, by all means use the exciting tech, but it isn't a decision to make in isolation.
The canonical link on choosing boring technology is http://mcfunley.com/choose-boring-technology.
A relevant example is microservices which are all the rage right now. But, you have to be this tall to use them[0]. You cannot effectively just say you are going to do microservices, especially if you don't know how to do microservices.
Alternatively, consider the potential problems for your company if you had introduced React on your own in a core business element, and your company had a patent beef with Facebook, and FB hadn't switched to the MIT license.
[0]: https://martinfowler.com/bliki/MicroservicePrerequisites.htm...
