Aztec excels at providing programmable privacy for complex DeFi applications through its Noir domain-specific language (DSL) and UTXO-based model. This enables developers to build private smart contracts for use cases like private voting, shielded DEX swaps, and confidential lending. Aztec's zk.money showcase demonstrates this, processing private transfers with fees under $0.01, though its current mainnet throughput is limited to ~15 TPS while prioritizing privacy guarantees.
LABS
Comparisons
Aztec vs. Polygon Miden: Privacy-Focused zkRollups
A technical analysis comparing Aztec's shielded pool model with Polygon Miden's private state model, focusing on architecture, developer experience, and strategic trade-offs for protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Privacy zkRollup Landscape
A technical breakdown of Aztec and Polygon Miden, two leading zkRollups with fundamentally different approaches to privacy and scalability.
Polygon Miden takes a different approach by focusing on high-throughput, general-purpose computation with optional privacy. Built on a STARK-based virtual machine (Miden VM), it allows any Solidity or Cairo-style logic to run with data privacy as a feature, not a mandate. This results in a trade-off: while it offers greater flexibility for public and private state, its privacy model is less battle-tested for complex, fully-private applications compared to Aztec's dedicated architecture.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum privacy-by-default for financial applications and you can work within a specialized DSL, choose Aztec. If you prioritize flexibility and scalability for a mix of public and private logic on a familiar VM, and are willing to implement privacy selectively, choose Polygon Miden.
tldr-summary
Aztec vs. Polygon Miden
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for two leading privacy-focused zkRollups.
01
Aztec: Unmatched Privacy Guarantees
Full-stack privacy: Uses private state and private function execution, hiding sender, receiver, and amount. This matters for DeFi, private voting, and confidential enterprise transactions where data leakage is unacceptable. The protocol is built for privacy-first applications.
02
Aztec: Native Private Bridging
Direct private deposits/withdrawals: Aztec Connect's architecture allows for private interactions with mainnet DeFi protocols like Lido and Uniswap. This matters for users who need to preserve privacy when moving assets between L1 and L2, a critical gap in most rollups.
03
Polygon Miden: Flexible Public/Private Hybrids
Public state, private execution: Miden's STARK-based VM allows any function to be proven privately, enabling apps with mixed privacy models. This matters for gaming, identity, and selective disclosure dApps where some data must be public (e.g., leaderboards) while computations remain private.
04
Polygon Miden: EVM-Compatible Tooling
Seamless developer onboarding: Miden aims for compatibility with Solidity and the EVM toolchain, lowering the barrier for existing Web3 devs. This matters for teams migrating from Polygon PoS or other EVM chains who want to add privacy features without learning a new language.
05
Aztec: Trade-Off in Complexity
Steeper learning curve: Developers must learn Noir, a domain-specific language, and manage private state abstractions. This matters for prototyping speed and team composition, as it requires dedicated privacy engineering expertise versus general Solidity knowledge.
06
Polygon Miden: Trade-Off in Privacy Scope
Not default full privacy: Privacy is opt-in per function, and asset ownership on the public state can create analysis vectors. This matters for applications requiring guaranteed anonymity, as the base layer offers less obfuscation than Aztec's private state model.
AZTEC VS. POLYGON MIDEN
Feature Matrix: Head-to-Head Specs
Direct comparison of key technical and operational metrics for privacy-focused zkRollups.
| Metric | Aztec | Polygon Miden |
|---|---|---|
Primary Privacy Model | Private State (Private smart contracts) | Public State (Private notes via client-side proofs) |
Virtual Machine | Custom Noir VM (LLVM-based) | Miden VM (STARK-based, RISC-V ISA) |
Proof System | PLONK / UltraPLONK (SNARK) | STARK (Zero-Knowledge) |
Programming Language | Noir (Domain-Specific) | Rust (via Miden Assembly) |
Mainnet Status | Live (Aztec 3) | Testnet (v0.7) |
Native Token Privacy | ||
EVM Compatibility |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Aztec vs. Polygon Miden: Privacy-Focused zkRollups
A technical breakdown of two leading privacy-centric zkRollups. Aztec focuses on programmable privacy for Ethereum, while Miden builds a new VM for general-purpose private computation.
02
Aztec's Key Weakness: Throughput & Cost
High computational overhead: Privacy comes at a cost. Generating zero-knowledge proofs for private transactions is resource-intensive, leading to higher gas fees and lower throughput compared to transparent L2s. This is a trade-off for projects that prioritize absolute privacy over high-frequency, low-cost transactions.
04
Polygon Miden's Key Weakness: Ecosystem Maturity
Early-stage development: As a newer project, Miden currently has a smaller live ecosystem, fewer audited tools, and less battle-tested infrastructure than more established rollups. Choosing Miden requires a higher tolerance for early-adopter risk and building with nascent developer tools compared to networks with more mature dApp suites.
pros-cons-b
Aztec vs. Polygon Miden
Polygon Miden: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading privacy-focused zkRollups. Use this to guide your infrastructure decision.
02
Aztec: Native Asset Privacy
Specific advantage: ZK.money (now Aztec Connect) demonstrated private stablecoin transfers with over $100M in historical shielded volume. This matters for institutional on-ramps and users prioritizing complete transaction anonymity for ETH and stablecoins from day one.
03
Aztec: Trade-off - Complexity & Pause
Specific disadvantage: The protocol was paused in 2024 to address architectural challenges, highlighting the complexity of maintaining a universal privacy set. This matters for production applications requiring uninterrupted uptime. Development has shifted focus to the new Avail-powered Aztec architecture.
05
Polygon Miden: Flexible Privacy Model
Specific advantage: Supports both public and private transactions within the same rollup, with privacy as an opt-in feature per transaction. This matters for applications needing hybrid models, like a game with public scores but private asset transfers, reducing default computational overhead.
06
Polygon Miden: Trade-off - Ecosystem Maturity
Specific disadvantage: As a pre-mainnet solution (testnet live), it lacks the deployed dApp ecosystem and proven economic security of a live network. This matters for teams needing immediate composability with existing DeFi legos (e.g., Aave, Uniswap) or proven tooling (The Graph, Pyth).
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Aztec for DeFi
Verdict: The specialized choice for private, high-value transactions. Strengths: Full privacy for both transaction amounts and participants via its UTXO-based zk.money model. This is critical for institutional OTC trades, private DAO treasury management, and confidential DEXs. Its Aztec Connect bridge allows private interaction with Ethereum mainnet protocols like Lido and Element Finance. Limitations: Throughput is lower (~20 TPS theoretical), and the programming model (Aztec Noir) is a paradigm shift from Solidity, requiring deep zk expertise. Best for: Protocols where privacy is the primary product feature, not just a nice-to-have.
Polygon Miden for DeFi
Verdict: The performance-focused choice for scalable, transparent DeFi with optional privacy. Strengths: High throughput (1k+ TPS target) via STARK-based proofs and a rollup architecture familiar to EVM developers. Its client-side proving model enables privacy for specific actions (e.g., hiding a bid amount) within a public-state application. Easier integration for teams already using Cairo or Solidity. Limitations: Privacy is selective and application-defined, not a default network state. Best for: Scaling existing DeFi applications that need massive throughput and want to add optional privacy features, like confidential voting or hidden-order auctions.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Aztec and Polygon Miden hinges on your application's specific privacy and scalability requirements.
Aztec excels at full-stack, programmable privacy because it's a dedicated L2 with a native privacy-first smart contract language, Noir. This enables complex, confidential DeFi logic like private lending and shielded DEXs, as demonstrated by its ecosystem of privacy-focused dApps. Its use of plonk-based recursive proofs and a centralized sequencer currently supports a throughput of up to 30 TPS, prioritizing robust privacy guarantees over raw speed.
Polygon Miden takes a different approach by being a general-purpose, EVM-compatible zkRollup with privacy as an optional feature via zero-knowledge proofs. Its STARK-based virtual machine allows developers to write private logic in Solidity or Cairo, lowering the barrier to entry. This results in a trade-off: while it enables selective privacy for public apps, it doesn't provide the same out-of-the-box, network-level privacy guarantees as Aztec's architecture.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum, default privacy for a novel financial application and you can build in Noir, choose Aztec. If you prioritize EVM compatibility, selective privacy features, and integration with the broader Polygon ecosystem, choose Polygon Miden. For CTOs, the decision maps to building a bespoke private bank (Aztec) versus adding confidential transactions to an existing public platform (Miden).
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall