Secret Network excels at providing a holistic, privacy-first environment because it is a purpose-built Layer 1 blockchain with privacy as its default state. Its secure enclave-based Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) architecture ensures data inputs, outputs, and contract states are encrypted, enabling complex private DeFi and confidential NFTs. For example, its mainnet has maintained over 99.9% uptime since 2020, processing private transactions with finality in ~6 seconds, a testament to its mature, standalone infrastructure.
LABS
Comparisons
Secret Network (Native Privacy L1) vs. Polygon with Miden (Privacy L2)
A technical comparison of two distinct privacy architectures: Secret Network's default-private, TEE-based Cosmos L1 versus Polygon's modular zkRollup, Miden. Analyzes tech stack, asset integration, and developer ecosystem for CTOs and architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Two Paths to On-Chain Privacy
A technical breakdown of two distinct architectural approaches to private computation: a dedicated Layer 1 versus a modular Layer 2.
Polygon with Miden takes a different approach by leveraging a zero-knowledge (ZK) rollup strategy on a high-throughput Layer 2. This results in a powerful trade-off: it inherits Ethereum's robust security and liquidity while offering scalable private computation, but privacy is an opt-in feature rather than a network default. Projects like Polygon Nightfall demonstrate this model, where ZK-proofs enable private enterprise transactions, but the ecosystem's general-purpose smart contracts (e.g., on Polygon PoS) remain transparent.
The key trade-off: If your priority is native privacy-by-default for all application logic and state, requiring a dedicated ecosystem like Shade Protocol for private swaps, choose Secret Network. If you prioritize leveraging Ethereum's security and existing Polygon DeFi liquidity (e.g., Aave, Uniswap V3) while adding selective privacy features, choose Polygon with Miden.
tldr-summary
Secret Network vs. Polygon Miden
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key architectural and operational trade-offs for privacy-focused blockchain selection.
02
Secret Network: Mature Ecosystem
Production-Ready Privacy: Live mainnet since 2020 with over $100M in historical TVL. Supports Cosmos IBC, enabling private cross-chain swaps. This matters for teams needing a battle-tested privacy layer with existing DeFi primitives like SiennaSwap.
2020
Mainnet Launch
04
Polygon Miden: Developer Familiarity
EVM-Compatible Tooling: Leverages the Polygon CDK and supports Solidity/Vyper, reducing migration friction. This matters for EVM-native teams (e.g., Aave, Uniswap v3 deployments) wanting to add privacy features without learning a new stack.
EVM
Compatibility
05
Choose Secret Network For...
Maximum Data Sovereignty & Cross-Chain Privacy.
- Use Case: Private, generalized smart contracts where data itself must be encrypted (e.g., medical records, enterprise supply chains).
- Key Protocol: Secret NFTs with hidden metadata.
- Trade-off: Relies on TEE hardware security assumptions.
06
Choose Polygon Miden For...
Scalable Privacy for Mass-Market dApps.
- Use Case: High-frequency applications needing low-cost, verifiable privacy (e.g., private voting, stealth transactions in games).
- Key Tool: Miden VM for ZK-optimized execution.
- Trade-off: Privacy is opt-in per application, not network-default.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Secret Network vs. Polygon Miden: Privacy Tech Comparison
Direct comparison of privacy architecture, performance, and ecosystem for CTOs and architects.
| Metric / Feature | Secret Network (L1) | Polygon Miden (L2) |
|---|---|---|
Privacy Model | Default on-chain privacy (encrypted state) | Optional off-chain privacy (ZK proofs) |
Consensus & Settlement | Tendermint BFT (Sovereign L1) | Ethereum (ZK Rollup L2) |
Throughput (Theoretical TPS) | ~10,000 | ~1,000+ |
Avg. Transaction Cost | $0.05 - $0.20 | < $0.01 (estimated) |
Developer Environment | CosmWasm (Rust) with privacy | Miden VM (Rust, ZK-native) |
EVM Compatibility | ||
Mainnet Status | Live (since 2020) | Testnet (Mainnet target 2024) |
Key Use Cases | Private DeFi, NFTs, MEV resistance | Private scaling for Ethereum dApps |
PRIVACY ENGINE COMPARISON
Technical Deep Dive: TEEs vs. zk-STARKs
Choosing a privacy infrastructure is a foundational architectural decision. This analysis compares Secret Network's Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs) with Polygon Miden's zk-STARKs, breaking down their performance, security models, and ideal use cases for builders.
Yes, Secret Network currently offers higher throughput for private smart contracts. Secret's TEE-based execution can process hundreds of transactions per second (TPS) for general-purpose private computation. In contrast, Polygon Miden, as a zk-STARK-based rollup, inherits Ethereum's block times for settlement, prioritizing verifiable integrity over raw speed. However, Miden's performance is optimized for specific, provable state transitions rather than general computation.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Secret Network for DeFi
Verdict: The premier choice for privacy-first applications like dark pools, private voting, and confidential DEXs. Strengths:
- Default Data Privacy: All smart contract states and inputs/outputs are encrypted by default via Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs). This is critical for protecting sensitive financial data, order books, and trading strategies.
- Native Privacy Assets (SNIP-20): Supports private fungible tokens, enabling confidential transfers and balances.
- Proven Use Cases: Applications like Sienna Network (private DEX) and Shade Protocol (private lending/stablecoin) demonstrate live, battle-tested privacy DeFi. Key Trade-off: Higher transaction costs (~$0.05-$0.15) and lower throughput (~30 TPS) compared to L2s.
Polygon with Miden for DeFi
Verdict: Ideal for scalable, cost-effective DeFi where privacy is a selective feature, not a default. Strengths:
- Low-Cost, High-Throughput: Inherits Polygon's low fees (<$0.01) and high capacity, suitable for high-frequency DeFi operations.
- Selective Privacy via ZK: Miden's zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs allow developers to add privacy to specific functions (e.g., hiding a bid amount) without encrypting the entire application state.
- EVM Compatibility: Seamless integration with the vast Polygon/Ethereum DeFi ecosystem (Aave, Uniswap V3). Key Trade-off: Privacy is opt-in and application-specific, not a foundational layer property.
pros-cons-a
NATIVE PRIVACY L1 VS. PRIVACY L2
Secret Network vs. Polygon with Miden
A data-driven comparison of two leading privacy architectures. Secret Network offers programmable privacy on a sovereign chain, while Polygon Miden uses zero-knowledge proofs on a scaling layer.
01
Secret Network: Sovereign Privacy
Full-stack privacy by default: Data in smart contracts (inputs, outputs, state) is encrypted using Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs). This enables private DeFi, confidential NFTs, and private voting. As an independent L1, it offers complete control over its privacy stack and economics without dependency on another chain's security.
~$50M
TVL (Shade Protocol)
Cosmos IBC
Interoperability
02
Secret Network: Trade-offs
Smaller ecosystem & higher friction: With a TVL under $100M, it lacks the developer mass of Ethereum. TEEs introduce hardware-based trust assumptions (Intel SGX), a different security model than pure cryptography. Cross-chain asset bridging adds complexity for users coming from major chains.
03
Polygon Miden: Scalable ZK Privacy
Leverages Ethereum security with ZK proofs: Inherits the robust security and liquidity of Ethereum while enabling private transactions via zk-STARKs. Offers massive scalability potential (10k+ TPS target) for private applications. Integrates seamlessly with the vast Polygon PoS and Ethereum developer tooling (Solidity/Vyper).
$1B+
Polygon Ecosystem Fund
EVM-Compatible
Developer Reach
04
Polygon Miden: Trade-offs
Privacy is opt-in, not default: Applications must be specifically built using Miden's VM and STARK proofs. Still in testnet (as of late 2024), with mainnet economics and adoption unproven. Privacy scope may be initially more limited compared to a network built entirely for confidential computation.
pros-cons-b
Secret Network vs. Polygon with Miden
Polygon with Miden: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for two distinct approaches to on-chain privacy: a dedicated L1 versus an L2 leveraging zero-knowledge proofs.
01
Secret Network: Native Privacy
Full-stack confidentiality: Every smart contract (Secret Contract) runs inside a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE), encrypting inputs, state, and outputs by default. This matters for private DeFi (e.g., Shade Protocol) and confidential NFTs where data must be hidden from all parties, including validators.
02
Secret Network: Interoperability Focus
IBC-native architecture: As a Cosmos SDK chain, it has native cross-chain communication with 50+ chains via IBC. This matters for privacy-preserving bridges and applications that need private computation across ecosystems, like Axelar's General Message Passing for cross-chain private transactions.
03
Secret Network: Trade-offs
Specialized but isolated: As a sovereign L1, it lacks direct access to Ethereum's liquidity and developer tooling (e.g., Hardhat, Foundry). Throughput is limited (~50 TPS) compared to high-performance L2s. This matters for teams prioritizing EVM compatibility or needing ultra-low-cost, high-volume transactions.
04
Polygon with Miden: EVM Synergy
Leverages Ethereum security & liquidity: Miden is a ZK-rollup, inheriting Ethereum's consensus while enabling private smart contracts via zero-knowledge proofs (STARKs). This matters for projects already on Polygon PoS or Polygon zkEVM seeking to add privacy features without migrating ecosystems or sacrificing composability with mainstream DeFi (Aave, Uniswap).
05
Polygon with Miden: Scalability & Cost
High-throughput, low-cost privacy: As a ZK-rollup, it batches proofs for thousands of private transactions, targeting low fees and high TPS (>5,000). This matters for privacy at scale in gaming, enterprise supply chains, or microtransactions where Secret Network's per-transaction cost and throughput would be prohibitive.
06
Polygon with Miden: Trade-offs
Privacy is opt-in, not default: Applications must be specifically built using Miden's VM and tooling; the base Polygon chains are transparent. Ecosystem maturity: Miden's mainnet is pending (2024/2025), while Secret Network has 5+ years of production use. This matters for teams needing battle-tested, default-private contracts today.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A direct comparison of a privacy-native blockchain versus a privacy-enabled scaling solution for Ethereum.
Secret Network excels at providing strong, default privacy for smart contracts through its Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) architecture. This native integration means every application inherits privacy by design, enabling confidential DeFi, private NFTs, and secure data oracles without additional developer overhead. For example, its mainnet has secured over $1B in Total Value Locked (TVL) in privacy-focused applications like Shade Protocol, demonstrating real-world adoption for its unique value proposition.
Polygon with Miden takes a fundamentally different approach by layering a zero-knowledge (ZK) rollup on top of Ethereum's security. This strategy prioritizes inheriting Ethereum's battle-tested security and vast liquidity while introducing privacy via ZK-proofs. The trade-off is that privacy is an opt-in feature developers must implement using Miden's STARK-based virtual machine, rather than a default network state. This positions it as a high-throughput scaling solution (targeting 1,000+ TPS) where privacy is a powerful, optional module.
The key architectural divergence is between a sovereign, privacy-first L1 and a scalable, security-first L2. Secret Network's sovereignty allows for faster iteration on core privacy features but requires building its own validator ecosystem and cross-chain bridges. Polygon Miden's rollup model leverages Ethereum's robust consensus and developer tooling (like Ethers.js and Hardhat) but is ultimately constrained by Ethereum's data availability costs and upgrade timelines.
The final trade-off is clear: If your priority is maximum, out-of-the-box privacy for complex application logic and you are willing to build on a specialized ecosystem, choose Secret Network. If you prioritize leveraging Ethereum's security and liquidity above all else and need privacy as a high-performance feature for specific computations, choose Polygon 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