Aztec Connect excelled at providing private access to Ethereum's liquidity because it functioned as a privacy-focused bridge. It used a hybrid model where private notes existed on its own L2, but final settlement and DeFi interactions occurred on Ethereum Mainnet via a bridge contract. For example, this allowed users to privately swap assets on Lido or Uniswap v3, with the system processing over 300,000 private transactions before its sunset. Its strength was seamless, trust-minimized composability with established protocols.
LABS
Comparisons
Aztec Connect vs Aztec 3.0
A technical analysis of Aztec's evolution from a bridge-based privacy layer to a native private rollup. We compare architectures, privacy models, performance, and developer trade-offs for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: Two Eras of On-Chain Privacy
A technical breakdown of Aztec's evolution from a connected L2 to a full-stack zkRollup, and what it means for your application's privacy, cost, and composability.
Aztec 3.0 (now Aztec Network) takes a fundamentally different approach by being a fully independent, general-purpose zkRollup. This architecture moves all logic—private state, public smart contracts, and proof generation—into a unified Layer 2. This results in a trade-off: superior scalability and lower costs for native private applications, but a more complex path for direct, private interaction with Mainnet DeFi. It's a shift from a privacy plug-in to a privacy-first execution environment.
The key trade-off: If your priority is low-friction, private interaction with existing Ethereum DeFi and your application logic can live on Mainnet, the Aztec Connect model was optimal. If you prioritize building scalable, native private dApps with their own complex logic (e.g., private AMMs, fully private governance) and are willing to build within a new L2 ecosystem, Aztec 3.0 is the definitive choice. The decision hinges on whether privacy is a feature of your Ethereum application or the foundation of your new application.
tldr-summary
Aztec Connect vs Aztec 3.0
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key architectural strengths and trade-offs at a glance. Aztec Connect is a live, application-specific privacy layer, while Aztec 3.0 is the upcoming universal privacy-first L2.
01
Aztec Connect: Live & Battle-Tested
Specific advantage: A live, audited system with over $120M in historical shielded volume. This matters for teams needing production-ready privacy today for DeFi bridging (e.g., Lido, Element Finance).
02
Aztec Connect: Application-Specific Privacy
Specific advantage: Acts as a privacy hub for Ethereum L1, enabling private interactions with protocols like Uniswap and Aave via its Connect Bridge. This matters for integrating privacy into existing L1 dApps without a full chain migration.
03
Aztec 3.0: Universal Privacy L2
Specific advantage: A fully programmable, privacy-first zkRollup with a native VM (Aztec VM). This matters for developers building complex, private smart contracts (e.g., private DAOs, on-chain games) that require Turing-complete logic.
04
Aztec 3.0: Scalability & Lower Fees
Specific advantage: Designed for massive scalability via batching and a rollup architecture, targeting significantly lower fees than Connect's L1 settlement. This matters for applications requiring high-frequency, low-cost private transactions.
AZTEC CONNECT VS AZTEC 3.0
Architecture & Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of key architectural metrics and features between the deprecated L1 bridge and the new L2 rollup.
| Metric / Feature | Aztec Connect (Deprecated) | Aztec 3.0 (Aztec Sandbox) |
|---|---|---|
Core Architecture | L1 Bridge (Ethereum) | ZK Rollup L2 (Ethereum) |
Privacy Model | Private State (App-level) | Hybrid Public/Private State |
Transaction Throughput | ~15 TPS (est.) |
|
Native Asset Privacy | ||
Developer Framework | zk.money SDK | Aztec.nr, Noir |
Smart Contract Language | Limited (Custom Circuits) | Noir (General Purpose) |
Mainnet Status | Deprecated (Oct 2023) | Sandbox Testnet (Live) |
pros-cons-a
ARCHITECTURE COMPARISON
Aztec Connect vs Aztec 3.0
A technical breakdown of the two distinct privacy architectures, highlighting their core trade-offs for protocol builders.
01
Aztec Connect: Production-Proven Bridge
Specific advantage: A battle-tested, live system for private interactions with Ethereum L1 DeFi. It acts as a privacy layer via a specialized rollup bridge, enabling private stablecoin yields on protocols like Lido and Element Finance.
This matters for teams needing a stable, audited solution for private access to established L1 liquidity today. It's a proven dependency for applications like zk.money.
02
Aztec Connect: Simpler Integration Model
Specific advantage: Integrators connect via a standardized bridge contract on Ethereum L1. This abstracts away much of the underlying zk-SNARK complexity, allowing protocols to offer private versions of their functions with minimal internal changes.
This matters for DeFi protocols (e.g., Aave, Compound analogs) wanting to add a privacy feature without rebuilding their entire stack. The integration surface is well-defined and constrained.
03
Aztec 3.0: Full App-Specific zkRollup
Specific advantage: A generalized, programmable zkRollup where developers write private smart contracts in Noir. This enables arbitrary private state and logic, moving beyond simple bridge interactions to complex, composable private applications.
This matters for architects building novel privacy-first dApps (e.g., private voting, dark pool DEXs, confidential RWA platforms) that require custom logic and state management not possible through a simple bridge.
04
Aztec 3.0: Native Multi-Asset Privacy & Efficiency
Specific advantage: Introduces a UTXO-based model with private note aggregation. This allows batching many private transactions into a single proof, drastically reducing per-transaction cost and enabling native private transactions for any asset on the network.
This matters for applications requiring scalable, low-fee privacy for a diverse asset portfolio. It solves the liquidity fragmentation and high cost limitations of the Connect model's bridge-centric approach.
05
Aztec Connect: Limited Composability & Scalability
Specific weakness: Privacy is largely siloed to the bridge interaction. Complex, multi-step private DeFi strategies are difficult. Each private action requires a new L1 bridge call, leading to high latency and cost overhead.
This matters for builders designing intricate, cross-protocol workflows. The architecture is a bottleneck for applications demanding high-frequency private state updates or complex logic.
06
Aztec 3.0: Higher Development Complexity
Specific weakness: Requires learning a new domain-specific language (Noir) and zkRollup development patterns. Teams must manage private state, note discovery, and proof generation, introducing significant upfront R&D cost and new attack surfaces.
This matters for teams with tight timelines or those lacking zero-knowledge cryptography expertise. The learning curve is steep compared to deploying a simple L1 bridge contract.
pros-cons-b
AZTEC CONNECT VS AZTEC 3.0
Aztec 3.0: Pros and Cons
Key architectural differences, trade-offs, and decision criteria for CTOs evaluating private execution layers.
02
Aztec Connect: Lower Development Overhead
Specific advantage: Developers integrate via a standardized Bridge Contract interface, avoiding the need to write custom private circuits. This matters for prototyping speed and audit surface, allowing teams to launch private DeFi products by connecting to battle-tested L1 smart contracts.
04
Aztec 3.0: Native Rollup Architecture
Specific advantage: Functions as an encrypted zkRollup with its own sequencer and prover network, decoupling throughput from Ethereum L1 congestion. This matters for scalability and cost predictability, targeting 100+ TPS for private transactions versus Connect's dependency on L1 block space and gas costs for settlement.
05
Aztec Connect: Constrained by L1 Design
Specific trade-off: Every private transaction requires a public L1 settlement, making throughput and cost directly tied to Ethereum mainnet gas prices. This matters for high-frequency applications where sub-dollar fees and sub-second finality are required.
06
Aztec 3.0: Higher Complexity & New Stack
Specific trade-off: Developers must learn a new Noir programming language and manage encrypted state, a significant lift compared to Solidity/EVM. This matters for team onboarding and time-to-market, as the tooling and audit ecosystem is nascent compared to the mature EVM environment Connect leverages.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose: Use Case Analysis
Aztec Connect for DeFi
Verdict: A specialized bridge for private interactions with Ethereum's public DeFi. Strengths:
- Proven Bridge Architecture: Allows shielded Aztec users to interact with established protocols like Lido, Element Finance, and Uniswap without exposing their identity or full transaction history.
- Capital Efficiency: Users can deposit once into the Aztec rollup and batch multiple DeFi interactions (e.g., yield farming, swaps) into a single expensive Ethereum L1 proof.
- Tooling: Mature SDK for integrating with existing L1 contracts via the bridge.
Aztec 3.0 for DeFi
Verdict: The future-proof choice for building native, fully private DeFi applications. Strengths:
- Native Private Smart Contracts: Full-featured zk-SNARK VM (Noir) enables complex, custom private DeFi logic (e.g., private AMMs, lending with confidential collateral).
- State Model: UTXO-based, enabling true parallel transaction processing and better scalability for high-frequency DeFi actions.
- Developer Experience: Noir language and Aztec.nr framework are designed for building private applications from the ground up, not just bridging.
AZTEC CONNECT VS AZTEC 3.0
Technical Deep Dive: Privacy Models
Aztec's evolution from a hybrid rollup to a fully encrypted zkRollup represents a fundamental architectural shift. This comparison breaks down the key technical trade-offs between the deprecated Aztec Connect and the new Aztec 3.0 for developers and architects.
Aztec Connect was a hybrid privacy layer, while Aztec 3.0 is a fully encrypted zkRollup. Connect operated as a privacy bridge, batching private transactions from L1 (Ethereum) for efficiency. Aztec 3.0, however, is a standalone L2 where all transactions are private by default, using zk-SNARKs for both execution and validity, creating a fully encrypted environment.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Decision
Choosing between Aztec Connect and Aztec 3.0 is a strategic decision between a proven, specialized bridge and a next-generation, programmable privacy platform.
Aztec Connect excels at providing a simple, secure privacy bridge for existing DeFi applications on Ethereum. Its architecture allows users to shield assets and interact with protocols like Lido, Uniswap, and Element Finance without those protocols needing to modify their smart contracts. For example, it processed over $100M in shielded volume, demonstrating its utility for private yield farming and trading. Its strength lies in its immediate, low-friction integration path for established dApps.
Aztec 3.0 (now Noir & Aztec) takes a fundamentally different approach by introducing a universal, programmable privacy layer. It replaces Connect's bridge model with a zk-rollup powered by its own virtual machine and Noir programming language. This results in a trade-off: while it requires applications to be rebuilt in Noir, it enables arbitrary private smart contracts, moving beyond simple DeFi bridging to support private gaming, identity, and voting with significantly higher scalability potential.
The key trade-off: If your priority is integrating privacy into an existing Ethereum dApp with minimal development overhead, Aztec Connect is the pragmatic, production-ready choice. If you prioritize building a novel, fully private application from the ground up with maximum flexibility and future-proof scalability, the Aztec 3.0 stack (Noir & Aztec) is the strategic, forward-looking platform. The decision hinges on whether you need a bridge to the past or a foundation for the future.
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