EVM vs Non-EVM: AML Coverage

Unified address screening: Tools like Chainalysis, TRM Labs, and Elliptic provide deep, standardized coverage for Ethereum and its L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism). This matters for institutional DeFi and regulated exchanges requiring consistent risk scoring across a portfolio.

Tailored transaction monitoring: Networks like Solana (Solscan tags) and Cosmos (custom modules) enable native, high-speed analysis frameworks. This matters for high-frequency trading platforms and gaming economies where low-latency, custom risk rules are critical.

Deep integration with major providers: Chainalysis, TRM Labs, and Elliptic offer native, battle-tested support for Ethereum, Polygon, and Arbitrum. This provides regulator-recognized transaction monitoring and wallet screening, crucial for licensed exchanges and DeFi protocols operating in regulated jurisdictions.

Native compliance standards: ERC-20 and ERC-721 token standards enable uniform screening. Protocols like Aave and Uniswap integrate sanctions screening oracles (e.g., Chainlink) directly into smart contract logic, allowing for automated, on-chain compliance actions like pausing suspicious asset pools.

Tailored risk models: Networks like Solana and Cosmos allow teams to build bespoke AML logic directly into the application layer (e.g., a Sei-based DEX). This is critical for niche financial products (e.g., real-world asset tokenization) where off-the-shelf EVM tools may not capture specific jurisdictional or asset-class risks.

Alternative data paradigms: Chains with focused privacy (Monero) or high-throughput data layers (Celestia) present a different AML challenge. While this can complicate traditional monitoring, it enables novel compliance approaches using zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) for privacy-preserving attestations, appealing to institutions requiring confidentiality.

Deep, integrated ecosystem: Tools like Chainalysis, TRM Labs, and Elliptic offer native, battle-tested support for EVM chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum). This provides unified risk scoring and transaction monitoring across $500B+ in TVL. This matters for protocols requiring established, auditable compliance for institutional onboarding.

Largest developer pool: With 4,000+ monthly active Solidity devs, compliance logic (e.g., OFAC-sanctioned address lists) can be integrated directly into smart contracts using standards like EIPs. This matters for teams building custom, on-chain AML rules who need to move quickly with available talent.

Built-in privacy and compliance features: Chains like Solana (Sealevel) and Aptos (Move VM) offer architectural choices that can simplify compliance. For example, Solana's account model can make transaction graph analysis more efficient for AML bots. This matters for high-throughput applications (50k+ TPS) where traditional EVM analysis tools struggle with scale.

Less exposure to EVM-specific exploits: Avoiding the EVM can sidestep well-known vulnerability patterns (reentrancy, gas griefing) that are often exploited for money laundering. Native languages like Rust (Solana) and Move (Aptos, Sui) enforce stricter safety guarantees. This matters for security-first DeFi protocols where contract integrity is a primary AML defense.

Cross-chain laundering risk: While individual chains are well-monitored, funds can be bridged across 50+ EVM L2s and sidechains using bridges like LayerZero and Axelar, complicating end-to-end traceability. This matters for compliance officers who need a holistic, cross-chain view of fund flows, which is still an emerging solution.

Sparse third-party tooling: Major AML providers have lighter support for non-EVM chains. Building custom compliance for ecosystems like Cosmos (IBC) or Near often requires in-house development or niche vendors. This matters for projects with immediate regulatory requirements who cannot afford to build core monitoring infrastructure from scratch.