Railgun excels at providing privacy directly within existing DeFi ecosystems like Ethereum and Polygon because it operates as a smart contract system using zero-knowledge proofs (zk-SNARKs). This allows users to interact with protocols like Uniswap or Aave privately without migrating assets. For example, its Railgun Smart Wallet contract holds over $30M in TVL, enabling private transactions and swaps with on-chain auditability via its Proof of Innocence system.
LABS
Comparisons
Auditable Privacy: Railgun vs Incognito: Smart Contract Implementation
A technical comparison of two leading EVM-compatible privacy protocols, focusing on their mechanisms for providing regulatory-compliant audit trails while shielding transaction details. Analyzes core architecture, viewing key systems, and integration trade-offs for DeFi builders.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Need for Auditable Privacy in DeFi
A technical comparison of Railgun's smart contract-based privacy system versus Incognito's sidechain architecture for DeFi applications.
Incognito takes a different approach by operating as a standalone, privacy-focused sidechain. This architecture results in higher theoretical throughput and lower fees for native operations but creates a trade-off: assets must be bridged to its chain, creating friction for interacting with mainnet DeFi. Its use of a custom consensus (Beacon) and sharding aims for scalability, but this comes with the complexity of managing a separate validator set and liquidity pool.
The key trade-off: If your priority is seamless, composable privacy within established DeFi ecosystems and you value on-chain audit trails, choose Railgun. If you prioritize high-throughput, low-cost private transactions in a dedicated environment and can manage cross-chain asset bridging, choose Incognito.
tldr-summary
Smart Contract Implementation
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key architectural and operational trade-offs between Railgun and Incognito for auditable privacy.
01
Railgun: EVM-Native Smart Contracts
Deployed directly on host chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum). Uses zero-knowledge proofs (zk-SNARKs) for private balances and transfers. This matters for composability with existing DeFi protocols like Uniswap and Aave via its Relay system, enabling private interactions without protocol modifications.
02
Railgun: Prover & Verifier On-Chain
Verification logic is a smart contract on the base layer. Users submit proofs to this contract to update the private state. This matters for security and auditability, as the entire system's correctness is anchored to and enforced by the underlying chain's consensus (e.g., Ethereum).
03
Incognito: Dedicated Privacy Blockchain
A standalone, Tendermint-based blockchain with a native token (PRV). Privacy is achieved via Shielded Transactions and a network of validators. This matters for throughput and fee independence, as transactions occur on a separate chain, avoiding base layer congestion and gas fees.
04
Incognito: Cross-Chain Bridges as Connectors
Uses a decentralized bridge network to port assets (BTC, ETH, BSC tokens) into its private chain. This matters for multi-chain privacy unification, allowing a single private wallet for assets from many ecosystems, but introduces bridge security as a dependency.
SMART CONTRACT PRIVACY IMPLEMENTATION
Feature Comparison: Railgun vs Incognito
Direct technical comparison of auditable privacy solutions based on smart contract architecture.
| Metric / Feature | Railgun | Incognito |
|---|---|---|
Core Technology | EVM Smart Contracts (zk-SNARKs) | Independent L1 with Privacy VMs |
Auditability Mechanism | Proof of Innocence & Compliance Tool | View-Key System & Regulatory Nodes |
Supported Base Chains | Ethereum, BSC, Polygon, Arbitrum | Native Incognito Chain (Cross-Chain via pBTC, pETH) |
Privacy Set (Shielded Pool) | Shared, Chain-Specific | Discrete, User-Managed Privacy Pools |
Developer Entry | Solidity/zk-SNARK Circuits | Incognito's Custom PrvVM & Go |
Trusted Setup Required | Yes (Per Circuit) | No |
Native Token for Fees | Base Chain Gas (ETH, MATIC, etc.) | PRV (Incognito Native Token) |
SMART CONTRACT IMPLEMENTATION
Technical Deep Dive: Privacy Mechanisms & Auditability
A technical comparison of how Railgun and Incognito implement privacy at the smart contract layer, focusing on their distinct approaches to zero-knowledge proofs, on-chain verification, and the resulting trade-offs for developers and auditors.
Yes, Railgun's smart contract-based privacy is inherently more auditable. Railgun's core logic and zero-knowledge proof verification (zk-SNARKs) are implemented as public, non-upgradable smart contracts on the host chain (Ethereum, Polygon, etc.), allowing for complete on-chain verification and independent audit. Incognito's privacy is enforced at the consensus layer of its own L1 blockchain, making its core logic less transparent to external auditors not specialized in its codebase.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Railgun vs Incognito
Railgun for DeFi
Verdict: The superior choice for integrating privacy into existing DeFi protocols on Ethereum, Polygon, and BSC. Strengths:
- Smart Contract Integration: Functions as a zk-SNARK privacy layer on top of existing L1/L2s. DeFi dApps can call
Railguncontracts directly, enabling private deposits, swaps, and yield farming. - Composability: Shielded balances can interact with AMMs like Uniswap V3 and lending pools like Aave via Railgun's adapter contracts, preserving privacy.
- Audit Trail: Provides optional
zk-proofauditability for compliance, crucial for institutional DeFi. Weaknesses: Inherits the base chain's gas fees and finality times.
Incognito for DeFi
Verdict: A self-contained privacy chain, better for building a fully private DeFi ecosystem from scratch. Strengths:
- Native Privacy: All transactions are private by default on its own L1, offering consistent low fees (~$0.001) and fast block times.
- Cross-Chain Assets: Built-in pBTC, pETH, pBNB bridges allow private trading of assets from other chains. Weaknesses: Lower TVL and less integration with mainstream DeFi blue chips. Composability is limited to apps built within the Incognito ecosystem.
pros-cons-a
Smart Contract Implementation
Railgun: Advantages and Trade-offs
A technical comparison of Railgun's and Incognito's core architectures, focusing on smart contract integration, security models, and trade-offs for enterprise deployment.
01
Railgun: EVM-Native Privacy
Smart contract-based zero-knowledge system: Deployed as a standard smart contract on Ethereum, Polygon, BSC, and Arbitrum. This provides native composability with DeFi protocols like Uniswap, Aave, and Curve directly from private balances. The trade-off is reliance on the underlying L1/L2 for finality and gas costs.
8+
Supported Chains
02
Railgun: Auditable Compliance
Built-in Proof of Innocence and Viewing Keys: Enables optional, user-controlled auditability for regulatory compliance or treasury management via a zk-SNARK proof that a transaction is not linked to a banned address. This is a key differentiator for institutions requiring OFAC compliance pathways.
03
Incognito: Privacy-Focused Sidechain
Independent, dedicated privacy blockchain: Operates as a separate L1 with its own consensus (Beacon & Shard) and virtual machine. This provides high throughput and low fees for private transactions isolated from mainnet congestion. The trade-off is reduced composability, requiring bridges and wrapping for cross-chain assets.
~100 TPS
Network Capacity
04
Incognito: Broader Asset Support
Privacy for any asset via wrapping: Uses a mint-and-burn model to create private versions (pTokens) of BTC, ETH, ERC-20s, and BEP-20s. This offers a unified privacy layer across heterogeneous chains without requiring their native smart contract support, ideal for privacy across Bitcoin and Ethereum ecosystems.
pros-cons-b
Smart Contract Implementation
Incognito: Advantages and Trade-offs
A technical comparison of privacy protocol architectures. Railgun uses smart contracts on host chains, while Incognito operates as a separate Layer 1 blockchain.
02
Railgun: Security Inheritance
Leverages the full security of its underlying L1 (e.g., Ethereum's $110B+ staked). No separate validator set or consensus mechanism to trust. Trade-off: Privacy set size and throughput are limited by the host chain's block space and finality time.
04
Incognito: Unified Privacy Environment
All assets natively exist within a single, shielded environment. Transfers between any shielded assets (pBTC, pETH, pBNB) are private by default without cross-contract calls. Trade-off: Interacting with external DeFi requires a two-step process via its bridge, adding latency and complexity.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A conclusive breakdown of the architectural trade-offs between Railgun and Incognito for implementing auditable privacy in your protocol.
Railgun excels at Ethereum-native, composable privacy because it operates as a smart contract system using zero-knowledge proofs (zk-SNARKs via the zk-SNARKs library) directly on L1 and L2 chains. For example, its Relayer network abstracts gas fees, allowing users to transact privately without holding the native token, and its Railgun SDK enables seamless integration of private balances into existing DeFi apps like Uniswap or Aave. This makes it the superior choice for projects that require deep integration with the established EVM ecosystem and demand regulatory compliance tools like the Proof of Innocence system.
Incognito takes a different approach by constructing a privacy-focused sidechain with its own consensus (Proof-of-Stake) and virtual machine. This results in a trade-off: it offers higher theoretical throughput and lower fees for private transactions within its own ecosystem, but at the cost of fragmentation and more complex cross-chain asset bridging. Its strength lies in creating a self-contained privacy environment where all applications, from DEXs to lending, are private by default, rather than retrofitting privacy onto public chains.
The key architectural divergence is integration model vs. sovereign chain. Railgun is a privacy layer; Incognito is a privacy chain. This fundamentally dictates the development experience, user onboarding, and scalability profile.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing liquidity and composability within the Ethereum/EVMcape, and you need built-in compliance features for institutional use, choose Railgun. Its smart contract implementation and ~$30M+ Total Value Locked (TVL) across supported chains offer a proven path. If you prioritize ultimate transaction privacy, higher TPS for a dedicated application, and control over the entire stack, choose Incognito. Its sidechain model is better for building a new, privacy-first product from the ground up, independent of mainnet congestion and fees.
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