Tornado Cash (App-Specific Mixer) vs. Aztec Network (General Privacy Layer)

Specific advantage: Proven, non-custodial mixer for ETH and major ERC-20s with over $7.6B in historical volume. This matters for users needing simple, one-off privacy for specific assets without complex application logic.

Specific advantage: Uses zk-SNARKs for cryptographic privacy with no centralized operator. Fixed, predictable fees (~0.1% of deposit). This matters for cost-sensitive users who prioritize trust minimization over feature richness.

Specific advantage: A full ZK-Rollup enabling private smart contracts (zk-zkRollups). Developers can build private DeFi (e.g., zk.money, Noir language). This matters for protocols requiring private state and logic, like confidential DEXs or lending.

Specific advantage: Batches private transactions for efficiency (~300 TPS target). Enables privacy for complex, multi-step DeFi interactions. This matters for scalable dApps where privacy must be maintained across a series of actions, not just a single transfer.

• Breaking fund traceability for a specific wallet balance.
• Obfuscating NFT minting or airdrop eligibility.
• Simple, asset-specific privacy with maximal censorship resistance.
• Use Case: A whale moving 1000 ETH to a new wallet before a major OTC deal.

• Building a private DeFi application (e.g., a shielded DEX or lending pool).
• Private payroll or DAO treasury management.
• Complex, multi-asset private transactions in a single rollup batch.
• Use Case: A protocol like L2 Finance offering private yield strategies across multiple assets.

Single-purpose design: Optimized for one function—breaking the on-chain link between deposit and withdrawal addresses. This results in a battle-tested, audited core contract with $7.7B+ in historical volume. It's ideal for users seeking simple, high-value privacy for ETH or major ERC-20s without complex client-side software.

App-layer vulnerability: As a standalone dApp, it's exposed to direct regulatory action (e.g., OFAC sanctions, front-end takedowns). Relies on centralized relayers to pay gas for anonymous withdrawals, creating a potential censorship point. This matters for protocols needing long-term, resilient privacy that can't be easily blacklisted at the application level.

Higher barrier to entry: Requires users to run a client to generate ZK proofs, leading to slower UX and higher gas fees per transaction due to proof verification. The ecosystem is newer, with lower TVL and liquidity compared to established mixers. This matters for mass-market applications where user experience and cost are primary constraints.

High regulatory scrutiny: Sanctioned by OFAC, with core contracts blacklisted. This presents a significant legal risk for integration and user access. Front-end reliance: The protocol's usability is heavily dependent on community-run UIs, which are frequent takedown targets, creating operational instability.

Proven cryptographic security: Uses zk-SNARKs with a trusted setup ceremony (Powers of Tau) that is considered secure but has a historical reliance point. Relayer network risk: Users depend on third-party relayers to pay gas fees, which can censor transactions or leak metadata, creating a potential centralization vector.

Novel cryptographic stack: Relies on PLONK proof system and a custom VM. While audited, this complexity increases the attack surface and smart contract risk compared to battle-tested, simple mixers. Sequencer dependency: As an L2, Aztec relies on its sequencer for transaction ordering and proof submission, introducing a liveness and censorship vector.

Higher cost for general computation: Privacy for arbitrary logic (e.g., DeFi) requires proving entire contract execution, leading to higher fees than simple asset mixing. Ecosystem immaturity: Fewer integrated dApps and tools compared to mainnet-native solutions, creating developer friction and lower immediate utility for users.

Specific, high-value asset obfuscation where the primary need is breaking on-chain links between deposit and withdrawal addresses for ETH or major ERC-20s. Optimal for users who accept the legal risk and can manage relayer dependencies for a maximally decentralized, app-specific solution.

Programmable privacy within DeFi or complex applications. Ideal for protocols needing private voting, shielded DEX swaps, or confidential lending. Suits teams building new privacy-preserving dApps who prefer a compliant front-end approach and can manage L2 stack complexity.