Why are privacy-focused public chains still attracting institutional attention despite the existence of Ethereum? That’s a good question.

The key lies in two words: demand difference. Retail investors indeed prefer on-chain transparency, but institutional considerations are entirely different.

Imagine Apple settling a large transaction on Ethereum, while a competitor like Samsung can simply run a script to estimate its shipment volume. Hedge funds preparing to build positions in an asset might detect abnormal activity from MEV bots before placing an order, causing the cost of capital to spike instantly. These are not exaggerated assumptions but real market dilemmas.

Old Money’s participation in DeFi is actually far below expectations, and the reason is here: without privacy protection mechanisms, deep involvement is equivalent to exposing trading strategies and positions to the entire network. Hedge funds and corporate finance departments face the same awkwardness—buying ETFs is fine, but truly engaging in on-chain financial activities? The risk is too high.

This is the value of privacy infrastructure. Its role is not to help retail investors hide something, but to equip institutions with a "bulletproof vest," enabling traditional financial professionals to dare to participate. The market needs this layer.