No. The initial model is designed as a non-invasive proxy layer that routes into existing public liquidity rather than forcing a core AMM redesign.
Compliant Shielded Trading For EVM DEXs
On-Demand ZK Privacy for Institutional Liquidity. Enable private trading without liquidity fragmentation, core AMM redesigns, or sacrificing MiCA/AML auditability.
16+
years in software delivery
7+
years in blockchain
100+
delivered projects
EVM, Rust and ZK
expertise
Architecture, consulting
and delivery ownership
Public DeFi is transparent by design. Institutional trading is not.
For larger traders, public execution creates a structural problem. Balances, positions, and trade behavior become visible on-chain. That exposes alpha, invites copy-trading, and makes serious execution harder to protect. At the same time, anonymous privacy is not a viable path for regulated entities operating under AML and MiCA constraints. That leaves many DEXs stuck in the middle: public liquidity exists, but institutional flow still avoids it.
A privacy layer for institutional flow - without changing your core DEX engine.
Neti delivers a Shielded Trading Proxy that allows institutions to execute private trades through existing public DEX liquidity. The model is non-invasive: a proxy layer, frontend SDK, or API integrates with your current trading flow, while selective disclosure mechanisms preserve regulatory auditability.
See the shielded execution flow in practice
How it works
How it works
Who it's for
- building or operating an EVM DEX
- exploring institutional or larger trader participation
- trying to protect users from public execution exposure
- looking for privacy without abandoning auditability
- evaluating privacy without redesigning the full protocol
- Avoiding deep AMM redesign or shielded liquidity fragmentation
How shielded execution works
Intent (Off-chain ZK)
User's device generates a ZK proof of intent and derives a stealth address off-chain. Keys never leave the client.
Why this matters commercially
Attract larger traders without forcing them into public exposure
Protect your protocol from becoming unusable for serious flow
Expand toward institutional participants without abandoning compliance
Introduce privacy as a growth lever, not just a technical feature
Introduce privacy as a growth lever, not just a technical feature
What changes and what doesn't
- no need to redesign your AMM
- no separate shielded pools
- no forced liquidity fragmentation
- proxy layer + relayer + client-side proving
- selective disclosure added without breaking global privacy
Built for teams evaluating real protocol constraints
We design around protocol constraints, not just product requirements
We think in architecture, compliance, and delivery risk
We can show the mechanism, not just describe it
We help teams assess what can be added without destabilizing the protocol
FAQs
No. The concept is specifically built to avoid separate empty shielded pools and preserve access to existing order books.
The architecture is designed around selective disclosure, allowing specific fund flows to be reviewed when needed rather than making all activity publicly visible.
Neti already has working demo-level mechanics and prior R&D/implementation work in privacy-oriented ZK infrastructure, even if some client references remain limited by NDA.
This version is designed to solve the most immediate privacy problems for larger traders and institutions using public DEX infrastructure. It focuses first on: strategy privacy balance privacy selective disclosure for specific flows stronger confidentiality for privacy-sensitive execution In practice, it is especially relevant where public execution visibility creates copy-trading risk or discourages larger participants from using public liquidity.
Not fully in the first version. The current model is strongest for privacy, reduced strategy exposure, and protection against copy-trading. Because execution still interacts with public liquidity infrastructure, it does not fully eliminate all MEV or front-running vectors. A more complete protection model would require deeper protocol-level changes in the DEX architecture and execution environment.
Exploring privacy for your DEX? Discuss your privacy architecture
We can help you assess whether shielded execution makes sense for your protocol, where the integration risk sits, and what can be delivered without breaking liquidity, composability, or compliance assumptions.