Common vs Zama: Which Crypto Privacy App Fits You in 2026?

Pick Common if your priority is making it harder to connect a depositing wallet with a different withdrawal wallet. Its shielder uses zero-knowledge technology, and you keep control of your assets rather than sending them to a centralized exchange. That does not make you anonymous: timing, amounts or information shared elsewhere may still help link activity.

Pick Zama if you want selected balances and transaction amounts to stay encrypted while a public-chain app processes them. Its FHE approach supports confidential tokens, vaults and swaps. But public addresses and transaction timing may still be observable, so encrypted values are not the same as hiding every trace. In either case, check what the exact product hides and what remains public before you deposit. Neither app should be treated as a guarantee against blockchain analysis.

Neither gives you a complete fee schedule in the details compared here, so there is no reliable basis to call one cheaper. Common says it integrates gas fees so you can pay in the token you are shielding instead of first acquiring a separate network gas token. Still, inspect the quote for both the deposit and the later withdrawal, and check for any costs attached to an asset or yield option.

Zama’s stated 1:1 USDC-to-cUSDC deposit rate describes the conversion amount, not the total cost of using the product. You may also face Ethereum gas, and vaults or swaps can have their own charges or execution costs. Before confirming either app’s transaction, read the displayed quote and exit terms. Do not assume an advertised yield is guaranteed or that you can withdraw immediately.

Common has an advantage in that it names Kudelski Security and zkSecurity as auditors. However, detailed audit reports and their scope are not published on its site, so you cannot tell from that claim alone which contracts or versions were reviewed or how findings were handled. Its non-custodial design does not remove smart-contract, approval or supported-token risks.

No audit is listed for Zama. Its use of FHE is a privacy technique, not proof that the contracts are safe or that funds cannot be lost. For either project, confirm the exact contract and network, check current security information, and understand how withdrawals work before approving a transaction. Zama’s custody model and recovery process are not established in the product details compared here. If you cannot assess those risks or verify the contract, do not deposit funds you cannot afford to lose.

Common is the more direct starting point if you already use an EVM wallet and want its basic privacy flow: connect, shield supported assets, then withdraw to a new address. It currently supports Arbitrum and Aleph Zero EVM. Common says core features do not require KYC, although some fiat on- or off-ramp services may require verification. Its mobile app is described as waitlist-only, so do not count on a generally available mobile experience.

Zama offers more types of actions in its app, including shielding, sending, earning and swapping, but you should verify wallet and network compatibility in the app before connecting. Ethereum is its named deployment; broader L1 and L2 support is a protocol capability, not confirmation that every product is live on every chain. With either option, check the network and contract, read approvals carefully, and never share your recovery phrase.

Common is the narrower choice: its distinctive flow is a shielder intended to interrupt the visible connection between a deposit address and a different withdrawal address. It may suit you if you want that function on Arbitrum or Aleph Zero EVM and are comfortable checking supported assets and transaction details yourself. Its exact fees and detailed audit reports are not published on its site.

Zama is the broader technical option. FHE is designed to let applications process selected encrypted values, and its app lists confidential tokens, vaults and swaps. That may be more relevant if you want confidential balances or are exploring encrypted onchain computation. It does not automatically hide addresses or make a transaction anonymous, and no audit is listed. Choose based on the specific privacy job you need—not the assumption that either system conceals everything.