Everyone says “ETH has Zama, BNB has Primus,” but do you know how they’re different? 1/ First, something many overlook: Zama has only launched a token on BNB so far—its actual privacy features haven’t arrived yet. Even BNB’s own documentation states “still in development.” Meanwhile, @primus_labs is already functional: you can convert U to encrypted eU, send transfers where the amount is hidden, and even earn interest by depositing it. On BNB, the only solution currently usable is Primus. 2/ So what’s the real difference between them? I think it boils down to one key question: If your money is encrypted, who holds the key? Zama splits the key into 13 parts and distributes them among major institutions like Ledger and Fireblocks—requiring 9 out of 13 to unlock. Primus, for now, locks the key inside a “hardware vault”; the multi-party custody solution is still on the way. To be honest, this is the one area Primus most needs to improve. 3/ Scale-wise, we must acknowledge: Zama already has over $100 million flowing through its system; Primus hit around $1 million on its first day—it’s still the underdog. But Primus has something Zama doesn’t: it can prove the authenticity of your data from exchanges or banks—without revealing any details. It essentially helps you “get verified” first, then “spend privately”—end-to-end. 4/ Recently, Vitalik said AI might make such encryption less secure. Zama’s response? Simple: just strengthen the lock. Even if breached, attackers would only see balances—not be able to steal funds. Primus has also pledged to take this seriously, but hasn’t yet detailed how it plans to harden its system. I’m waiting to see their solution. 5/ My take: Zama is the seasoned veteran—reliable, but not yet live on BNB. Primus is the first to arrive, with unique strengths—but still young.