I still think DuskEVM solves the easy part of the problem. The harder question is why I would stay.

I noticed the developer entry point is familiar: Solidity works with Hardhat and Foundry, while DuskEVM uses Chain ID 744 on mainnet and 745 on testnet.

But EVM compatibility alone isn’t enough.

The more interesting layer is Hedger, which brings confidential EVM workflows using homomorphic encryption and zero-knowledge proofs. That could matter when financial applications need privacy without losing the ability to meet regulatory requirements.

Then there’s Dusk Trade, focusing on things like investor onboarding, controlled asset transfers, payment coordination and settlement for tokenized financial assets.

That creates the real tension for me:

EVM compatibility can get developers through the door. But privacy, compliance and financial infrastructure have to give them a reason to stay.

Can Dusk turn its familiar EVM environment into a real advantage for regulated finance, rather than simply becoming another EVM chain?

@Dusk $DUSK #dusk

What will make DuskEVM stand out in regulated finance?