Major VCs Back Zcash Developers With $25 Million After ECC Split

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-03-10Última atualização em 2026-03-10

Resumo

Zcash Open Development Lab (ZODL), formed by the team formerly known as Electric Coin Company, has raised over $25 million from major investors including a16z, Paradigm, and Coinbase Ventures. The funding will support the development of Zcash-focused wallets and protocol work without relying on the network’s development fund. According to ZODL, its wallet has driven a 400% increase in shielded pool adoption and facilitated over $600 million in ZEC swaps since October 2025. The team emphasizes continuity, with the full ECC engineering team moving to ZODL. Zcash founder Zooko Wilcox highlighted that the investment involves no new token and no control over the Zcash protocol, suggesting backers are betting on Zcash's broader adoption and long-term importance.

Zcash Open Development Lab, the company formed by the team formerly known as Electric Coin Company, has raised more than $25 million from a roster of heavyweight crypto investors including a16z, Paradigm, Winklevoss Capital, Coinbase Ventures, Cypherpunk Technologies, Maelstrom (family office of Arthur Hayes), Chapter One, David Friedberg, Haseeb Qureshi, Mert, Balaji and others.

What This Means For Zcash

The round lands just months after the ECC team regrouped under a new name, and gives the Zcash-focused builder fresh capital to expand its wallet and protocol work without leaning on the network’s development fund.
Josh Swihart, who now leads ZODL after previously serving as CEO of ECC, framed the raise as a bet on product traction rather than a brand reset. “The name is new, but our team has been building Zcash for a decade,” he wrote. “A couple of years ago, my team and I set out to change the trajectory of Zcash with an uncompromising focus on the user experience for shielded ZEC. We released Zodl (then called Zashi) and have never looked back.”

That pitch is backed by a set of numbers the team clearly wants the market to notice. According to ZODL, its wallet has helped drive adoption of the Zcash shielded pool by more than 400% since launch, while facilitating over $600 million in ZEC swaps since October 2025. Swihart said the company first shipped what he called a “normie-friendly wallet,” then layered in integrations with Flexa for retail spending, Keystone for cold storage and, more recently, NEAR-powered intents for ZEC swaps.

The capital raise is also meant to change how that work gets funded. “This funding allows us to bring these ambitions to life, without relying on Zcash dev fund grants to get there,” Swihart wrote. Alongside Zodl, the company said it is building Zallet, a full-node wallet that will serve as the foundation for new desktop software, with the longer-term goal of creating “a private, decentralized financial system as an alternative to legacy institutions.”

ZODL’s own announcement leaned heavily on continuity. The company said the full ECC team, including the engineers responsible for designing and maintaining some of Zcash’s core systems, moved over earlier this year. It added that protocol development remains central to the company’s work, but argued that future upgrades should stay tied to usability and product-market fit rather than protocol design in isolation.

Zcash founder Zooko Wilcox read the raise as something larger than a routine venture financing. “Twenty-five million dollars is a big investment! For a company that makes a wallet!?” he wrote in a thread reacting to the news. “This set of investors is a signal. They are big, sophisticated, long-standing, and reputable.”

He focused on what the deal does not appear to offer. There is no new token for investors to capture, he noted, and no control over the Zcash protocol itself. “There is no new token that the investors can get a cut of! The ZEC supply is locked in, with a 21M total supply cap, like Bitcoin,” Wilcox wrote. “The investors don’t get control of the protocol! Zcash is permissionless, open-source, and has a huge number and variety of stakeholders.”

From there, Wilcox sketched out a theory of the round: investors may see the wallet business as a monetizable entry point, but just as importantly, some may be underwriting broader ZEC adoption itself. He pointed to public disclosures from Cypherpunk Technologies, which he said already holds more than 1% of ZEC’s eventual supply, and argued that its equity stake in ZODL is smaller than its exposure to the coin.

His conclusion was blunt. “These people are betting that Zcash — not crypto, not privacy, not Bitcoin, not zero-knowledge-proofs — Zcash will be critically important for our civilization,” he wrote.

At press time, Zcash traded at $221.95.

ZEC bounces from the 0.5 Fib, 1-week chart | Source: ZECUSDT on TradingView.com

Leituras Relacionadas

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

The era of fragmented AI agents is ending. Over the past month, China's tech giants—Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance—have simultaneously shifted strategy: instead of launching new, standalone AI agents, they are consolidating their various agent projects into unified "super workbenches." Tencent integrated its QClaw teams into WorkBuddy, a strategic product hailed as a potential third flagship after QQ and WeChat. Alibaba is merging its QoderWork, Wukong, and MuleRun agents into a new "Qianwen Office" platform under DingTalk's leadership. ByteDance rebranded its TRAE SOLO coding agent to TRAE Work, signaling a broader focus on workflow collaboration. This convergence marks a pivotal industry consensus. The initial exploration phase, where companies rapidly built numerous overlapping agents for different scenarios, proved costly and inefficient. With open-source tools eroding technical barriers, competition has shifted from agent creation to resource consolidation and cost control. Historically, platform wars are won not by creating more products, but by simplifying them—as seen with browsers unifying web access and super-apps consolidating services. Now, the "super workbench" aims to become the unified AI entry point for work. This reflects a deeper market realization: the primary audience for AI is no longer just programmers (a market in the tens of millions) but all knowledge workers (a market of billions). The real opportunity lies in augmenting everyday tasks—managing emails, documents, data, and meetings—across the entire workday. The core battleground is becoming control over the primary AI entry point that employees use daily. Tencent's WorkBuddy leverages WeChat and Tencent Docs; Alibaba's Qianwen Office taps into DingTalk's organizational data; ByteDance's TRAE Work integrates with Feishu's workflows. Whoever owns this "super workbench" gains strategic control over orchestrating enterprise data and APIs. This shift is redefining enterprise software. Traditional SaaS applications, valued for their user interfaces, will recede into the background. Their core functionalities will be exposed as standardized "Skills" or APIs for the super workbench's agents to invoke. Software value will shift from selling user seats to charging based on API calls and outcomes delivered. The evolution of agents is moving through clear stages: first as novel standalone products, then as consolidated primary work entry points, and finally as pervasive, invisible capabilities embedded into the digital fabric. The recent moves by major tech firms signal the transition from the first stage into the second, accelerating toward the third. In the end, the most successful agent technology may become invisible—like electricity or the HTTP protocol—a fundamental, unnamed infrastructure powering work itself.

marsbitHá 12m

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

marsbitHá 12m

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

Michael Saylor presents 110 arguments against Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110, a soft fork aimed at restricting certain non-monetary data storage uses (like inscriptions) on the Bitcoin blockchain. He acknowledges the proponents' valid concerns—such as node costs, fee pressure, and preserving Bitcoin's monetary focus—but fundamentally disagrees with the proposed solution. Saylor argues that BIP 110 represents a dangerous precedent of using consensus rules to enforce value judgments on transaction validity, moving away from Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and permissionless innovation. His key objections are organized into eleven categories: 1) It violates neutrality and hard consensus by banning currently valid transactions. 2) It fails to meet the high burden of proof required for a consensus change, lacking concrete data on the alleged crisis. 3) Its seven bundled technical restrictions are overly broad, targeting generic script functionalities and blocking future upgrade paths. 4) It sacrifices compatibility and future optionality by closing off designed upgrade hooks. 5) Its temporary rules add significant complexity (grandfathering, expiry states) without sufficient justification. 6) The economic and security impacts, particularly on miner revenue and fee markets, are uncertain and unmodeled. 7) Superior, market-based tools (fee markets, relay/mining policies) already exist to manage blockchain load. 8) It stifles innovation by creating a chilling effect for developers. 9) Its modified activation mechanism (55% threshold, forced signaling) is aggressive and risks network splits. 10) The precedent it sets—using consensus to suppress disliked but legal uses—is more dangerous than the problem it aims to solve. 11) A better path exists: improving measurements, refining resource-based policies, and allowing market forces to work. Saylor concludes that Bitcoin's strength lies in its neutral rules, open markets, and hard consensus. Changing these foundational elements to target specific use cases is an unnecessary and risky "iatrogenic" intervention. He advocates for guarding Bitcoin's neutrality rather than acting as its redeemer.

marsbitHá 27m

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

marsbitHá 27m

Trading

Spot
活动图片