In March 2026, Beijing time, the privacy Layer1 public chain Aster announced the launch of the modular Web3 trading infrastructure Aster Code, packaging "high-performance matching and clearing modules" into reusable capabilities, directly targeting the core pain points of Perpetual DEX (decentralized exchanges for perpetual contracts) development. On the surface, this is the release of a new component; essentially, it is a reconfiguration of the weights and priorities of privacy protection, public chain performance, and decentralization within the same trading infrastructure. Aster Code aims to meet the infrastructure demands of the entire perpetual contract track, which is exactly where the most acute contradictions in current crypto finance converge.

From Privacy Public Chain to Trading Engine: Aster Attempts to Rewrite Its Narrative Boundaries

Aster's initial label was that of a Layer1 public chain emphasizing privacy capabilities, with early narratives centered around typical privacy chain keywords like "privacy computing" and "confidential trading," creating a relatively clear boundary: to be a bottom layer chain with privacy characteristics competing with other public chains for developers and assets in general scenarios. However, after launching Aster Code, it no longer positions itself merely as "a more secure ledger" but starts portraying itself as a "provider of Web3 trading infrastructure," especially for the subset track of perpetual contracts where it expresses stronger ambitions.

According to public reports, Aster Code is described as a "modular Web3 trading infrastructure," indicating that it attempts to move from a "single-chain narrative" to an "ecosystem foundation narrative": not just providing capabilities for its own chain but outputting a complete set of embeddable trading engine modules that cover key areas such as matching and clearing. Media outlets like Techflow have evaluated this positioning as "covering multiple core areas of the perpetual contract ecosystem", placing Aster Code directly in the competitive coordinates of Perpetual DEX infrastructure. For any team looking to enter the perpetual track but lacking foundational trading system capabilities, Aster is no longer just an optional deployment chain but a potential "trading engine provider."

Perpetual DEX Development Hell: High Barriers Create an Oligopoly

To understand what problems Aster Code aims to solve, one needs to first grasp today's "development hell" of Perpetual DEX. The perpetual contract protocol, from matching, clearing to risk management, has high thresholds for each link: matching requires real-time performance and order processing capabilities close to those of centralized exchanges, while clearing and margin management demand extensive financial engineering and risk control experience, all of which must withstand challenges such as MEV, congestion, and fee variability in a public chain environment.

Industry consensus is clear: high development thresholds, long cycles, and extreme performance requirements for matching lead to only a handful of Perpetual DEX protocols that can truly operate. Many teams are trapped in the quagmire of self-research at the infrastructure layer, either compromising on matching performance by moving off-chain or greatly simplifying risk control, resulting in experiences far inferior to centralized exchanges or exposing flaws in risk models during extreme market conditions. There is also a natural tug-of-war between privacy and compliance review—regulators are particularly sensitive to derivatives, and while privacy features enhance user protection, they also heighten external concerns about compliance visibility.

More realistically, on-chain performance and user experience often engage in a trade-off: wanting high TPS and low latency usually requires sacrifices in decentralization levels and node thresholds; seeking complete privacy protections might increase data processing and verification costs, further extending interaction delays. This confluence of contradictions makes Perpetual DEX one of the toughest nuts to crack in decentralized finance, while providing sufficient tension for Aster Code's entry—if it can "modularize the difficult parts," it could potentially rewrite the entrance threshold structure for the entire track.

Double-layer Architecture Play: Matching and Clearing are "Packaged," Developers Just Build with Blocks

Centered around the notion of "significantly lowering development thresholds through a double-layer architecture", Aster Code positions itself as an "infrastructure module layer" that encapsulates high-complexity trading capabilities. Public information shows that it attempts to abstract high-performance matching and clearing capabilities as standardized components, allowing developers to integrate these modules into their product architecture like calling an SDK rather than designing a matching engine and clearing process from scratch.

From a developer's perspective, this resembles a "building block"-style integration process: teams can focus on frontend interaction, asset routing, risk control parameter configuration, and product innovation, leaving the underlying order processing, transaction matching, and clearing logic to Aster Code. This directly compresses the time window from whiteboard to usable product and reduces the hidden technical debts and security risks stemming from self-researching complex trading systems. For DeFi teams accustomed to reinventing the wheel, Aster Code attempts to provide a "shared chassis for the contract world."

However, achieving high-performance matching on a privacy Layer1 means there must be trade-offs and compromises between privacy, performance, and decentralization. Stronger privacy implies that more data must be encrypted or processed in a trusted environment, often increasing computational costs and system latencies; to pursue extreme performance, some off-chain components or more centralized consensus and node architectures may need to be adopted, thereby sacrificing some degree of decentralization. Aster has not yet disclosed specific TPS, latency, throughput parameters, nor detailed the technical aspects of its double-layer architecture; these gaps mean that outsiders can only assess its design logic directionally and cannot provide quantitative evaluations of its trade-off positions.

Wallets and Terminals Line Up First: Traffic Entry Bets on Infrastructure Foundation

In its collaborative ecosystem, Aster Code has initially placed its bets on traffic entry points and trading interfaces. According to reports from media like Rhythm and Techflow, the first batch of partners includes Binance Web3 Wallet, Trust Wallet, Genius Terminal, and Planet Daily also mentioned SafePal, Polarise. It is essential to emphasize that this information comes from media reports and not authoritative commitments in Aster's official white paper or technical documents; the outside world has not yet seen more detailed integration progress disclosures.

Nevertheless, the roles of wallets and trading terminals carry obvious signaling significance. As traffic and order entry points, they inherently possess the first touchpoints with users and trades—if these entries choose to connect Aster Code's matching or clearing capabilities on the product side, it establishes a "traffic funnel" above Aster, helping it gain incremental orders and users during the cold start phase. For any plan aiming to become foundational infrastructure for the perpetual track, having entry-type partners lined up carries more persuasive power than mere technical promotions.

The mentioned partners like SafePal and Polarise provide potential supplemental coverage for the ecosystem: the former leans toward hardware and multi-chain asset management, while the latter is closer to professional trading terminals and tool-type products. If these different types of entry points eventually integrate Aster Code to varying degrees, it would achieve a fuller breadth of coverage from "wallet to terminal." However, in the absence of publicly available business terms, technical integration depth, and operational scale data, any extrapolation of cooperation details can only remain at the role level and cannot rise to conclusory quantitative judgments.

Ecological Fund on the Way: Who Will Become the First to Dare?

In addition to the technological modules and partnership lists, Aster has also released information through public channels about its plans to establish an ecological fund (according to Foresight reports). However, there are currently no disclosures regarding the scale, distribution mechanisms, or yield arrangements of the ecological fund; these figures and terms are also included in the "no derivation" scope, and the outside world can only view it as a directional commitment rather than a capital tool already in operation.

In the Perpetual DEX track, financial incentives have always been an important lever for driving early migration and multi-stack deployments. Common practices include providing development funding and liquidity subsidies for protocols that launch on new chains/new infrastructures, offering fee rebates or market-making subsidies to market makers and professional trading teams, and directly investing through ecological funds to secure priority layout rights in new ecosystems for potential leading projects. For perpetual protocols already operating on other public chains, the willingness to adopt multi-stack deployments often depends on the cost-effectiveness of the "migration cost vs. incentive intensity" relationship.

In Aster's scenario, the combination of financial incentives + infrastructure modules naturally makes it easier to attract three types of teams: first, new teams with derivative product ideas but lacking foundational matching and clearing technical expertise; second, DeFi protocols that already have a user base for spot or simple leveraged products, want to extend into perpetual contracts but are constrained by self-research capabilities; and third, mature perpetual protocols willing to explore multi-stack deployments to gain incremental users and liquidity pools in a new ecosystem. The first two types are more likely to be persuaded by "modular infrastructure + early funding," while the third type will more carefully weigh the financial returns and technical risks of new versus old ecosystems.

Can Privacy Layer1 Bear the Narrative of the "World Foundation" for Perpetual Contracts?

Looking back on this move, Aster is trying to upgrade its storyline from "privacy public chain" to "modular Perpetual DEX infrastructure": on one hand, using Aster Code to encapsulate high-complexity matching and clearing capabilities, attempting to lower the development threshold for Perpetual DEX from "heavy industry" to "ready-made"; on the other hand, through partnerships with entry-type products such as Binance Web3 Wallet, Trust Wallet, and Genius Terminal, along with the inclusion of supplementary roles like SafePal and Polarise, it provides a real flow and order imagination space for this infrastructure narrative.

If all goes as expected, Aster Code's potential value in lowering the development threshold for the perpetual track will gradually become apparent: more teams will have the opportunity to quickly iterate product forms without self-researching high-performance trading systems, channeling resources into mechanism design and user experience. However, meanwhile, current technical details are not fully disclosed, and the specific implementation methods of the double-layer architecture, along with trade-off positions between performance and decentralization, remain to be validated; hosting high-frequency derivative trading on a privacy Layer1 demands far higher requirements on consensus design, node operations, and risk control systems than ordinary DeFi applications.

In the next few quarters, key indicators to monitor will be relatively clear:
● Number of actual deployed Perpetual DEX—how many teams are willing to build their trading systems on Aster Code rather than continuing to iterate on other public chains or self-research solutions.
● Real users and transaction volume—whether the cooperation with wallets and terminals can translate into substantial trading depth or remain simply as "window dressing" at the integration level.
● Follow-up situation of other public chains—whether more public chains will choose to pursue the route of "outputting trading infrastructure modules" instead of just serving as general computing platforms, pushing the infrastructure competition for the perpetual track into a new stage.

Aster must provide answers that can stand the test of time on these three fronts to uphold the narrative of being the "foundation of the perpetual contract world." It has already played the cards of a privacy Layer1, double-layer architectural matching and clearing, entry-type partners, and ecological fund previews; whether it can combine these elements into a sustainable network effect will determine whether this chain becomes a foundational player in the perpetual track or merely leaves a fleeting footnote at the narrative level.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。