ROZO and NEAR Intents

Both are described as "intents", which makes them sound like alternatives. They sit at different layers. NEAR Intents is a solver network: you express a swap, competing solvers quote it, and the winning solver fills it. ROZO is a payment router: you say which address should end up holding which asset, and ROZO is accountable for that payout landing — including choosing which underlying path to use, of which a solver network is one.

What each one is accountable for

• Solver network: filling a quote. The output is a swap result, and the quote has a deadline attached to it.
• Payment router: a terminal outcome per transfer — paid out, or refunded. Deposit addresses are single-use and tied to one order, and the order is driven to that terminal state rather than left open.

What ROZO adds on top

For several routes, a solver network is genuinely the fastest fill available, and ROZO routes through one when that is true — the same way it routes through CCTP on the pairs where CCTP wins. What ROZO adds on top is the part a solver marketplace deliberately leaves to the caller: a non-EVM-literate pay-in (a Stellar wallet, a QR code, an exchange withdrawal), a payout with no gas token on the destination chain, and an order that keeps its own state until it is settled.

The chains it lands on

A payout is only as useful as the chain it can reach. ROZO settles on HyperEVM — the EVM layer of Hyperliquid — as well as Base, Stellar and Solana, with Arbitrum, Ethereum, Polygon and BNB Smart Chain available on a narrower set of pairs. The receiver needs no gas token on any of them. Which pairs are live, and which are limited, is listed on supported chains.

Which one to use

• You are a protocol or a trading system holding your own gas on both sides, and you want raw fill quality — go direct to the solver network.
• You are paying someone, or receiving on a chain where you hold no gas, and you want one signature and a receipt — that is the case ROZO is built for.