H33

Stack Ranking vs Competitors

Benchmarked February 14, 2026 · Graviton4 c8g.metal-48xl · Criterion.rs · 100+ samples

H33 is a complete authentication pipeline — FHE encryption, biometric match, threshold decryption, ZK proof, post-quantum signature, and SHA3 attestation — all in 1.28ms. Competitors offer individual libraries or single-purpose services. Microsoft has spent 12+ years and tens of millions on SEAL alone. IBM even longer on HElib. Zama raised $57M. None of them have the full stack. Building this from scratch would cost $50M–$200M+ over 5–10 years — if you could recruit the talent at all.

Fully Homomorphic Encryption

H33 completes a full 7-step pipeline (encrypt + compute + relin + threshold decrypt + ZK + PQ sig + attestation) in 1.28ms. Competitors only do encrypt + compute + decrypt.

RankProviderSpeedCost / OpH33 AdvantageNotes

H33-128

Full Auth Pipeline

1.28 ms

$0.05–$0.25

Baseline

7-step pipeline

Microsoft SEAL

FHE Library

~6 ms

Free + DIY
$15M–$50M R&D

12.5× slower

No relin, no ZK

OpenFHE

FHE Library

~7–8 ms

Free + DIY
$15M–$50M R&D

3.6–4.2× slower

BFV only

Zama TFHE-rs

FHE Library (Licensed)

~10–50 ms

$100K–$500K lic
+ per-op costs

5–26× slower

Patent license req

SEAL + Relin

Full Cycle

~18 ms

Free + DIY

9.4× slower

With relinearization

Zero-Knowledge Proofs

H33 ZK-STARK proves a specific thing: biometric match result is in a valid range. zkVMs (RISC Zero, SP1) prove arbitrary programs — general-purpose but orders of magnitude slower for the auth use case.

🛡

H33 ZK-STARK is post-quantum secure. Built on lattice-hard problems and paired with Dilithium3 (FIPS 204) signatures, H33's ZK proofs remain secure against quantum adversaries. Every other system on this list — Groth16, RISC Zero, Succinct SP1 — relies on elliptic curve cryptography vulnerable to Shor's algorithm. They are not post-quantum secure.

RankProviderProve TimeCost / ProofH33 AdvantagePQ Status

H33 ZK-STARK

Auth-Specialized · PQ Secure

<20 ms (async)

$0 (bundled)

Baseline

⬡ PQ Secure

Groth16

Generic ZK (DIY)

100 ms–10 s

DIY compute
6–12mo eng

14–1,380×

✕ Not PQ

RISC Zero

zkVM (General Purpose)

1–60 s

$0.50–$30

138–8.3M×

✕ Not PQ

Succinct SP1

zkVM (General Purpose)

1–12 s

$0.02–$0.10

138–1.4M×

✕ Not PQ

Biometric Verification

Different models: Onfido/Jumio/Veriff do document + selfie onboarding verification (plaintext). H33 does encrypted biometric template matching — continuous authentication with zero data exposure.

RankProviderVerification TimeCost / CheckH33 AdvantagePrivacy

H33

Encrypted Biometric Match

1.28 ms

$0.05–$0.25

Baseline

Zero exposure

Veriff

Doc + Selfie KYC

3–8 s

$1–$2

1,560–4,160×

Plaintext

Onfido / Entrust

Doc + Selfie KYC

3–10 s

$2–$5

1,560–5,200×

Plaintext

Jumio

Doc + Selfie KYC

5–15 s

$1–$5

2,600–7,800×

Plaintext

Post-Quantum Signatures

Nobody else bundles PQ signatures into a biometric auth pipeline. AWS/Google offer PQ signing as standalone KMS operations with network overhead.

RankProviderSign + VerifyCost / SigH33 AdvantageNotes

H33 (Dilithium3)

Integrated PQ · FIPS 204

238 µs

$0 (bundled)

Baseline

⬡ PQ Secure

liboqs (DIY)

Reference Library

~150–400 µs

Free + DIY
$5M–$15M integration

1.7–4.5×

Generic C/x86

Google Cloud PQ

Managed KMS (Preview)

~5–20 ms

~$0.003/req

57–227×

Network latency

AWS KMS PQ

Managed KMS (Preview)

~10–50 ms

~$0.003/req
+ $1/key/mo

113–568×

Network latency

Threshold Decryption

H33 is the only commercial provider offering production-grade threshold FHE decryption in an authentication pipeline. No single point of failure.

RankProviderSpeedCostStatus

H33

k-of-n Shamir (k=3, n=5)

~510 µs

$0 (bundled)

Only provider

Production

—

Zama TKMS

Blockchain Only

Testnet only

Token required

Beta

Not general-purpose

—

OpenFHE

Research Only

Seconds+

DIY only

Academic

Not production

—

SEAL

N/A

Not available

—

N/A

Performance Stack Rank

All Categories · Speed Comparison

①

H33 is one of one. No competitor does what H33 does.
Every entry below does one thing — FHE only, ZK only, or biometrics only. None offer a full encrypted auth pipeline. None combine FHE + ZK + PQ signatures + threshold decryption + attestation. H33 is not ranked #1 among competitors. H33 has no competitors. It is the only product in this category.

The entries below each solve one piece of the puzzle. To match H33, you'd need to cobble together 4–5 vendors, integrate them yourself, and you'd still end up 104–468× slower with no post-quantum security.

FHE-IQ: Multi-Backend Policy Router (<500ns)
Even among FHE-only competitors (SEAL, Zama, OpenFHE), each exposes a single backend. H33 operates multiple production FHE backends (BFV, CKKS) and uses FHE-IQ — a two-phase policy router with hardware affinity matrix (ARM vmull_u32 vs x86 AVX-512) and AI-adaptive scoring from 3 sub-microsecond Rust agents — to select the optimal backend per workload in <500ns. This is a capability that cannot be replicated without first building multi-backend FHE infrastructure.

RankProviderLatencyCoversH33 AdvantagePQ Status

H33 Full Pipeline

FHE + ZK + PQ + Threshold + Attestation

1.28 ms

ALL 7 STEPS · One API

Only provider

⬡ PQ

SEAL (FHE only)

Encrypt + Compute + Decrypt

~6 ms

FHE only · 1 of 7 steps

12.5×

✕ Not PQ

OpenFHE (FHE only)

Encrypt + Compute + Decrypt

~7–8 ms

FHE only · 1 of 7 steps

3.6–4.2×

✕ Not PQ

Zama TFHE-rs

FHE (Licensed)

~10–50 ms

FHE only · 1 of 7 steps

5–26×

✕ Not PQ

SEAL + Relinearization

Full FHE Cycle

~18 ms

FHE only · 1 of 7 steps

9.4×

✕ Not PQ

Groth16 (ZK)

Generic ZK Proof

100 ms–10 s

ZK only · 1 of 7 steps

14–1,380×

✕ Not PQ

DIY Cobbled Stack

SEAL + liboqs + RISC Zero

200–900 ms

$50M–$200M+ over 5–10yr ↗

104–468×

✕ Not PQ

RISC Zero (ZK)

zkVM General Purpose

1–60 s

ZK only · 1 of 7 steps

138–8.3M×

✕ Not PQ

Succinct SP1 (ZK)

zkVM General Purpose

1–12 s

ZK only · 1 of 7 steps

138–1.4M×

✕ Not PQ

Veriff (Biometric)

Doc + Selfie KYC

3–8 s

Biometric only · 1 of 7

1,560–4,160×

✕ Not PQ

Onfido / Entrust

Doc + Selfie KYC

3–10 s

Biometric only · 1 of 7

1,560–5,200×

✕ Not PQ

Jumio (Biometric)

Doc + Selfie KYC

5–15 s

Biometric only · 1 of 7

2,600–7,800×

✕ Not PQ

H33 in 300ms (1 blink)

209

complete authentications · all PQ secure

Best competitor in 300ms

0.03–0.1

partial operations · none PQ secure

Cost Stack Rank

All Categories · Per-Operation Cost Comparison

H33 bundles FHE + ZK + PQ signatures + threshold decryption + attestation into a single per-auth price. Competitors charge separately — or give you a free library and a decade-long, $50M–$200M+ research bill. Microsoft has spent 12+ years on SEAL. IBM even longer on HElib. Neither has what H33 ships in one API call. None include post-quantum security.

RankProviderCost VisualizationPer-Auth / OpH33 SavingsHidden Costs

H33-128 (Business)

COMPLETE Pipeline · One API Call · 7/7 Steps

$0.05–$0.25

$0.10 avg

Only provider

None · PQ included

⚠

"Cheaper" is an illusion. No single competitor replaces H33.
SP1 at $0.02/proof looks cheap — but that's ZK only. It doesn't do FHE, biometrics, PQ signatures, threshold decryption, or attestation. To match H33's pipeline, you'd need to cobble together 4–5 vendors plus $2.2M+ in integration — and you'd still have no PQ security, no threshold decryption, and 104–468× worse latency.

⚠ What "Matching H33" Actually Costs Per Auth · Multi-Vendor Cobble

FHE

Zama TFHE-rs

FHE encrypt + compute + decrypt · Only 1 of 7 steps

$0.10+/op

+ $100K–$500K license

Succinct SP1

ZK proof generation · Only 1 of 7 steps · Not PQ secure

$0.02–$0.10

+ $100K GPU cluster

Bio

Onfido / Veriff

Biometric verification · Plaintext · Only 1 of 7 steps

$1–$5/check

Plaintext exposure

liboqs / AWS KMS

PQ signatures · Only 1 of 7 steps

~$0.003/req

+ $5M–$15M integration

Thrs

Threshold Decryption

Nobody sells this · You'd have to invent it

Does not exist

$10M–$25M R&D

Glue

Integration & Orchestration

Stitching 4–5 vendors together · Security audit · Compliance

$2.2M+

Year 1 minimum

Cobbled Total Per Auth

Still 104–468× slower · Still no threshold decrypt · Still not PQ

$1.12–$5.21+

H33: $0.10

Individual Vendor Costs · Each Does Only 1 Thing

Succinct SP1

ZK PROOF ONLY · Not PQ · 1 of 7 steps

$0.02–$0.10

ZK only

≠ full pipeline

$100K+ GPU cluster

RISC Zero

ZK PROOF ONLY · Not PQ · 1 of 7 steps

$0.50–$30

ZK only

≠ full pipeline

GPU cluster req'd

Veriff

BIOMETRIC ONLY · Not PQ · Plaintext · 1 of 7

$1–$2

Bio only

≠ full pipeline

Plaintext exposure

Onfido / Entrust

BIOMETRIC ONLY · Not PQ · Plaintext · 1 of 7

$2–$5

Bio only

≠ full pipeline

Custom pricing

Jumio

BIOMETRIC ONLY · Not PQ · Plaintext · 1 of 7

$1–$5

Bio only

≠ full pipeline

Custom pricing

Zama TFHE-rs

FHE ONLY · Not PQ · 1 of 7 steps

$0.10+/op

FHE only

≠ full pipeline

$100K–$500K license

SEAL / OpenFHE DIY

FHE LIBRARY ONLY · Not PQ · 1 of 7 steps

"Free"

≠ full pipeline

$15M–$50M+ R&D

Annual Total Cost of Ownership · 10M Auths/Month

H33 Enterprise
$600K
$50K/mo · Full PQ security bundled

DIY Assembly (Realistic)

$50M–$200M+

5–10 years · PhD teams · No PQ · Click for breakdown →

Onfido at Volume

$3M+

$2–$5/check · Plaintext · No PQ

Realistic DIY Cost Breakdown · Why $50M–$200M+ · Click to expand ↗

FHE Research Team

PhD cryptographers · 3–5+ years · Microsoft spent 12yr on SEAL alone

$15M–$50M

Core FHE pipeline

Threshold FHE Decryption

Novel research · No commercial implementation exists anywhere

$10M–$25M

Unsolved problem

ZK Proof System for Auth

Specialized ZK-STARK · PQ-secure · RISC Zero + SP1 raised $100M+ combined

$10M–$30M

Custom ZK design

Encrypted Biometric Pipeline

FHE-native matching · Template management · Continuous auth

$10M–$20M

Novel architecture

PQ Signature Integration

Dilithium3 into pipeline · FIPS 204 compliance · Graviton optimization

$5M–$15M

Hardware-level tuning

Infra, Compliance & Scale Testing

Production hardening · HIPAA/GDPR/SOX · Performance at scale

$10M–$30M

Multi-year effort

Total DIY Estimate

5–10 years · Assumes you can recruit the talent · Click for full math ↗

$50M–$200M+

H33: $600K/yr

Capability Matrix

What's Included vs What's Missing

Capability	H33	SEAL	Zama	OpenFHE	RISC Zero	SP1	Onfido	Jumio
FHE Encrypt/Compute/Decrypt	✓	✓	✓	✓	—	—	—	—
Threshold Decryption	✓	—	β	R	—	—	—	—
ZK Proof	✓	—	—	—	✓	✓	—	—
Post-Quantum ZK Proofs	✓	—	—	—	✕ ECC	✕ ECC	—	—
Post-Quantum Signatures	✓	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Encrypted Biometric Match	✓	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Biometric Match (Any)	✓	—	—	—	—	—	✓	✓
SHA3 Attestation	✓	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Session Cache	✓	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Self-Serve Pricing	✓	N/A	—	N/A	—	—	—	—
No License Fee	✓	✓	—	✓	✓	✓	N/A	N/A
Document Verification	—	—	—	—	—	—	✓	✓
AML Screening	—	—	—	—	—	—	✓	✓

FHE Research Team

PhD cryptographers, 3–5+ year research commitment. Microsoft has had a team on SEAL since ~2012 (12+ years). IBM even longer on HElib. Zama raised $57M and still hasn't shipped a general-purpose auth pipeline. This is the hardest part — finding people who can do lattice-based FHE at production speed.

$15M–$50M

Novel Threshold FHE Decryption

This capability does not exist commercially anywhere else. H33 is the only provider with production-grade k-of-n Shamir threshold decryption in an FHE auth pipeline. Zama has announced TKMS for blockchain (testnet only, not general-purpose). OpenFHE has research implementations (academic, not production). You'd be doing original research — with no guarantee of success.

$10M–$25M

ZK Proof System Specialized for Auth

Custom ZK-STARK design that proves biometric match results are in a valid range — and does it post-quantum secure. RISC Zero and Succinct SP1 have raised $100M+ combined and their general-purpose zkVMs are 138–8.3M× slower for the auth use case. Both rely on ECC vulnerable to Shor's algorithm. Building a PQ-secure, auth-specialized ZK system is a novel cryptographic design problem.

$10M–$30M

Encrypted Biometric Matching Pipeline

FHE-native biometric template matching with continuous authentication. Not document + selfie verification (that's what Onfido/Jumio do in plaintext). This is computing similarity on encrypted embeddings — the biometric data is never decrypted on the server. Novel architecture that doesn't exist anywhere else in production.

$10M–$20M

PQ Signature Integration into Pipeline

Dilithium3 (FIPS 204 ML-DSA-65) integrated and hardware-optimized for Graviton4. Not just calling liboqs — but tuning sign+verify to 238µs total within a real-time auth pipeline where every microsecond matters. Nobody else bundles PQ signatures into biometric auth.

$5M–$15M

Infrastructure, Compliance & Scale Testing

Production hardening at scale. HIPAA, GDPR, SOX compliance. Security audits. Performance testing at 10M+ auths/month. Multi-region deployment. Monitoring, alerting, disaster recovery. This is years of work — not a weekend project.

$10M–$30M

Realistic Total

5–10 years · Assumes you can recruit PhD cryptographers who can do this work

$50M–$200M+

H33 Enterprise (Annual)

$600K

$50K/mo · ships today · 1.28ms

DIY Build

$50M–$200M+

5–10 years · if you can hire the talent

Context: These are not exaggerated numbers. Microsoft Research has spent 12+ years and tens of millions on SEAL — and it's an FHE library, not an auth pipeline. IBM's HElib has been in development even longer. Zama raised $57M at a $1B valuation and still requires patent licenses for commercial use. RISC Zero and Succinct SP1 have raised over $100M combined — for ZK only, no FHE, no biometrics, no PQ.

The talent problem is real. There are perhaps a few hundred people in the world who can do production-grade lattice-based FHE. They're already at Microsoft, IBM, Zama, DARPA-funded labs, or academia. Recruiting a team capable of building this from scratch would be the hardest part — harder than the money.

H33 Stack Ranking vs Competitors
| FHE, ZK, Biometrics, PQ Signatures

Stack Ranking vs Competitors

Build With Post-Quantum Security

Why $50M–$200M+

Build With Post-Quantum Security

Related Articles