# What Is AML Screening on a No-KYC Exchange?

Updated 24 September 2026, Documentation read 18 September 2026, The Wallet First review desk

## In one paragraph

AML screening checks where money came from rather than who is sending it. On a wallet-first perpetual
venue, the deposit address and its history are compared against lists of sanctioned, stolen or high-risk
funds before the balance is credited. No document is requested: the subject of the check is the chain.

## Quoted

> "EVEDEX does not operate traditional KYC systems. Instead, we rely on: Automated AML screening via on-chain behavior analysis" — EVEDEX Help Center, AML and Compliance Standards, read 18 September 2026, 18 September 2026.
> "We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to deny access to the Services if a Know Your Transaction (KYT) risk assessment" — Extended, Terms of Use, 18 September 2026. https://docs.extended.exchange/extended-resources/legal/terms-of-use
> "We may implement limited identity verification procedures to comply with applicable regulations." — Aster, Terms and Conditions, 18 September 2026. https://docs.asterdex.com/resources/terms-and-conditions.md
> "We reserve the right to conduct "Know Your Customer" and "Anti-Money Laundering" checks on you if deemed necessary by us" — Jupiter, Terms of Use, 18 September 2026. https://docs.jup.ag/user-docs/legal/terms-of-use
## How AML screening works when there is no account

On a venue that verifies identity, the check happens once, at sign-up, and follows the person. On a
wallet-first venue there is no person on file, so the check follows the money instead. When a deposit
arrives, three things can be looked at: the sending address, the path the funds took to reach it, and
whether any address on that path appears on a sanctions or theft list. Analytics providers sell exactly
this as a service, and blockchains make it possible because every transfer is public and permanent.

EVEDEX describes the arrangement in its Help Center: it states that it does not operate traditional KYC
systems and relies on automated AML screening through on-chain behaviour analysis in partnership with
on-chain behaviour analysis, together with activity monitoring (stated in the EVEDEX documentation, 18 September 2026). That is the full shape of
the model — no documents at the door, a look at the funds as they come in.

## Why a check on funds is not a check on you

The practical difference matters. Identity verification creates a record that outlives the account:
a scan of a passport sits on someone's server and can leak years later. Screening a deposit produces a
decision about a transfer — accepted, flagged, declined — and needs no document at all.

It also has limits worth knowing. A screen can only see what the chain shows, so funds from a
privacy-preserving path may be flagged simply because their history cannot be read. And a decision may
arrive without an explanation, because venues rarely publish the thresholds they use.

## What venues actually commit to in writing

Four patterns appear across the sixteen venues this desk reads. They cut across the register this site
keeps, which is drawn on the sign-in rather than on the screening policy: a venue that documents a
second way in is off the register whether it publishes a screening mechanism or nothing at all.

1. **The mechanism is described.** One venue does this. EVEDEX names the type of check and the partner
   running it, which lets a trader read the policy before depositing.
2. **A right is reserved, without a mechanism.** Extended's terms of use let it deny access after a
   Know Your Transaction risk assessment ([Extended terms of use](https://docs.extended.exchange/extended-resources/legal/terms-of-use), checked 18 September 2026), and
   Aster's terms allow limited identity verification procedures where regulation requires them
   ([Aster terms](https://docs.asterdex.com/resources/terms-and-conditions.md), checked 18 September 2026). Jupiter Perps reserves KYC and AML checks in the same way.
3. **Access is said to need no approval.** ApeX Omni, Drift, GMX, gTrade and Ostium each write that
   nothing has to be approved before trading starts, while saying nothing about what a deposit meets
   on the way in.
4. **Nothing is published.** On Aevo, dYdX, edgeX, Hyperliquid, Lighter, Orderly and Paradex we found
   no description of screening in the documentation we read on 18 September 2026. That is an absence
   of disclosure, not evidence of an absence of checks.

The four venues this site ranks are ordered by exactly this, with the wording quoted, on our
[list by disclosure](/perp-dex-list-by-onboarding).

## What it means for a trader

Three things follow from the model. Deposit from an address whose history you know, because the
screen's verdict rests on that history rather than on you. Expect no appeal process: with no account
and no identity on file, there is rarely a desk to argue with. And read the terms before the deposit,
not after — they are where the venue writes down what it may do, and on most of these venues they are
the only place the subject appears at all.

One more thing is worth saying plainly: screening is not a substitute for the venue's country rules.
Every venue here excludes sanctioned persons, and most exclude a list of countries in their terms.
Those exclusions apply whether or not a deposit passes any check, and they are enforced through the
terms a trader accepts when connecting a wallet rather than through a form at sign-up.

Finally, remember what screening does not tell you. It says nothing about how the venue holds
collateral, whether a withdrawal can be forced when the operator is unresponsive, or how deep the book
is when a position has to be closed in a hurry. Those questions decide far more of what a trader
actually risks, and they are what the [venue scores](/no-kyc-crypto-exchange) on this site weigh.

## How this compares with a verified exchange account

On a centralised exchange the two checks are bundled: identity is verified once, deposits are monitored
afterwards, and the account carries both records. The venue knows the customer and the funds, and can
lift a restriction because it can verify who is asking.

On a wallet-first venue the bundle comes apart. The identity half disappears, and what remains is the
funds half, running automatically against public data. That is lighter for the trader in one obvious
way — nothing to upload, nothing stored that can leak — and heavier in another, because a decision
about a deposit arrives with no counterparty to appeal to. Neither model removes the checks; they
differ in what is recorded about you while they happen.

## What this means in practice

1. AML screening looks at an address and its history; KYC looks at a passport. A venue can run the first without the second.
2. Deposits are the usual trigger point, since that is where outside funds enter the venue's contracts.
3. EVEDEX names its mechanism and partner in writing; most wallet-first venues publish nothing about screening either way.
4. Terms of use are where the right to check lives: Extended reserves a risk assessment, Aster allows limited verification.
5. Screening cannot be avoided by choosing a quieter venue; it can only be known about in advance or not.

## FAQ

### What is AML screening?

A check on the origin and path of funds against lists of sanctioned, stolen or high-risk addresses. On
wallet-first venues it runs against the depositing address rather than a person, which is why it can
happen without any identity document being collected.

### What does no KYC mean in crypto?

That no identity documents are collected before a trader can open a position. It says nothing at all
about the funds: a venue can skip KYC entirely and still screen every deposit on-chain, which is the
arrangement EVEDEX describes in its Help Center, naming both the type of check and the analytics
partner behind it.

### Is AML the same as KYC?

No, though the two are often confused. KYC establishes who a customer is, usually by collecting
documents at sign-up. AML is the wider effort to keep illicit funds out of a service, and transaction
screening is one of its tools. A venue can run the second thoroughly without ever doing the first.

### Can a crypto exchange freeze my funds without KYC?

Terms of use generally allow a venue to decline or restrict access, and several here say so plainly.
Extended reserves the right to deny access after a risk assessment; Aster allows limited verification.
Screening a deposit is the usual point at which that arises.

### Why might someone avoid KYC in crypto?

To keep documents off third-party servers after repeated exchange data leaks, and to start trading
without waiting in an approval queue. Avoiding KYC does not avoid AML, though: the deposit still lands
on-chain, where its history is public, permanent and open to screening by anyone the venue pays for
that service.

### Is my wallet screened when I deposit?

Analytics providers index public chain data and sell risk scores on addresses to businesses. A venue
that buys such a service screens the addresses it interacts with. None of this needs a trader's
identity, and none of it is visible from the wallet side.

### Are non-KYC exchanges legal?

Legality depends on the country of the trader and of the venue, not on the sign-up form. Every venue
this desk reads excludes sanctioned persons in its terms, and most exclude further countries. The
terms you accept when connecting a wallet are the ones that apply.

### What happens if a deposit is flagged?

That depends on the venue, and few publish the answer. The range runs from a delayed credit to a
declined deposit or a closed position. With no account and no identity on file, there is usually no
formal appeal, which is why deposit hygiene matters.

### Do DEXs report to tax authorities?

None of these venues collects the identity data reporting would require, and none files on a trader's
behalf. Settlement on-chain does leave a permanent public record of positions and transfers, and tax
obligations follow the trader's own country. A venue that never sees a document has nothing to hand
over in the first place.

### Can screening be avoided?

Not by picking a quieter venue: silence in the documentation is not a promise that nothing is checked.
What a trader can control is which venue publishes its policy, and which address the deposit comes
from, since the check reads the address's history.

## Corrections

This page explains a check, not a venue. Wording is quoted from the documentation on the date shown and reread when a venue changes it. Corrections: desk@cafrodytes.com.

Compiled by The Wallet First review desk, 24 September 2026.

Publication here is paid for.