This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.
Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:
i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.
But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.
So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?
Not the issue here.
ii) Is there a business risk for stablecoin issuers if the underlying chain’s security diminishes?
Yes.
Ok, so Circle and Tether may become net buyers of ETH to ensure the tokenized assets minted onchain are secure.
The elephant in the room: centralization risk.
If these entities become the largest holders of ETH then there’s a bigger threat around influence (political or otherwise).
But let’s be honest… we all know that the truly decentralized future that Satoshi laid out is unrealistic.
You’ve got governments and corporate entities stock piling BTC in reserve.
Perhaps we will see Strategic ETH reserves set up in the US to protect the dollar as more USD is minted on chain?
Ideally there’s some middle ground, but it’s looking more likely we are just bringing traditional systems onchain.
iii) Circle / Tether could accumulate DeFi tokens to sway governance decisions on protocols.
The illusion of decentralization.
Regulators may end up having to step back in, ensuring disclosure around influence or control, just like traditional financial systems.
So what’s the solution?
- ETH market cap needs to grow via broader adoption, staking and price appreciation
- Deeper network securit features so these centralized entities aren’t obliged to accumulate to manage their risk
- Maybe Decentralized stablecoins need to gain traction?
- Governance caps for giga whales when voting on protocol proposals
Honestly, if the rate of stables minted onchain continues, then surely ETH price will appreciate one way or another.
Unless other chains like TRON become the preferred home for stablecoins.
World Liberty Financial (WLF) has been hedging its risk given it holds a decent stack of TRX and ETH.
ethereum has a trillion dollar problem nobody wants to discuss
$300b market cap securing $1t in stablecoins breaks basic proof of stake economics. pajke called it: the math doesn't work
circle and tether might need to become ethereum's largest holders just to keep the chain functional. imagine explaining that dependency to regulators
tether alone added $20b on tron this year. jpmorgan sees $500b stablecoins by 2028. eth market cap isn't keeping pace
the "decentralized computer" requiring centralized stablecoin companies to prop up its security model wasn't in the whitepaper
24.05K
109
The content on this page is provided by third parties. Unless otherwise stated, OKX is not the author of the cited article(s) and does not claim any copyright in the materials. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not represent the views of OKX. It is not intended to be an endorsement of any kind and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell digital assets. To the extent generative AI is utilized to provide summaries or other information, such AI generated content may be inaccurate or inconsistent. Please read the linked article for more details and information. OKX is not responsible for content hosted on third party sites. Digital asset holdings, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk and can fluctuate greatly. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition.