Let's take a seat and rate the decentralization level of the 7 major public blockchains—how many points would each get?
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Let's take a seat and rate the decentralization level of the 7 major public blockchains—how many points would each get?
According to the model in this article, ETH is the most decentralized blockchain, while SOL is more decentralized than BTC.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: Justin Bons
Translation: Frank, Foresight News
What is decentralization? And how can we truly measure it? Too many projects use centralization as an excuse to justify their mediocrity. In this article, we will conduct a genuine decentralization assessment of BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, ADA, AVAX, and TRX.
Six Key Metrics for Measuring Decentralization
First, we'll define six core metrics that comprehensively assess decentralization: validator node decentralization, client decentralization, permissionless design, technical trade-offs, governance design, and political decentralization.
1. Validator Node Decentralization
Simply counting nodes is meaningless due to the lack of Sybil attack resistance—what matters is the distribution of unique validators (nodes participating in block production), since they are involved whether under PoW or PoS.
2. Client Decentralization
Using a democratic analogy:
A blockchain network with only one type of client is like a one-party system, meaning a single client implementation can act as gatekeeper for all protocol changes or upgrades—one way Bitcoin has been effectively controlled.
3. Permissionless Protocol Design
No matter how many nodes exist on a blockchain, if there are permissioned elements in the protocol design, decentralization is merely superficial. This includes any blockchain relying on some form of authority (permission) to operate—well-known examples being Ripple and Algorand (though Algorand plans to change this).
4. Technical Trade-offs
This category examines design decisions that have centralizing effects on the network, including high entry barriers, demanding node requirements, MEV, delegation/liquidity pools, PBS, etc.—in these cases, details matter significantly.
5. Governance Design
On-chain governance design is crucial for achieving any real decentralization, yet it's often overlooked. A lack of governance always creates a power vacuum, eventually attracting the worst actors, leading to poor decisions and protocol capture.
6. Political Decentralization
The impact of political decentralization is an inevitable part of human nature, so we must analyze influential figures and factions. Technically speaking, if cults of personality around founders dominate, then even blockchains decentralized in other aspects remain fundamentally centralized.
How Do the Top 7 Blockchains Score?
Next, using the six principles above—with each dimension scored out of 10 and a total possible score of 60—we’ll rate BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, ADA, AVAX, and TRX:
Assessing BTC’s Degree of Decentralization
-
8/10; second-highest number of validators;
-
1/10; Core client dominance;
-
10/10; no permissioned elements;
-
5/10; PoW, no native delegation;
-
0/10; no on-chain governance;
-
5/10; Wizard faction growing (Foresight News note: supporters of NFT inscription on Bitcoin);
BTC Total Score: 29/60
Assessing ETH’s Degree of Decentralization:
-
10/10; highest number of validators;
-
10/10; most diverse client ecosystem;
-
10/10; no permissioned elements;
-
7/10; no native delegation;
-
0/10; no on-chain governance;
-
6/10; large ecosystem with numerous distinct factions;
ETH Total Score: 43/60
Assessing SOL’s Degree of Decentralization:
-
7/10; large number of validators;
-
7/10; diversified client ecosystem;
-
10/10; no permissioned elements;
-
2/10; PoH, high node requirements;
-
3/10; on-chain governance planned;
-
3/10; large ecosystem but few factions;
SOL Total Score: 32/60
Assessing XRP’s Degree of Decentralization:
-
1/10; small number of unique validators;
-
0/10; single client;
-
0/10; contains permissioned elements;
-
3/10; uses validator list;
-
0/10; no plans for on-chain governance;
-
4/10; small ecosystem but strong factions;
XRP Total Score: 17/60
Assessing ADA’s Degree of Decentralization:
-
7/10; large number of validators;
-
1/10; single client;
-
10/10; no permissioned elements;
-
8/10; native delegation;
-
6/10; on-chain governance soon to be implemented;
-
3/10; limited resistance to IOHK (Foresight News note: IOHK is Cardano’s development company);
ADA Total Score: 35/60
Assessing AVAX’s Degree of Decentralization:
-
5/10; average number of unique validators;
-
1/10; single client;
-
10/10; no permissioned elements;
-
8/10; native delegation;
-
8/10; limited on-chain governance;
-
3/10; large ecosystem but few factions;
AVAX Total Score: 35/60
Assessing TRX’s Degree of Decentralization:
-
1/10; low number of unique validators;
-
1/10; single client;
-
10/10; no permissioned elements;
-
2/10; mandatory delegation;
-
9/10; fully implemented on-chain governance;
-
3/10; medium-sized ecosystem, founder-dominated;
TRX Total Score: 26/60
This model for assessing blockchain decentralization is highly simplified. Previous research by Cyber Capital used over 50 parameters to derive a decentralization score, with individual factors weighted separately. Yet this simple and flawed model cuts through much of the noise.
Despite its simplifications, I still stand by the argument that ETH is currently the most decentralized blockchain, and that SOL is more decentralized than BTC.
Objective parameter measurements outweigh emotion and cult-like thinking, even though this may unsettle many who are immersed in the fantasy of perfect decentralization. In reality, decentralization is a multidimensional field, and no chain dominates across all dimensions.
In summary, if you take decentralization seriously, you need to evaluate it across multiple dimensions.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
