DEX vs CEX: Choosing the Best Solution for Your Crypto Exchange

Maciej Zieliński

08 Nov 2021
DEX vs CEX: Choosing the Best Solution for Your Crypto Exchange

What are the differences between DEX and CEX? Which one suits your needs and business assumptions best? Read this article before you make that crucial decision.

In the article you learn about:

  • Different types of crypto exchanges
  • What is a centralized exchange?
  • Pros and cons of centralized exchanges
  • How does decentralized exchange work?
  • Liquidity pools and Automatic Market Maker
  • Pros and cons of decentralized exchanges

Crypto Exchanges

The cryptocurrency exchange is an indispensable part of cryptocurrency trading, which may be considered as one of the most important financial trends of this century. Hence more and more investors are becoming interested in launching their own exchange. The fundamental decision that has to be made at the begging is choosing the model of crypto trading that will meet our requirements. 

In this article, we'll take a closer look at centralized and decentralized exchanges, which will hopefully enable you to examine which of them is right for your project in the crypto space.

Centralized Exchange
Centralized Exchange

Centralized Exchange

Most big cryptocurrency exchanges you know are probably centralized. Coinbase, Binance, BKEX, or Upbit - you are familiar with them. Thanks to higher liquidity and lower transaction fees they remained the first choice of crypto traders for a long time.

Times have changed and players such as decentralized exchange Uniswap or Sushi Swap have gained significant importance in the crypto market. Yet, in many cases, centralized exchanges still remain the most suitable solution. What's their backbone?

Centralization of an exchange

Centralization of the exchange essentially means that each trade there takes place with a centralized intermediary. The centralized exchange has its order book, where every order is recorded and validated. All the data is stored and exchanged between exchange servers. Additionally, transactions and user information go through a centralized security process.

To access the exchange, users have to sign up by providing their bank details and personal data. This is the part of KYC and AML practices, which aim to prevent money laundering and have to be followed by every centralized exchange. 

Buying cryptocurrencies on a centralized exchange

Trading on centralized exchanges generally seems simple. You just need to choose coins and confirm the transaction. The exchange will show the funds you acquired in your account. Then you can trade them for other digital assets. The price of each coin on the site is based on an order book.

However, users don't really hold their funds. The exchange works here as a custodian of the customer’s funds. Furthermore, trades don't occur on the blockchain. Instead, they take place only within the exchange's database.

Centralized exchange - pros and cons
Centralized exchange - pros and cons

Pros of Centralized Exchanges

User-friendliness

Generally, centralized exchanges have a more user-friendly platform. They give users easy and uncomplicated access to crypto trading. This is especially relevant for crypto newcomers.

High liquidity

Since the whole process doesn't take place on a blockchain, the network nodes don't have to be updated in real-time, hence trading speed is usually much higher than on DEX.

Lower transaction fees

The trading fee on CEX is fixed, and they tend to be lower than on decentralized exchanges for the same reason as stated above.

Trading with fiats

Unlike DEXs, centralized exchanges allow users to buy crypto for fiat currencies.

Cons of Centralized Exchanges

More legal regulations

Centralized exchanges are limited by strict government requirements. For example, high standards of the identity verification process have to be respected.

Centralized entity

From a technical point, when you deposit funds on a centralized exchange, you lose control over it. The exchange puts your funds into integrated wallets controlled by it.

Additionally, CEXs extract users' private keys. They will no longer be your keys. Therefore, if you want to withdraw your money, the exchange has to sign the transaction on your behalf.

This is an important reason why many traders migrate to decentralized exchanges.

Risk of leaking private user data

Due to KYC procedures, crypto users provide extensive data. As such information is fragile, a security dilemma is present even before one starts trading. This may lead to the lack of users’ trust, especially when we talk about smaller, less-known exchanges.

Decentralized Exchange
Decentralized Exchange

Decentralized Exchange

In many ways, decentralized exchanges are similar to centralized ones. However, the differences are more than substantial. In decentralized exchanges, trade essential relies on a blockchain (most often Ethereum or the Binance Smart Chain). Trading between users is conducted using smart contracts - orders are executed on-chain. As a result, the exchange doesn't take control of users' assets during the entire process.

Cross-chain exchanges are a very promising novelty on the DEX market. Yet, most of them operate only on one blockchain - most often Ethereum or the Binance Smart Chain.

How can a decentralized exchange handle trading?

How DEX handles trading
How DEX handles trading

On-chain order book

There are decentralized exchanges where every transaction is written into a blockchain. This means that every order, as well as cancellation or alteration, is handled on-chain.

Without a doubt, this is the purest approach to decentralization. There is absolutely no third party involved at any stage of trading. Everything is extremely transparent. Unfortunately, there are vital downsides as well.

The on-chain order book is far less practical than the other two options. Firstly, because every node on the blockchain records the order, placing it requires paying a fee. Furthermore, users have to wait until the miner adds necessary data to the chain. This translates to high costs and poor liquidity.

Off-chain order book

Off-chain order books are a bit more centralized than their counterparts. But they are also far more practical. In this model, orders are hosted elsewhere and only the final transaction is settled on the blockchain. Moreover, you can still benefit from non-custodial storage.

As orders aren't stored on-chain, this approach is faster and less costly. Furthermore, it helps a better liquidity of trades to be achieved. However, it can encounter some of the security issues typical for CEXs.

Trading pairs 

Let’s use the example of Ether and Bitcoin to describe how trading pairs work in the order book model on DEX

If users want to trade their ETH for BTC, they need to find another trader willing to sell BTC for ETH. Furthermore, they need to agree on the same price. 

While in the case of popular cryptocurrencies and tokens, finding a trading pair shouldn’t be a problem, things get a bit more complicated when we want to trade more alternative assets. 

The vital difference between order books and automatic market makers is that the second one doesn’t require the existence of trading pairs to facilitate trade.

Automatic Market Maker AMM

Automated Market Maker (AMM) is a decentralized exchange protocol that relies on smart contracts to set the price of tokens and provide liquidity. In an automated market makers' model, assets are priced according to a pricing algorithm and mathematical formula instead of the order book used by traditional exchanges.

Essentially, they are autonomous trading machines that replace traditional order books with liquidity pools run by algorithms. According to many, it was the development of AMM that enabled the mass adoption of decentralized exchanges.

Dentralized exchange - pros and cons
Dentralized exchange - pros and cons

Pros of Decentralized Exchanges

No KYC

Most of the DEXs don’t have to follow KYC and AML requirements, because they don’t intermediate in transactions between parties. That’s why it’s often more convenient to build your own DEX than CEX. 

No third parties involved

The basic idea behind decentralized trading is removing third-party providers. All transactions take place in a peer-to-peer or peer-to-contract model. 

Full control of your assets

A decentralized exchange doesn't hold the user's assets or private keys. Therefore funds are under the user's control at every stage of trading.

More diversified crypto assets

On the DEX platform, trades of tokens that aren’t listed on CEXs are possible.

Cons of Decentralized Exchanges

Trading volume

The volume traded on CEXs is still much higher than that on DEXs. Liquidity is lower as well.

Higher fees

This is not an absolute standard, but when it comes to trading fees CEXs often offer better prices.

Convenience

A decentralized exchange is less user-friendly than a traditional one.

DEX vs CEX
DEX vs CEX

Developing DEX vs CEX

Crypto space develops at a tremendous speed, continuously bringing new possibilities. The number of people interested in crypto investments increases every day; hence the popularity of both decentralized and centralized exchanges has recently grown significantly. You need to bear this in mind when deciding to launch your crypto exchange.

Launching a crypto exchange requires not only experience of blockchain developers’ fluently using blockchain protocols but also a solid and well-planned business strategy. That's why choosing a technology partner with previous experience with both blockchain development and business consulting in the crypto field might be the optimal solution.

Do you want to gain more first-hand knowledge regarding building crypto exchanges? Don't hesitate to ask our professionals who will be happy to answer your questions.

Most viewed


Never miss a story

Stay updated about Nextrope news as it happens.

You are subscribed

Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Kajetan Olas

22 Nov 2024
Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Authors of the contents are not affiliated to the reviewed project in any way and none of the information presented should be taken as financial advice.

In this article we analyze tokenomics of Aethir - a project providing on-demand cloud compute resources for the AI, Gaming, and virtualized compute sectors.
Aethir aims to aggregate enterprise-grade GPUs from multiple providers into a DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network). Its competitive edge comes from utlizing the GPUs for very specific use-cases, such as low-latency rendering for online games.
Due to decentralized nature of its infrastructure Aethir can meet the demands of online-gaming in any region. This is especially important for some gamer-abundant regions in Asia with underdeveloped cloud infrastructure that causes high latency ("lags").
We will analyze Aethir's tokenomics, give our opinion on what was done well, and provide specific recommendations on how to improve it.

Evaluation Summary

Aethir Tokenomics Structure

The total supply of ATH tokens is capped at 42 billion ATH. This fixed cap provides a predictable supply environment, and the complete emissions schedule is listed here. As of November 2024 there are approximately 5.2 Billion ATH in circulation. In a year from now (November 2025), the circulating supply will almost triple, and will amount to approximately 15 Billion ATH. By November 2028, today's circulating supply will be diluted by around 86%.

From an investor standpoint the rational decision would be to stake their tokens and hope for rewards that will balance the inflation. Currently the estimated APR for 3-year staking is 195% and for 4-year staking APR is 261%. The rewards are paid out weekly. Furthermore, stakers can expect to get additional rewards from partnered AI projects.

Staking Incentives

Rewards are calculated based on the staking duration and staked amount. These factors are equally important and they linearly influence weekly rewards. This means that someone who stakes 100 ATH for 2 weeks will have the same weekly rewards as someone who stakes 200 ATH for 1 week. This mechanism greatly emphasizes long-term holding. That's because holding a token makes sense only if you go for long-term staking. E.g. a whale staking $200k with 1 week lockup. will have the same weekly rewards as person staking $1k with 4 year lockup. Furthermore the ATH staking rewards are fixed and divided among stakers. Therefore Increase of user base is likely to come with decrease in rewards.
We believe the main weak-point of Aethirs staking is the lack of equivalency between rewards paid out to the users and value generated for the protocol as a result of staking.

Token Distribution

The token distribution of $ATH is well designed and comes with long vesting time-frames. 18-month cliff and 36-moths subsequent linear vesting is applied to team's allocation. This is higher than industry standard and is a sign of long-term commitment.

  • Checkers and Compute Providers: 50%
  • Ecosystem: 15%
  • Team: 12.5%
  • Investors: 11.5%
  • Airdrop: 6%
  • Advisors: 5%

Aethir's airdrop is divided into 3 phases to ensure that only loyal users get rewarded. This mechanism is very-well thought and we rate it highly. It fosters high community engagement within the first months of the project and sets the ground for potentially giving more-control to the DAO.

Governance and Community-Led Development

Aethir’s governance model promotes community-led decision-making in a very practical way. Instead of rushing with creation of a DAO for PR and marketing purposes Aethir is trying to make it the right way. They support projects building on their infrastructure and regularly share updates with their community in the most professional manner.

We believe Aethir would benefit from implementing reputation boosted voting. An example of such system is described here. The core assumption is to abandon the simplistic: 1 token = 1 vote and go towards: Votes = tokens * reputation_based_multiplication_factor.

In the attached example, reputation_based_multiplication_factor rises exponentially with the number of standard deviations above norm, with regard to user's rating. For compute compute providers at Aethir, user's rating could be replaced by provider's uptime.

Perspectives for the future

While it's important to analyze aspects such as supply-side tokenomics, or governance, we must keep in mind that 95% of project's success depends on demand-side. In this regard the outlook for Aethir may be very bright. The project declares $36M annual reccuring revenue. Revenue like this is very rare in the web3 space. Many projects are not able to generate any revenue after succesfull ICO event, due to lack fo product-market-fit.

If you're looking to create a robust tokenomics model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure your project’s resilience in the long term.

Quadratic Voting in Web3

Kajetan Olas

04 Dec 2024
Quadratic Voting in Web3

Decentralized systems are reshaping how we interact, conduct transactions, and govern online communities. As Web3 continues to advance, the necessity for effective and fair voting mechanisms becomes apparent. Traditional voting systems, such as the one-token-one-vote model, often fall short in capturing the intensity of individual preferences, which can result in centralization. Quadratic Voting (QV) addresses this challenge by enabling individuals to express not only their choices but also the strength of their preferences.

In QV, voters are allocated a budget of credits that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The cost of casting multiple votes on a single issue increases quadratically, meaning that each additional vote costs more than the last. This system allows for a more precise expression of preferences, as individuals can invest more heavily in issues they care deeply about while conserving credits on matters of lesser importance.

Understanding Quadratic Voting

Quadratic Voting (QV) is a voting system designed to capture not only the choices of individuals but also the strength of their preferences. In most DAO voting mechanisms, each person typically has one vote per token, which limits the ability to express how strongly they feel about a particular matter. Furthermore, QV limits the power of whales and founding team who typically have large token allocations. These problems are adressed by making the cost of each additional vote increase quadratically.

In QV, each voter is given a budget of credits or tokens that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The key principle is that the cost to cast n votes on a single issue is proportional to the square of n. This quadratic cost function ensures that while voters can express stronger preferences, doing so requires a disproportionately higher expenditure of their voting credits. This mechanism discourages voters from concentrating all their influence on a single issue unless they feel very strongly about it. In the context of DAOs, it means that large holders will have a hard-time pushing through with a proposal if they'll try to do it on their own.

Practical Example

Consider a voter who has been allocated 25 voting credits to spend on several proposals. The voter has varying degrees of interest in three proposals: Proposal A, Proposal B, and Proposal C.

  • Proposal A: High interest.
  • Proposal B: Moderate interest.
  • Proposal C: Low interest.

The voter might allocate their credits as follows:

Proposal A:

  • Votes cast: 3
  • Cost: 9 delegated tokens

Proposal B:

  • Votes cast: 2
  • Cost: 4 delegated tokens

Proposal C:

  • Votes cast: 1
  • Cost: 1 delegated token

Total delegated tokens: 14
Remaining tokens: 11

With the remaining tokens, the voter can choose to allocate additional votes to the proposals based on their preferences or save for future proposals. If they feel particularly strong about Proposal A, they might decide to cast one more vote:

Additional vote on Proposal A:

  • New total votes: 4
  • New cost: 16 delegated tokens
  • Additional cost: 16−9 = 7 delegated tokens

Updated total delegated tokens: 14+7 = 21

Updated remaining tokens: 25−21 = 425 - 21 = 4

This additional vote on Proposal A costs 7 credits, significantly more than the previous vote, illustrating how the quadratic cost discourages excessive influence on a single issue without strong conviction.

Benefits of Implementing Quadratic Voting

Key Characteristics of the Quadratic Cost Function

  • Marginal Cost Increases Linearly: The marginal cost of each additional vote increases linearly. The cost difference between casting n and n−1 votes is 2n−1.
  • Total Cost Increases Quadratically: The total cost to cast multiple votes rises steeply, discouraging voters from concentrating too many votes on a single issue without significant reason.
  • Promotes Egalitarian Voting: Small voters are encouraged to participate, because relatively they have a much higher impact.

Advantages Over Traditional Voting Systems

Quadratic Voting offers several benefits compared to traditional one-person-one-vote systems:

  • Captures Preference Intensity: By allowing voters to express how strongly they feel about an issue, QV leads to outcomes that better reflect the collective welfare.
  • Reduces Majority Domination: The quadratic cost makes it costly for majority groups to overpower minority interests on every issue.
  • Encourages Honest Voting: Voters are incentivized to allocate votes in proportion to their true preferences, reducing manipulation.

By understanding the foundation of Quadratic Voting, stakeholders in Web3 communities can appreciate how this system supports more representative governance.

Conclusion

Quadratic voting is a novel voting system that may be used within DAOs to foster decentralization. The key idea is to make the cost of voting on a certain issue increase quadratically. The leading player that makes use of this mechanism is Optimism. If you're pondering about the design of your DAO, we highly recommend taking a look at their research on quadratic funding.

If you're looking to create a robust governance model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure that your DAO will stand out as a beacon of innovation and resilience in the long term.