It’s time for another matchup!
This time around, we are going to be placing the old guard of centralization against the innovative approach of decentralization.
As with previous matchups, we are going to go three rounds with the winner being declared after round three.
So without further ado, let’s begin!
Round 1: Entry Barriers
When starting at the beginning, it’s important to take a dive into the barriers set in place that might prevent a person from, well, beginning.
With that, when taking a look at centralization, we find that far more often there are barriers set in place in the form of brokers, middlemen, and just general gatekeepers that must be paid before a person can utilize a centralized trading platform.
This pay to play entry barrier is almost completely inherent within all centralized platforms so it’s safe to say that this sticking point is a facet of centralization as a whole.
On the other hand, when looking towards decentralized platforms, the same barriers do not exists in the same quantity as it does within the counterpart.
So, given the higher barriers towards entry for centralized platforms, decentralized takes this round.
Round 2: Access To Funds
For round two we will be taking a look at the ability for users to access their funds as well as the platform’s ability to access, manipulate, or otherwise impede movement of users’ funds.
When taking a look at decentralized platforms, we can see that given the very nature of the platform, decentralized, platforms are unable to exert the same control that centralized platforms have over users’ funds.
Whereas in a centralized setting users’ funds are able to be locked, controlled, or in worse cases, downright stolen, decentralized limits access to users own assets.
Given that decentralization relies on no central component having access, platforms are unable to lock, freeze or otherwise touch users’ funds as it simply is impossible to do so.
This in part also eliminates the need for withdrawals, a sticking point for centralized platforms, from the decentralized equation.
Thus, round two again goes to decentralized.
Round 3: Insulation From External Forces
For the final round, we will taking a look at a platform’s susceptibility to manipulation from external forces.
This would include the ability for large players to manipulate movements, artificial fluctuations, and general underhanded activities.
Given that decentralized platforms are inherently free of intervention on the part of platform owners, this round will be going to decentralized.
Though in fairness, let’s take a look at where centralized falls short.
As centralized platforms by nature allow for the platform operators to maintain a level of control of the process there exist the possibility for manipulation. And while it is not very common or widespread, there have be notable cases in which it has occured.
The Final Tally
This matchup is going to decentralized platforms as they swept through all three rounds with wins.
It should be no surprise that decentralized platforms offer a more secure, safer, and user-oriented experience as the very nature of decentralization is intended to address the flaws within centralization.
Ready to make your own trades?
Looking for a platform that allows you to leverage AI to ensure fair trades and equal win opportunities?
Download the Level01 App today and start trading!