Proof-of-stake leads to centralization when it favors token quantity. It’s not necessarily a problem as big holders don’t want to lose money on bad decisions. But it creates fewer opportunities for new validators and higher security risks.
Decentralization is the essence of blockchain. Yet, one of the most centralized consensus models seems to be the most successful. Proof-of-stake rewards users for locking tokens and selects validators based on those holdings.
You don’t need to buy mining devices in proof-of-stake. You can win many block rewards by just having the most coins for the longest. Hence why proof-of-stake tends to centralize:
Maybe the consensus model is the problem. Bitcoin is fairly decentralized and still performs well with millions of users. So is it worth switching from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake?
While both consensus mechanisms tend to centralize, proof-of-stake is more centralized than proof-of-work. Mainly, because networks put too much weight on token quantity rather than validator numbers, staking length, or randomness. Proof-of-stake might be profitable for everyone, but governance comes down to a few holders.
Whales aren’t necessarily the problem. Interest rewards increase the gap between stakeholders, even if that gap was just $100. Proof-of-stake needs smart contracts that prevent early holders from taking up the network.
Proof-of-work is based on computing power. “Mining” is a competition between powerful devices to solve cryptographic puzzles to win block rewards. The network security increases proportionally to the energy spent.
Thus, the most competitive miners have dozens of devices and live in countries with low electricity costs. These tend to centralize by creating mining pools. All miners from a pool contribute computing power and get proportional rewards for their contribution. If they win.
Still, proof-of-work is fairly decentralized and more secure than proof-of-stake.
Does Proof-of-Stake lead to centralization? Not always. You can design for it by rewarding smaller users, reducing validator entry barriers, and expanding token utility.
Developers can design to prevent centralization before it becomes a problem:
Decentralization isn’t hard to design. The challenge is to balance the network security and scalability (see blockchain trilemma).
If you want your network to become successful, it has to be more competitive (scalable) than the leading ones. The best scalability comes from centralization, unfortunately.
Decentralization doesn’t mean much in practice when there’s a high entry barrier. If users need high-tech devices, technical knowledge, or thousands of dollars, fewer will become validators. In order to attract validators in the first place, the consensus model should be rewarding enough for the whole.
To become an Ethereum validator, for example, you need to stake over 32 Ethereum, have enough hardware storage, and keep your device always online. Validators expect minimum hardware requirements to increase after the Merge in September 2022. AKA centralize.
Other examples are:
To get more validators, reduce the hardware requirements and minimum staking amount. One way to split data storage is by sharding the blockchain. It also increases performance, so validator numbers go up without raising fees.
As for staking minimums, lower ones increase the risk of bad actors misusing the network. So it’s recommended to update smart contract penalties as well.
As more people use the network, scalability issues arise. When a blockchain doesn’t scale well, users cause network congestion and expensive fees. This drives away new users and incentivizes people to hold rather than use those tokens.
But utility tokens aren’t a store of value. When treated that way, proof-of-stake tends to centralize. So instead of having a stake feature, have several ways for users to get value from tokens.
Ethereum has a large ERC-20 ecosystem. Users can spend Ether on DeFi services, NFT marketplaces, metaverse projects, web infrastructure, governance, or advertising. A diverse ecosystem attracts more users (potential validators) while dissuading big spenders from locking tokens.
Sometimes, you can “borrow” these systems rather than build them. If the blockchain is EVM compatible (Ethereum’s code) or interoperable, it can export functions from Ethereum, Binance, or Solana. For example, Avalanche is highly compatible, scalable, and decentralized. So developers from different blockchains create an AVAX version of their apps. This benefits the network and decentralizes the overall crypto space.
e.g., Polygon also borrows many ERC-20 tokens as an Ethereum sidechain.
There are enough reasons to think of proof-of-stake as the best consensus mechanism. While it’s not as safe as proof-of-work, it’s more flexible, accessible, and efficient. Not everyone can stock mining hardware devices, and users wouldn’t be happy to pay more fees for higher electricity costs.
Proof-of-stake is a good foundation, but it’s not enough to solve the so-called blockchain trilemma. Today’s most successful blockchains don’t use proof-of-stake, but a variation of it:
Further proof of this is Ethereum 2.0. and The Merge. While it seems to use the classic proof-of-stake, this mechanism alone isn’t efficient enough. Thus why Ethereum needs dozens of scalability solutions, such as roll-ups, state channels, sidechains, or load-sharing forks like the upcoming PulseChain.
Join The Leading Crypto ChannelJOIN
Disclaimer:Please note that nothing on this website constitutes financial advice. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided on this website is accurate, individuals must not rely on this information to make a financial or investment decision. Before making any decision, we strongly recommend you consult a qualified professional who should take into account your specific investment objectives, financial situation and individual needs.
Max is a European based crypto specialist, marketer, and all-around writer. He brings an original and practical approach for timeless blockchain knowledge such as: in-depth guides on crypto 101, blockchain analysis, dApp reviews, and DeFi risk management. Max also wrote for news outlets, saas entrepreneurs, crypto exchanges, fintech B2B agencies, Metaverse game studios, trading coaches, and Web3 leaders like Enjin.
Subscribe To Newsletter
Stay up-to-date with all the latest news from
Copyright © 2023 Liquid Loans.
All Rights Reserved.