The coming DEX revolution
Since the launch of Ethereum we have all speculated on the potential disruption of centralized exchanges with the emergence of decentralized exchanges (DEXs). This is the first of a two-part series examining the DEX space and the potential coming revolution.
Context
Crypto’s killer-app today is investment and speculation, gaining exposure to a technology that could be incredibly transformative in the future.
Most trading is performed on a centralized exchange where one platform holds customer funds, matches buyers to sellers, and offers crypto and fiat services to manage deposits and withdrawals. But centralized exchanges have their challenges. They reside in specific geographic locations and subject to stringent regulations, require customers to open accounts and deposit their funds, place limits and restrictions on their customer’s actions, and have been the target of malicious attackers. In general, they are centralized choke-points that stand in contrast to the open, decentralized ethos of cryptocurrency.
Decentralized exchanges shine where centralized exchanges struggle:
Safe: Funds are never transferred to any third party or generally subject to counter-party risk, you trade directly from your own wallet
Global and permissionless: There is no concept of borders, let alone restrictions on who can trade
Ease of use and pseudonymous: No account signup or personal details are required
Better execution (potentially): Theoretically, we should see global DEX liquidity accrue to a handful of winning platforms, enabling deep liquidity
Given their clear advantages, why haven’t DEXs already disrupted centralized exchanges?
Turns out, they also struggle with some significant challenges:
User experience: Trading on a DEX is performed through self-custodial wallets, which are confusing and intimidating for many
Speed and scale: All trades are settled on-chain, bottlenecked by block times and base transaction throughput. (Try sending 1000s of tx/sec on Ethereum today…)
Limited trading pairs: DEXs are confined to only trade tokens on single blockchain, there is limited interoperability. For example, it’s very difficult to trade BTC-ETH pairs on a DEX, because bitcoins reside on the Bitcoin blockchain, not on Ethereum (this is changing soon).
Limited feature parity: Centralized exchanges can quickly build new services, whereas DEXs must work within the limitations of each blockchain, and carefully ship new features that have been audited for security
Regulation: While DEXs are intended to be decentralized and resistant to regulatory pressure, some hybrid models have run into problems. Increased pressure from regulators could stifle development and traction.
But what gets us excited?All the above issues seem tractable. They boil down to product and technology challenges that have conceptually clear paths forward.Eventually, we should be able to create a DEX that rivals the trading experience of centralized exchanges, while retaining all their native benefits.When this day comes, centralized exchanges could be ripe for disruption.
Current landscape
DEXs today are generally differentiated by two main segments:
(1) How are trades settled?
DEXs generally either adopt a traditional Order Book model or an Automated Market Maker (AMM) model.
Order books match each buyer to a unique seller (identical to trading on centralized exchanges like Coinbase Pro). This model has clear advantages, where price discovery is transparent and efficient for highly liquid books, but can also be subject to some manipulation (spoofing, frontrunning, etc), usually in more illiquid books.
AMM models match each trade against a pool of capital in a smart contract, where the price of the trade is determined by the ratio of assets in the pool. It might sound confusing, but this model does not require a specific counter-party to each trade (trades are performed against a smart contract). This makes AMM models ideal for more illiquid tokens. As a downside, traders generally suffer higher slippage when trading large amounts.
(2) Where are trades settled?
DEXs either settle trades on the base blockchain (usually Ethereum), or look to gain more throughput by routing trades through a sidechain before final settlement is pushed back to the main chain.
While sidechain-based execution shows promise, there are still security, UX, and decentralization tradeoffs with current models, leading to limited traction today. But these are also tractable challenges, and promising models are scheduled to launch over the next couple years. There are also some hybrid models that fuse on-chain and off-chain models, and an emerging number of DEX aggregators that provide best execution.
Today’s popular DEXs almost exclusively settle trades directly on Ethereum, owing to its significant lead in developer traction, large token network, and broad infrastructure and wallet support.
Volume and traction
Due to DEX’s challenges around scale & throughput, user experience, and limited trading pairs, traction has been minimal compared to centralized exchanges. But DEX volume has been slowly growing in market share.
According to Dune Analytics, Uniswap leads in volume and traction today with its AMM model that provides liquidity advantages. DyDx is second with leveraged trading, borrow/lend capabilities, and a recently launched BTC perpetual contracts market similar to BitMEX.
DEX volume is still small in aggregate compared to centralized exchanges, but shows steady growth. Today, total DEX volume amounts to ~6% of Coinbase Pro volume.
Looking into the future
DEX volume is small today, but is primed for substantial growth as the ecosystem matures. The timing is up for debate but their challenges are solvable; it’s more a matter of when and not if.
Key areas to watch:
Improvements to self-custody: Making it dead-simple to manage crypto in your own wallet will increase the pool of users ready to trade on DEXs
Interoperability: The ability to bring assets on other blockchains together will enable a larger selection of trading pairs
Sidechain and L1 scaling advances: Improving the trading experience and mitigating frontrunning and griefing attacks will bring near UX-parity
Regulatory pressure: This is a double-edged sword — If regulators begin pressuring centralized exchanges, DEXs could emerge as the only viable option for some consumers. Conversely, if regulators pressure DEX developers and teams, these platforms may take longer to emerge at scale.
Emerging feature differentiation: DEXs are tied to programmable money, and they may create novel new derivatives and synthetic assets, combined with deep composability with other DeFi services, to create a truly differentiated product offering
How close are we to this reality? It’s difficult to say with certainty, but considering the long development timelines associated with shipping code to blockchains, and the slow-but-steady growth in those key areas to watch, it’s not unreasonable to think the DEX revolution is still a few years away.