Centralization Map

The four-quadrant view

Each dot is one asset. Position on the chart reveals the structural shape of its centralization: how many distinct parties must be trusted (x) and how many privileged functions exist that can bypass normal protocol flow (y). Hover any dot for the asset name and its exact counts. The dashed lines show the median of each axis, splitting the field into four quadrants.

How to read this data

Trust Assumptions (TA) count the distinct entities or contracts that must behave honestly for the protocol to function as intended: governance bodies, multisigs, oracle providers, custodians, foundation-controlled keys, validator sets. A higher count is not automatically worse; mature systems often distribute trust across more parties on purpose. The number reveals architecture, not quality.

Override Points (OP) count the privileged functions that can bypass normal protocol flow: pause switches, upgrade authorities, parameter changes outside timelock, hard-fork capabilities. A protocol with many override points has more control levers; whether those levers are dangerous depends on who can pull them, how fast, and with what oversight.

The interesting reads are the asymmetric quadrants. Low TA paired with high OP (top-left) is "few trusted parties holding unconstrained powers", which is the highest-risk shape. High TA paired with constrained OP (bottom-right) is "many trusted parties with bounded authority", which is the most defensible. The methodology and the per-asset backing lists are documented in our methodology report.

Full data, sortable

Source data: /data/asset-risk-scores.json. Comparison entries that do not fit the protocol framework (e.g. bitcoin-vs-gold) are excluded by design. For the full backing list of every Trust Assumption and Override Point, click through to the asset's research page.