DeFi is not really decentralized, it is unavoidably centralized

HONG KONG — At the Consensus Hong Kong 2026 conference, the conversation surrounding decentralized finance (DeFi) took a sharp turn toward the pragmatic.

The panel, “How Decentralized is DeFi Really?” saw industry leaders dismantle the “pure decentralization” myth in favor of a reality where temporary centralization is a survival mechanism.

The “decentralization illusion” highlights the friction between DeFi’s permissionless ideals and its operational realities. While the goal is to replace intermediaries with smart contracts, most protocols exist on a spectrum rather than a binary state.

Anand Gomes, head of Paradigm and Paradex, dismissed the idea of binary decentralization, instead framing the current state of most protocols as a necessary “incubation phase.”

Gomes famously likened the role of a protocol founder to that of a parent. “You want your kids to be strong and independent once they grow up,” he explained, “but that doesn’t mean you leave them unattended in their infancy.” For Gomes, the use of admin keys and centralized guardrails in the first 18 months is a fiduciary duty; a protocol exploited in its first six months simply has no future left to decentralize.

This creates a distinct contrast with Vitalik Buterin’s role as the architect of Ethereum’s base layer. Gomes positioned Buterin as the head of a “government” (layer 1) whose role is to ensure stability through neutral, constitutional rules.

Conversely, layer 2 founders act as “businesses” focused on growth. While Buterin pushes for “stage 1” decentralization to ensure the L1 remains a “freedom machine,” Gomes argued that founders must be “stubborn” in protecting their protocols during early vulnerability.

Glenn Woo, representing the infrastructure giant Blockdaemon, noted that as DeFi scales to meet institutional demand, hardware and security requirements naturally create layers of centralization.

Woo said he believes that for DeFi to survive the scrutiny of global clearinghouses like the DTCC, it requires professionalized, robust infrastructure that often trades absolute decentralization for institutional-grade reliability.

Benji Loh of Treehouse echoed this sentiment, noting that temporary centralization is the “price of entry” for the Wall Street tailwinds needed to fund a robust ecosystem. He observed that even the most successful protocols only push for the decentralized ideal after finding product-market fit and stable trading infrastructure.

Arion Ho, CEO of ENI, added that the path to true decentralization must be paved with “transparent rules” rather than immediate, chaotic oversight. “Decentralization is not really a form of what kind of governance we’ve been doing,”

Ho stated, “it’s how to avoid having too much human intervention.” He also said that by starting with a rule-based, verifiable structure hard-coded into the system’s DNA, founders ensure that when the keys are eventually handed to the community, the transition is both safe and sustainable.

As institutional heavyweights like Goldman Sachs move multitrillion-dollar operations on-chain, the panel’s consensus was clear: the goal is no longer just to remove intermediaries, but to ensure that when the “parental” guardrails are finally removed, the protocols are mature enough to withstand the scrutiny of global markets.