DeFi vs. TradFi:
Institutions and Industrial Organization

Andreas Park

 


 

What does this paper do and why?

Motivation: Tech drives Institutions & Economics

  1. Technology and its limitations create constraints that shape
    • what can be done
    • how things are done
    • by whom they are done
  2. The what, how, and by whom shape
    • institutions: the rules of engagement 
    • market structure & industrial organization: how firms and individuals interact and compete
  3. This paper is primer text for what, how, and by whom for
    • Tradfi v. DeFi 
  4. Starting point for how emergence of blockchain should trigger a re-think of
    • industrial organization of financial services
    • implications for institutional arrangements​

The what, how, and by whom

technological constraints

institutions

(new) markets

services

Example 1: What to do with your money?

keep money safe and arrange "distant" payments

regulation: what is safe?

(fractional) lending

banks and their vaults

Example 2: Markets for financial contracts

trading: we can't all be at the same place all the time

regulation: conduct, access...

investment services, data, ...

dealers, brokers & exchanges

What is TradFi and how is blockchain & DeFi different?

TradFi

  • everything is driven by intermediaries
    • access to infrastructure
    • holding and operation of assets

DeFi

  • holding and operation of assets by individuals and "smart contracts"
  • In the paper I take an extreme stance: blockchains means
    self-custody and free, unchecked entry of
    service providers
  1. Self-custody of assets
  2. Access to financial infrastructure
  3. Free entry of service providers
  4. Conceptually non-custodial services
  5. Blockchain = common resource
  6. Services = platforms

features

consequences

Blockchain-based Decentralized Finance in a Nutshell

Why do these differences matter? What do they do?

  1. Self-custody of assets
  2. Access to financial infrastructure
  3. Free entry of service providers
  4. Conceptually non-custodial services
  5. Blockchain = common resource
  6. Services = platforms

Implications of the Differences

  • intermediaries are no longer necessary
    • intermediaries always introduce risk
    • But: regulators also lose a "hook"
    • many safeguards and protections are no longer available
  • balance privacy and compliance

 

 

 

  • regulatory regime needs to
    • be mindful of multi-layered smart contract environment
    • not create risk by tampering with function 
  1. Self-custody of assets
  2. Access to financial infrastructure
  3. Free entry of service providers
  4. Conceptually non-custodial services
  5. Blockchain = common resource
  6. Services = platforms

Path forward for Financial Institutions

  • choose your level of engagement
    • service to blockchain providers
    • custody
    • trading and on-ramping
    • tokenization & servicing
    • KYC
    • L2-based services

blockchain technology won't get uninvented

intermediaries are no longer necessary

some things won't change, however \(\ldots\)

  • a blockchain itself is not a market
    • investors/traders need to find one another
    • issuers need "distribution"
  • investors worry about
    • disclosures, info asymmetry, market manipulation
  • traders worry about
    • liquidity
    • counterparty risk/delivery
  • society should worry about concentration risk because of the massive scale advantages in finance

What's my view on policy?

  1. Establish self custody as a fundamental right
     
  2. Privacy rights and revamp the BSA
     
  3. Allow creative destruction (more popular wording: allow innovation)
     
  4. Enable self-regulation and embrace compliance incentives
     
  5. do not embrace permissioned systems because they feel more comfortable

Policy views

@financeUTM

andreas.park@rotman.utoronto.ca

slides.com/ap248

sites.google.com/site/parkandreas/

youtube.com/user/andreaspark2812/

DeFi v. TradiFi WIFPR Webinar

By Andreas Park

DeFi v. TradiFi WIFPR Webinar

  • 145