Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao recently conducted his first-ever on-chain futures trading experiment using the decentralized derivatives platform APX Finance. While the test was brief, his insights highlighted critical gaps between decentralized exchanges (DEXs) and centralized exchanges (CEXs), particularly regarding privacy and transparency.
Key Takeaways from CZ’s On-Chain Futures Test
- Transaction Details: CZ opened a 24.7x long position on $Mubarak using 0.4 BNB via APX Finance’s public donation address.
- Privacy Concerns: He emphasized that DEXs expose traders’ positions and liquidation prices, undermining the confidentiality expected in futures trading.
- Market Reaction: Despite CZ’s attempt to downplay the event, the tokens involved ($Mubarak and APX Finance’s native token) surged in value.
👉 Explore advanced trading strategies with secure platforms
Privacy Shortcomings in On-Chain Futures Trading
CZ’s primary critique centered on the lack of privacy in decentralized trading environments. Unlike CEXs, where positions remain confidential, DEXs broadcast the following data to the public blockchain:
| Aspect | CEX (e.g., Binance) | DEX (e.g., APX Finance) |
|---|---|---|
| Position Visibility | Private | Publicly verifiable |
| Liquidation Price | Hidden | Exposed |
| MEV Risks | Minimal | Significant |
CZ’s Verdict:
“On-chain trading lacks the privacy safeguards of centralized exchanges. Publicly visible positions and liquidation prices could expose traders’ strategies unnecessarily.”
Why This Test Matters for Crypto Traders
- Transparency vs. Privacy: While blockchain’s transparency ensures trustlessness, it clashes with traders’ need for discretion.
- MEV Risks: CZ noted concerns about Maximal Extractable Value (MEV), where bots exploit visible pending transactions.
- Market Psychology: Public data can influence price action, as seen with $Mubarak’s volatility post-test.
👉 Discover privacy-focused trading solutions
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
1. Why did CZ’s test cause $Mubarak to spike?
The token gained attention due to CZ’s high-profile involvement, showcasing the “CZ effect” where his actions often influence market sentiment.
2. Are DEXs inherently less private than CEXs?
Yes. By design, DEXs record all transactions on-chain, making positions and liquidation thresholds publicly accessible.
3. What is MEV, and how does it affect traders?
MEV refers to profits extracted by reordering or censoring transactions. In DEXs, visible pending trades allow bots to exploit price inefficiencies.
4. Will CZ continue using DEXs for futures?
Unlikely. His feedback suggests CEXs better align with his expectations for privacy and execution quality.
5. How can traders mitigate DEX privacy risks?
- Use wallets without publicly linked identities.
- Avoid oversizing positions to reduce visibility.
- Opt for protocols implementing privacy layers like zk-SNARKs.
6. Did CZ profit from this trade?
While details are scarce, his 24.7x long position on $Mubarak reportedly yielded a 148% gain within minutes.
Final Thoughts: The Trade-Offs of Decentralized Trading
CZ’s experiment underscores a pivotal challenge for DeFi: balancing transparency with practical privacy needs. While DEXs offer censorship resistance, their design limitations—like open position data—may deter institutional and high-net-worth traders. As the space evolves, hybrid solutions combining decentralized settlement with selective privacy could bridge this gap.
For now, centralized exchanges remain the preferred choice for discreet, large-scale trading.