Multicoin Co-founder: Is Decentralization Always Slower Than Centralization? PropAMM Is Breaking This Bias

marsbitОпубликовано 2026-03-13Обновлено 2026-03-13

Введение

In a recent article, Multicoin Capital co-founder Kyle Samani argues that PropAMM (Proactive Automated Market Maker) on Solana represents one of the most significant innovations in market microstructure in decades. It challenges the long-held belief that decentralized systems are inherently slower than centralized ones due to global node communication. In traditional centralized exchanges (CEXs), market makers co-locate servers and engage in constant bidirectional communication with the exchange to update orders, resulting in latency. In contrast, PropAMM runs market-making algorithms directly on the Solana blockchain, eliminating the need for inter-server messaging. Price updates occur within the same physical silicon, drastically reducing latency. PropAMM already offers narrower spreads for SOL-USDC spot trading than major CEXs. Samani predicts it will dominate on-chain trading across spots, perpetuals, and prediction markets in 2024. Current challenges include non-deterministic routing and lack of guaranteed best execution for takers, but solutions from aggregators like Jupiter and dFlow are expected. Upcoming Solana upgrades—such as higher compute limits, reduced slot times, and lower network latency—will further enhance PropAMM performance, solidifying its advantage over traditional systems.

Author: Kyle Samani, Multicoin Co-founder

Compiled by: Azuma, Odaily Planet Daily

Editor's Note: The man who knows how to hype Solana best, Multicoin Capital's former co-founder Kyle Samani, who recently made a high-profile exit, is back!

Last night, Kyle Samani posted a long Thread on his personal X account. In the post, Samani once again demonstrated his highly persuasive "hype" (not derogatory here) rhetoric, using "efficiency"—a weak point in the decentralization narrative—as a breakthrough. He detailed how Solana's PropAMM will catch up with or even surpass traditional centralized models in efficiency, arguing that PropAMM is one of the most important innovations in market microstructure in recent years, or even decades.

Below is the original content:

PropAMM is one of the most important innovations in market microstructure in recent years, and perhaps even one of the most significant in decades.

To help everyone grasp this conclusion, let's first look at how market makers (MMs) quote prices on traditional centralized exchanges (CEXs).

Market makers typically engage in physical co-location with the trading platform. Each market maker runs an algorithm on a server and connects to another server running the exchange's system via a network cable of uniform length (e.g., 50 meters).

A massive stream of data is constantly exchanged between market makers and the trading platform. Whenever a market maker sends an order to the exchange—whether it's a limit order, cancellation, or market order—the exchange must broadcast this information to all other market makers; then, other market makers resend their orders based on the new information; this cycle repeats indefinitely.

Here is a simple diagram.

Now let's look at how PropAMM works on the Solana mainnet.

The beauty of PropAMM on Solana is that the blockchain itself directly "hosts" the market maker algorithms. This means the system no longer needs to send billions of messages back and forth between market makers and the exchange; the market-making algorithms will run directly on the same physical machine as the exchange.

Here is the new diagram. (That's right, only the Solana blockchain is needed!)

There has long been a common view in the cryptocurrency industry that decentralized systems must be slower (with higher latency) than centralized systems because they require communication between global nodes.

But if you reframe the issue, on-chain hosted algorithms could actually have lower latency than traditional centralized financial exchanges.

Why is that? The reason is that the latency required for PropAMM to update prices only involves electrons moving within the same physical silicon chip. For example, if the last market order causes a change in the SOL-USD price, this information is immediately visible to all PropAMMs and used to price the next market order. Everything happens within the same silicon chip; there is no longer a need for two-way communication between servers.

It's worth noting that PropAMM does require frequent oracle updates, but this is not a problem and does not change the overall fact described above.

The most critical point remains that when the trading platform—in this case, the Solana blockchain—directly hosts the PropAMM algorithms, the market makers' pricing changes in real-time within the same physical silicon chip.

PropAMM has already become the dominant mechanism for SOL-USDC spot quotes on Solana, with narrower spreads than all major CEXs. I expect this market structure to become the dominant model for on-chain trading this year, including spot, perpetual contracts (perps), and even prediction markets.

The biggest challenge for PropAMM is that there is currently no way to ensure that takers always get the best execution, because:

· The algorithms of all PropAMMs are not public (which is reasonable, as traditional market-making algorithms are also proprietary);

· When routing trades between multiple PropAMMs, the results are non-deterministic.

However, this problem can be solved. I expect all relevant aggregator teams to launch solutions this year, such as Jupiter and dFlow for spot, and Phoenix for contracts.

Current PropAMMs are still under-optimized and constrained by various limitations of the Solana blockchain itself. This year, Solana will roll out a series of major upgrades that will significantly enhance PropAMM performance, including:

1. Higher CU (Compute Unit) limits per transaction and larger transaction sizes;

2. Higher CU limits per block;

3. Alpenglow: Reducing slot time from 400ms to 100–150ms;

4. DoubleZero: Reducing global network latency;

5. Application-controlled execution;

6. Multiple concurrent leaders.

If PropAMMs on the Solana mainnet can already offer narrower quotes than all CEXs without these upgrades, imagine how powerful they will become as these upgrades are gradually implemented.

Related reading: The Turnaround of Kyle Samani, the "Best Crypto Investor in History," and a Mirror of a Decade Ago

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat is PropAMM and why is it considered a major innovation in market microstructure?

APropAMM is a mechanism on Solana where market maker algorithms are hosted directly on the blockchain, eliminating the need for constant communication between market makers and exchanges. It is considered a major innovation because it reduces latency by running algorithms on the same physical hardware as the exchange, potentially outperforming traditional centralized systems in efficiency.

QHow does PropAMM achieve lower latency compared to traditional centralized exchanges?

APropAMM achieves lower latency by hosting market maker algorithms directly on the Solana blockchain, allowing price updates to occur within the same physical silicon. This eliminates the bidirectional communication delays between market makers and exchanges in traditional systems, as all operations happen internally on the same hardware.

QWhat are the current challenges faced by PropAMM in ensuring best execution for takers?

AThe main challenges are that PropAMM algorithms are not publicly disclosed (similar to traditional market makers), and trading routing across multiple PropAMMs is non-deterministic, making it difficult to guarantee the best execution for takers automatically.

QWhich Solana upgrades are expected to enhance PropAMM performance in the future?

AKey Solana upgrades include higher CU limits per transaction, larger transaction sizes, increased CU per block, Alpenglow (reducing slot time to 100-150ms), DoubleZero (reducing global network latency), application-controlled execution, and multiple concurrent leaders.

QHow has PropAMM already demonstrated its effectiveness on Solana's mainnet?

APropAMM has become the dominant mechanism for SOL-USDC spot quotes on Solana, offering narrower spreads than all major centralized exchanges (CEXs), showcasing its efficiency and potential to lead on-chain trading in spots, perpetuals, and prediction markets.

Похожее

50 Million USDT for 35,000 USD worth of AAVE: How Did the Disaster Happen? And Who Should We Blame?

In a catastrophic DeFi transaction, a user swapped 50.43 million aEthUSDT (Aave interest-bearing USDT) for only 327.24 aEthAAVE (worth ~$35,900), resulting in a near-total loss of value. The transaction was a collateral swap executed via CoW Protocol’s settlement system and Aave’s interface. The failure occurred due to a deeply flawed routing path: after redeeming USDT from Aave, the funds were routed through a highly liquid Uniswap V3 USDT/WETH pool (correctly executing the first swap). However, the entire amount of ~17,958 WETH was then sent to a tiny SushiSwap V2 AAVE/WETH pool with only ~331 AAVE and ~17.65 WETH in reserves. The massive trade drained 99.9% of the pool's AAVE, resulting in an effective execution price of ~$154,114 per AAVE—over 1000x worse than market price. Critical systemic failures were identified: 1. Aave’s interface requested a CoW quote without including critical hook metadata, leading to an inaccurate quote. 2. CoW’s solver competition logic deemed any quote with non-zero output and positive gas cost as "valid," with no sanity checks against market price or liquidity depth. 3. The routing algorithm modeled the tiny SushiSwap pool as a valid execution venue purely based on its constant-product formula, ignoring the economic absurdity. 4. Aave’s UI only provided a soft warning (a checkbox) for high price impact instead of a hard stop. The lost value was instantly arbitraged in the next block, benefiting MEV searchers and block builders. The core protocols (Aave, CoW Settlement, Uniswap, SushiSwap) functioned as coded. The primary blame lies with CoW’s inadequate routing quality controls and Aave’s flawed interface quote generation and weak risk safeguards.

Odaily星球日报17 мин. назад

50 Million USDT for 35,000 USD worth of AAVE: How Did the Disaster Happen? And Who Should We Blame?

Odaily星球日报17 мин. назад

Lobsters Not Yet Grown, Giants Already Casting Nets: OpenClaw Ecosystem Faces Enclosure Crisis

The article discusses the controversy surrounding Chinese tech giant Tencent's launch of SkillHub, a localized platform for the OpenClaw ecosystem. OpenClaw founder Peter Steinberger publicly accused Tencent of copying the project without providing support, specifically criticizing its impact on official download statistics. Tencent responded that SkillHub is a mirror site designed to serve Chinese users, citing reduced bandwidth strain on the official source and offering sponsorship. Steinberger countered that the core issue was not technical but a lack of prior communication and the risk of Tencent controlling user access and data. The author argues that the incident reflects a broader pattern of major Chinese tech companies exploiting open-source ecosystems for market dominance. While mirror sites are common in China, Tencent’s move is seen as an attempt to capture the user entry point and potential future commercialization of the Agent-based AI ecosystem represented by OpenClaw. The article warns that such platforms, under the guise of localization and convenience, may eventually lead to walled gardens where Tencent controls distribution, visibility, and monetization—echoing past strategies in sectors like ride-hailing and short-video platforms. The piece concludes that OpenClaw’s open, community-driven vision is at risk of being co-opted by corporate interests before it fully matures.

比推33 мин. назад

Lobsters Not Yet Grown, Giants Already Casting Nets: OpenClaw Ecosystem Faces Enclosure Crisis

比推33 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片