ARK, Glassnode Map Decentralization Spectrum for BTC, ETH, SOL

ARK Invest and Glassnode have published a new joint report titled The Decentralization Spectrum: Design Tradeoffs in Digital Assets, comparing Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and Solana (SOL) across four key design features—auditability, security, governance, and ownership. The report, released on September 1, 2026, highlights the nuanced tradeoffs that shape each network’s position along a decentralization continuum.

Rather than treating decentralization as a binary concept, the report quantifies these tradeoffs across six measurable dimensions, offering a data-driven perspective on where the three largest blockchain networks stand. This is particularly relevant for investors weighing the risks and benefits of different network architectures in an increasingly crowded digital asset space.

Decentralization as a Spectrum

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana represent distinct approaches to blockchain design, each making tradeoffs to prioritize specific goals. Bitcoin leads in auditability and ownership distribution, emphasizing monetary credibility and conservative governance. Ethereum balances decentralization with programmability, leveraging its proof-of-stake model to coordinate upgrades and scalability. Solana, meanwhile, trades decentralization for high performance, focusing on throughput and coordination speed.

One notable finding from the report is that Bitcoin and Ethereum’s critical control thresholds—defined as the number of entities required to collude to alter the ledger—are surprisingly low, at just three entities for each network. Solana, despite its relatively high infrastructure demands, requires 19 entities to achieve the same level of collusion due to its more distributed block production model.

Security and Block Production Concentration

Security metrics reveal stark contrasts in block production dynamics. For Bitcoin, a miner holding 1% of the network can exit their position in as little as 30 seconds by powering down hardware. In contrast, unstaking the equivalent capital in Ethereum’s proof-of-stake system can take several weeks under stress conditions. Solana’s reliance on data-center infrastructure introduces additional risks but offers greater resilience in terms of the number of validators required to compromise the ledger.

Geographically, Bitcoin boasts the most evenly distributed node infrastructure, with 63% of its nodes operating behind Tor. Ethereum, however, leans heavily on cloud providers, with Amazon Web Services (AWS) alone hosting approximately 20% of its nodes. Solana’s infrastructure is almost entirely concentrated in data centers—a design choice aimed at maximizing throughput but raising questions about centralization risks.

Scoring the Big Three

The report scores each network across six dimensions: ownership distribution, exit fluidity, network verification overhead, critical resilience threshold, blockchain reconstruction overhead, and geographic/provider resilience. While no network dominates every dimension, Bitcoin excels in auditability and geographic resilience. Ethereum strikes a middle ground, balancing programmability with decentralization, while Solana prioritizes performance, accepting tradeoffs in validator distribution and infrastructure decentralization.

For example, Bitcoin’s high score in ownership distribution reflects its widely dispersed token holdings, while Solana’s relatively low score highlights concentrated validator stakes. Ethereum’s proof-of-stake system achieves better coordination but introduces exit liquidity constraints relative to Bitcoin’s proof-of-work model.

Implications for Investors

As blockchain networks continue to evolve, understanding these tradeoffs is essential for investors and developers alike. Bitcoin’s emphasis on monetary sovereignty makes it ideal for long-term value storage, while Ethereum’s programmability supports a broad range of decentralized applications. Solana’s high throughput appeals to use cases requiring speed and scale, such as real-time payments or gaming applications.

ARK Invest and Glassnode’s collaboration builds on their history of data-driven crypto research, including ARK’s annual Big Ideas reports and Glassnode’s on-chain analytics expertise. For those seeking a deeper dive into the full methodology and scoring framework, the complete report is available on Glassnode’s research portal.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research before making any investment decisions.

Image source: Shutterstock