Large technology companies including Coinbase, Stripe, and Kraken are tightening control over decentralized finance by bringing key infrastructure in-house, redirecting revenue that once flowed to open-source protocols into their own ecosystems.
The shift centers on owning core systems such as blockchains, stablecoins, and trading infrastructure, allowing firms to capture fees across the full transaction lifecycle rather than sharing earnings with external providers.
Coinbase captures sequencing fees through Base
Coinbase’s launch of its layer-two blockchain, Base, has significantly increased its control over transaction revenue. The move redirected roughly $150 million in sequencing fees during 2024 and 2025 that had previously been shared with Optimism.
The platform reported $76 million in net sequencing fee income in 2024 and $74 million in 2025. By early 2026, Coinbase retained the remaining $64 million in fees after transitioning to a fully independent architecture, eliminating external revenue splits.
Despite this vertical integration, dependencies remain. Morpho, a lending protocol integrated into Coinbase’s offerings, continues to hold more than $2.5 billion in total value locked on Base. Each transaction still channels a portion of profits back to Coinbase.
Morpho also plays a central role in Coinbase’s $300 million Bitcoin-backed lending program. Its cbBTC token represents 38% of total collateral on the platform, making separation between the firms operationally difficult.
Stripe and Kraken expand control through acquisitions
Stripe followed a similar path in 2025 by acquiring Bridge for $1.1 billion, enabling the launch of its own stablecoin, USDB, backed by BlackRock money market funds. Before the acquisition, reserve yields benefited Circle. Afterward, those returns—estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars annually—remained within Stripe’s ecosystem.
The payments company processes approximately $1.4 trillion in annual volume, giving it substantial scale to monetize reserve-backed assets internally.
Kraken also accelerated its expansion through acquisition, purchasing NinjaTrader for $1.5 billion in early 2025. The deal provided access to 1.7 million funded accounts and a full set of U.S. regulatory licenses, including CFTC and NFA approvals, enabling immediate entry into the derivatives market without reliance on third-party compliance providers.
Single-chain protocols face higher risk
Market data shows that protocols limited to a single blockchain are more exposed to competition from platform-native applications. Aerodrome, the primary decentralized exchange on Base, captured 51% of trading volume and reached a peak share of 77% in September 2024, surpassing Uniswap’s 30% share on that network.
However, Uniswap maintained resilience through diversification, processing $212 billion in volume on Base in 2025 while averaging $73 billion in monthly transactions across 44 chains.
Morpho shows a similar pattern. Its total value locked reached $6.4 billion, with $3.3 billion on Ethereum and $2.5 billion on Base. Even if removed from Coinbase’s ecosystem, the protocol would likely retain a majority of its assets through operations on other networks including Hyperliquid L1, Monad, and Arbitrum.
Infrastructure control shapes market power
Control over foundational infrastructure is emerging as the key determinant of bargaining power in the sector. Companies that operate both user-facing platforms and backend systems can dictate terms for protocols built on top of them, shaping fee structures and market access.
This model reflects earlier trends in traditional technology, where firms like Amazon and Apple gained leverage by integrating across infrastructure and consumer layers.
Transparency and consolidation trends
Unlike traditional finance, on-chain data makes the redistribution of profits visible in real time, highlighting how revenue is shifting from open protocols to centralized platforms.
Analysts indicate this trend could lead to increased concentration of influence among a small number of large payment processors and exchanges that control both infrastructure and user access.
Protocols adapt to maintain relevance
Despite consolidation pressures, some decentralized protocols remain difficult to replace due to the high cost and risk of rebuilding secure, audited systems. Coinbase continues to rely on Morpho’s infrastructure for lending rather than developing an in-house alternative.
Multi-chain deployment has emerged as a key survival strategy, allowing protocols to reduce dependence on any single platform. Uniswap’s ability to offset lost dominance on Base with activity across other networks illustrates this approach.
Even traditional trading platforms are opting to integrate rather than build. Robinhood, for example, adopted the layer-two perpetual trading protocol Lighter, investing $68 million instead of developing its own system.
Outlook remains uncertain
The evolving balance between corporate consolidation and decentralized flexibility continues to shape the future of financial infrastructure. While large firms are gaining greater control through vertical integration, open-source protocols retain relevance through interoperability and distribution.
The long-term outcome remains unclear, as both models continue to compete for dominance in a rapidly changing market.
Explore how TradFi and DeFi intersect in 2026—read TradFi vs DeFi for deeper context on this power shift.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
