Zcash
ZECPrivacy-focused cryptocurrency using zk-SNARKs. Proof-of-Work (Equihash) with dev fund from block rewards.
Last updated: Jan 11, 2026
0.4 × Chain + 0.4 × Control + 0.2 × Fairness
Chain Score
Technical and economic decentralization of the chain
Control Score
Power and control structures around the protocol
Fairness Score
Launch, distribution, and governance fairness
Notes
- *GOVERNANCE CRISIS (January 2026): ECC's entire core development team resigned on January 7, 2026, citing "constructive discharge" by the Bootstrap board. Within 24 hours, they announced cashZ - a privatized wallet built on the Zashi codebase developed with nonprofit funds. This validates the SPOF risk: the "two orgs" redundancy collapsed when one left.
- *TRUSTED SETUP (HISTORICAL): Zcash's original zk-SNARKs (Sprout/Sapling, 2016-2018) required a ceremony where 6 participants (including Snowden as "John Dobbertin") supposedly destroyed key fragments. Zooko admitted: "There is no way we can actually prove we did what we said." The NU5 upgrade (May 2022) introduced Orchard with Halo 2, eliminating trusted setup for new shielded pools - but the historical Sprout/Sapling period remains unverifiable.
- *UNVERIFIABLE SUPPLY (CVE-2019-7167): A critical bug in the BCTV14 zk-SNARK construction (2016-2018) allowed unlimited counterfeit ZEC creation. Four insiders secretly fixed it in the Sapling upgrade (Oct 2018). Due to privacy features, exploitation cannot be proven or disproven - the supply integrity is permanently unverifiable.
Chain Score
Technical/economic decentralization
Nakamoto Coefficient
Number of independent entities that would need to collude to compromise the system. Higher is better.
tap to expandValidator/Miner Concentration
Share of top 5 validators/miners in stake/hashrate. Lower concentration is better.
tap to expandClient Independence
Number of independently developed full-node implementations. Measures resilience against single-codebase bugs and single-entity control.
tap to expandNode Geography & Hosting
Geographic distribution of nodes and cloud hosting concentration. Lower cloud % is better.
tap to expandFull Node Decentralization
Number of independent full nodes validating the chain. More nodes = harder to attack, better censorship resistance. For PoW chains, this is separate from miners. For PoS, validators often = nodes.
tap to expandControl Score
Power and control structures
Corporate/Foundation Capture
Is there a dominant company/foundation controlling roadmap, marketing, and hiring? Can the project survive without them?
tap to expandRepo/Protocol Ownership
Distribution of merge rights in core repositories (clients, specs). More distributed is better.
tap to expandBrand & Frontend Control
Who owns brand, domains, main frontends, official wallets/apps? Decentralized ownership is better.
tap to expandTreasury & Upgrade Keys
Composition of treasury/upgrade multisigs and admin keys. More independent signers is better.
tap to expandAdmin Halt Capability
Can a single entity or small group unilaterally halt, freeze, or censor the chain? This is a critical centralization risk.
tap to expandProtocol Immutability
Has the protocol made fundamental rule changes (consensus mechanism, monetary policy, contentious forks)? Immutable rules are a core property of decentralization.
tap to expandFairness Score
Launch and distribution fairness
Launch Fairness / Premine
Team/VC/Foundation premine and launch model (fair launch vs. sale/IDO). Less premine is better.
tap to expandToken Concentration
Share of circulating supply held by insiders (team/VC/foundation). Less concentration is better.
tap to expandGovernance Control
Share of governance voting power held by insiders. 100% = no token governance (team decides everything). Less insider control is better.
tap to expand