HomeServicesCompanyInsightsCareersContactE-Banking
IntroductionWhy is Ethereum moving to proof-of-stake?Enter SerenitySensitivity analysis of Ethereum 2.0 rewardsEffect of Ethereum’s shift on the mining ecosystemConclusion
Thursday, 6 February, 2020
The Digital Investor

Ethereum 2.0: Where the rubber meets the road

Abstract

In this issue of the Digital Investor, we focus on Ethereum – the second largest blockchain by market capitalisation. It is set to transition from a proof-of-work (PoW) to a proof-of-stake (PoS) consensus algorithm in order to improve its throughput and position itself as a global platform for smart contracts and decentralized applications.

This transition will be a long journey. Transitioning from PoW to PoS is a task similar to switching the engine of a car from combustion to electric while driving it! We explore here the way this transition is set to take place.

PoS has advantages and drawbacks. For investors, the transition is important as it offers the option of staking, i.e. the possibility to earn a yield, which is an attractive value proposition in the current environment of low interest rates and low yieldlow interest rates and low yieldlink1.

To help navigate in this new world, we provide a detailed yield analysis of the different monetary policy conditions that will prevail once the Ethereum PoS transition is completed.

Introduction

While both Ethereum and bitcoin currently run on PoW, they are different.Bitcoin was developed with a single purpose of becoming a decentralised form of money that cannot be manipulated by any single centralised authority. Ethereum builds on the idea of decentralization; it is an open-source platform for creating decentralised applications for any purpose.

Before diving deeper into Ethereum’s migration to PoS, we take a look at its history and how it has evolved.

For an introduction to PoW and PoS, we invite readers to read Mining: the essence of proof-of-workMining: the essence of proof-of-worklink1 and Proof-of-stake: have skin in the gameProof-of-stake: have skin in the gamelink1.

Why is Ethereum moving to proof-of-stake?

Building new and more complex structures using old tools may lead to limitations. A platform for hosting applications needs to be scalable, and Ethereum suffered congestion when a game called CryptoKitties became famous. This event severely underscored the need for Ethereum to scale.

One of the major concerns about the PoW network is their rising energy requirements to maintain network security. This is not a practical approach for a system that intends to be a global smart-contract1 platform for applications, because such a contract needs to have high throughput while maintaining security. Ethereum founder Vitalik ButerinVitalik Buterinlink1 and other key network developers detected this problem and asserted that PoS is a viable alternative to these problems.

The current state

The concept of Ethereum was first introduced in 2014 followed by a 42-day presale which raised about 31,000 bitcoins. Since then, Ethereum has come a long way as a platform within the digital assets ecosystem. In figure 1 we list the major network upgrades that Ethereum undertook and can see what exactly they were aiming towards.

Figure 1: Timeline of Ethereum upgrades

Source: Ethereum blog, SEBA Research

After Frontier – the genesis block for Ethereum – the development team rolled out two updates, namely Frontier Thawing and Homestead, which helped set up operational parameters for Ethereum’s network.

Later, a decentralised autonomous organisation project called The DAO was created through a crowdfunding campaign on the Ethereum network. The DAO was able to raise USD 150 million. The following month, The DAO suffered a major hack that drained almost one-third of the funds. To retrieve the lost investor funds, the DAO Fork was implemented. This proved a controversial move as it resulted in rolling back the chain. The chain which implemented the fund restoration is known as Ethereum (ETH), while the original unforked blockchain was maintained as Ethereum Classic (ETC).

Following the DAO Fork, the Ethereum network suffered multiple instances of denial of service attacks (DoS attack), where the attackers dumped millions of useless transactions into the network to flood the system. This required the Ethereum developers to implement two-fold hard forks, namely Tangerine Whistle and Spurious Dragon. These hard forks resolved the issues that led to the DoS attack.

To incentivise miners to move from a PoW to a PoS-based Ethereum network, a difficulty bomb was created. It is intended to make mining on the Ethereum network exponentially difficult and less profitable over time. Over the next three years, the Ethereum network entered the Metropolis Phase and implemented Byzantium, Constantinople, Istanbul and Muir Glacier upgrades, which systematically worked towards the following:

  1. Updating the network to increase efficiency
  2. Implementing security fixes
  3. Paving the way for migration from PoW to PoS
  4. Managing difficulty bomb according to expected time for the next update

Figure 2 illustrates all the updates that have been undertaken. The DAO hardfork, Tangerine Whistle and Muir Glacier were done as part of an unplanned or emergency fork to deal with immediate network threats. The Metropolis Phase is currently underway, with Berlin as its next update.

Figure 2: Past Ethereum upgrades

Source: Ethereum blog, SEBA Research

The road to serenity (what lies ahead)

Serenity (also known as Ethereum 2.0) is the last stage of Ethereum’s migration from a PoW to PoS-based consensus. Serenity is further broken down into smaller phases, as illustrated in figure 3.

Figure 3: Forthcoming Ethereum network upgrades

Source: Ethereum blog, SEBA Research

Enter Serenity

Serenity is the fully-fledged PoS implementation of Ethereum. It has a significant impact on the circulating supply of Ether, the native crypto-currency, and the existing economics of Ether (ETH).

Impact of Serenity on the circulating supply and inflation

The issuance mechanism of Serenity depends on the total ETH at stake. The supply issuance is decided in a manner that at a steady state, the annual inflation will settle below 1% per annum (figure 4).

Figure 4: ETH supply with and without Serenity

Source: SEBA Research and Ethereum blog

Serenity economics

If one wishes to be a validator, the following variables need to be considered:

  • Total ETH at stake
  • Total number of validators
  • Average number of uptime2 (of all the validators as well as the of the individual validator)
  • Different slashing3 conditions
  • Network fees
  • Hardware and other costs such as Internet, electricity for running the software, etc.

The economics relating to Ethereum 2.0 (Serenity) can be broadly categorised into two major categories, namely punishments (slashing conditions) and incentives (validator rewards).

Slashing conditions

The most common scenarios under which a validator’s stake is slashed are: misbehaviour and being offline

  1. Misbehaviour: The network design forgives honest mistakes but severely punishes coordinated attacks. In case the validator behaves maliciously (for example, signs invalid transactions) the minimum amount slashed will be 1 ETH. However, if more validators behave maliciously at the same time, it may lead to the slashing of the entire stake.
  2. Offline: A similar pattern follows when the validators are offline. If a validator is offline, when more than two-thirds of the network is online, it leads to a small penalty. However, if a validator is offline when more than one third of the network is offline, inactivity leak4 kicks in with harsher penalties. Validators may lose up to 50% of their stake in this case.

Validator rewards

As with the current PoW design, rewards can be broadly divided into two parts: transaction fees and base rewards. While transaction fees are similar to fees paid by the users on the network, base rewards are analogous to miner rewards in the PoW design. However, the difference is that with Serenity, the reward model moves away from the fixed reward model to a variable issuance model. The transaction fee component remains the same, but the base reward varies depending on the total ETH at stake and the base reward factor – a sensitivity factor – set at a default value of 64.

Validators will not be able to earn transaction fees until phase 2 of Serenity is launched. Until then, validators must rely on rewards other than fees.

In general, the Ethereum 2.0 validator reward design philosophy stems from four major drivers:

1. Total ETH at stake

Keeping the demand supply in mind, the more ETH is at stake, the lowerthe net average validator return5 on staking will be, as illustrated in figure 5.

Figure 5: Validator rewards decrease as total number of ETH at stake increases

Source: SEBA Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

2. Base rewards factorBase rewards factorlink1

Base rewards serve as an incentive for the validators to propose and attest blocks on the Ethereum network. Base rewards are inversely proportional to the total ETH at stake and directly proportional to base rewards factor6. As the base reward factor increases, the expected reward also increases. The base reward factor is decided in a manner that allows yearly issuance to be controlled. At a constant number of ETH staked as the base rewards factor (BRF) increase, the expected returns increases, as shown in figure 6.

Figure 6: As the base reward factor increases, the net validator reward increases at a constant number of ETH at stake

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

3. Average up time of the network

The rewards and penalties are designed in a manner to incentivise validators to remain online for the maximum amount of time (figure 7).

Figure 7: As the % of up time increases, the validator issuance increases

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

4. Incentivising decentralisation

Validator rewards are designed in a manner to ensure that economies of scale are only marginal (figure 8). This is key for maintaining a decentralised system. A significant component of staking costs is the actual cost to acquire Ether which does not scale. Therefore, cloud staking services cannot reap the benefits of scale beyond a certain point. It will ensure that small scale validators are kept in the game all the time.

Figure 8: Economies of scale kick in only up to a certain extent

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

Why does the right balance of incentives matter so much for the network? Because the number of validators determines the number of shards7, which in turn determines the success of the network. Therefore, if the incentive is too low, the minimum number of validators needed to keep the desired number of shards will not be met. If the incentive is too high, the network will be overpaying for the security as it will inflate at a rate that is detrimental to the network.

Sensitivity analysis of Ethereum 2.0 rewards

There are multiple factors that decide what the validator rewards will be. We analysed how these factors affect the network incentives by taking two factors at a time and keeping the rest of the parameters fixed. We used the Eth2 calculatorEth2 calculatorlink1 developed by Consensys and the Ethereum foundation to analyse various scenarios along the following equation:

Net validator issuance = Validator rewards + Transaction fees8 – Costs to run validators

Validator rewards depend on the factors mentioned earlier, and the cost to run a validator depends on whether the validator chooses a cloud-based set-up9 or a hardware set-up10. The first solution is ideal for an investor who does not have the technical knowledge to run a validator themselves. Validators cannot increasingly benefit from economies of scale as the price of Ether is a dominant factor. As the number of validators increase, the cost needed to acquire the corresponding number of ETH catches up and therefore makes it difficult to obtain an advantage with scale.

Phase 0

At phase 0, there are no transactions. Therefore, transaction fees = 0 by default. Two types of analyses can be carried out here for average or at-home validators and for the cloud-based model.

1. At-home validators

Let’s take the example of a validator staking at home. Imagine that he has a 5-million ETH at stake, that the base reward factor is set at 64 ( the default value), and he will earn a yield of 4% according to our estimates.

Figure 9 – Net validator yield: as the base reward factor increases, the validator’s net yield increases

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

2. Cloud model

In a similar way to the at-home model, the net yield increases with the base reward factor in the cloud model. The home model provides superior yields as the validator pays for the service the cloud model offers.

Figure 10: Net validator yield: similar to at-home model, the net yield increases with the base reward factor

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

Beyond phase 0

Beyond phase 0, as the beacon chain (the name of the blockchain running on PoS) is established and the network is ready for transactions, the transaction fees kick in. For most of the scenarios, we have assumed the total ETH at stake is 10,000,000, as it is an assumption across most of the discussions.

We look at three different pairs for an average validator and cloud model, which are relevant for this analysis. Note that to perform this analysis, we need to consider a proposer fee (i.e. how much the validators will receive by the users to validate the transactions), a daily burn rate due to slashing11 and the price of ETH in USD (the yield is estimated in USD).

1. For an average home validator

Figure 11: Net validator yield based on total number of ETH staked and the base reward factor for an average validator

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

Figure 12: Net validator yield based on total number of ETH staked and the proposer fee per day for an average validator

Source: Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

Figure 13: Net validator yield based on ETH price and the proposer fee per day for an average validator

Source: SEBA Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

2. For the cloud model

Figure 14: Net validator issuance yield based on total number of ETH staked and the base reward factor for the cloud model

Source: SEBA Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

Figure 15 - Net validator yield based on total number of ETH staked and the proposer fee per day for the cloud model

Source: SEBA Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

Figure 16: Net validator yield based on ETH price and the proposer fee per day for the cloud model

Source: SEBA Research and Ethereum calculator (by Ethereum foundation and Consensys, /r/Ethereum)

In an optimistic scenario where the price of ETH is around USD 1,500 and the proposer network fee is approximately 400 ETH per day, the net annual yield will be between 5% and 6%. BlockFi currently offers 3.6% on Ethereum interest accounts. The majority of the scenarios do not bode well for stakers beyond phase 0.

At phase 0, if the total ETH staked is between 2 million and 3 million, the validators will make a comfortable 6% to 8% yield. There is reason to believe that after phase 0 the validators may be able to deploy their ETH elsewhere so as to generate more returns.

For now, the response seems to be enthusiastic. In the current Ethereum 2.0 testnet12, about 70,000 ETH are locked. This is encouraging because the phase 0 launch is a few months away and validators seem to be keen on staking, at least in phase 0.

With new ways of earning interest emerging, such as DeFi and interest-bearing accounts, including BlockFi and Celsius, we believe that the Eth 2.0 network incentives need to be improved in order to increase the stickiness of validators as we move beyond phase 0.

Effect of Ethereum’s shift on the mining ecosystem

As Ethereum moves to PoS, the existing hash rate will no longer be usable on the network. In this case, we believe Zcash and Ethereum Classic will be the biggest beneficiaries as far as the hash rate is concerned. Though it is difficult to say how much hash rate gets divided between these two, given the fact that Ethereum Classic’s existing hash rate is just about one tenth of that of Ethereum, even a small percentage of Ethereum’s hash rate will give a significant boost to the Ethereum classic network.

Conclusion

The testnet participation of validators bodes well for Ethereum in the short term. However, the presence of better and certain alternatives require improvements in the network economics for validators in the long term. As the Ethereum 2.0 specification is still in the development phase, we believe an adjustment to the base reward factor to ensure validators are compensated enough is a good way to begin beyond phase 0 of Serenity.

From an investment point of view, the PoS staking incentive mechanism offers a new way of generating a yield. According to our analysis, the annualised yield should start at about 6-8% at the beginning of phase 0 and decline gradually as more validators become involved. Ultimately, we expect it to stabilise at about 1-2% per annum in the last phase of development.


1A smart contract is contract that executes itself once the trigger conditions are met.
2Uptime refers to percentage time for which the validator is online.
3Slashing refers to punishments for different offences on the network.
4When more than one third of the network is offline, blocks are not finalised (i.e. the network comes to a standstill). Therefore, to ensure that the network is functioning all the time, harsher penalties are imposed.
5The validator return is net of all the costs they incur, such as hardware, electricity, etc.
6The base reward factor is currently fixed at 64 according to the latest Ethereum 2.0 spec.
7Sharding is a technique used to break the Ethereum network into small components to allow parallel processing to increase the throughput. A shard is one such small component of the network.
8Transaction fees will come into the picture when phase 2 of Serenity is launched.
9With virtual private server (VPS).
10Individual validators.
11Mechanism designed to punish misbehaviour.
12Current testnet requires validators to stake 3.2 ETH instead of 32. With the current 70,000 ETH, this potentially means 7000,000 ETH when the phase 0 begins.
Share:

Authors


Yves Longchamp
Head of Research
SEBA Bank AG
in
Saurabh Deshpande
Research Analyst
B&B Analytics Private Limited
in
Ujjwal Mehra
Research Analyst
B&B Analytics Private Limited
in
Download pdf
Disclaimer

research@seba.swiss

Disclaimer

This document has been prepared by SEBA Bank AG (“SEBA”) in Switzerland. SEBA is a Swiss bank and securities dealer with its head office and legal domicile in Switzerland. It is authorized and regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). This document is published solely for information purposes; it is not an advertisement nor is it a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any financial investment or to participate in any particular investment strategy. This document is for distribution only under such circumstances as may be permitted by applicable law. It is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in any locality, state, country or other jurisdiction where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation or would subject SEBA to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction.

No representation or warranty, either express or implied, is provided in relation to the accuracy, completeness or reliability of the information contained in this document, except with respect to information concerning SEBA. The information is not intended to be a complete statement or summary of the financial investments, markets or developments referred to in the document. SEBA does not undertake to update or keep current the information. Any statements contained in this document attributed to a third party represent SEBA's interpretation of the data, information and/or opinions provided by that third party either publicly or through a subscription service, and such use and interpretation have not been reviewed by the third party.

Any prices stated in this document are for information purposes only and do not represent valuations for individual investments. There is no representation that any transaction can or could have been effected at those prices, and any prices do not necessarily reflect SEBA’s internal books and records or theoretical model-based valuations and may be based on certain assumptions. Different assumptions by SEBA or any other source may yield substantially different results.

Nothing in this document constitutes a representation that any investment strategy or investment is suitable or appropriate to an investor’s individual circumstances or otherwise constitutes a personal recommendation. Investments involve risks, and investors should exercise prudence and their own judgment in making their investment decisions. Financial investments described in the document may not be eligible for sale in all jurisdictions or to certain categories of investors. Certain services and products are subject to legal restrictions and cannot be offered on an unrestricted basis to certain investors. Recipients are therefore asked to consult the restrictions relating to investments, products or services for further information. Furthermore, recipients may consult their legal/tax advisors should they require any clarifications. SEBA and any of its directors or employees may be entitled at any time to hold long or short positions in investments, carry out transactions involving relevant investments in the capacity of principal or agent, or provide any other services or have officers, who serve as directors, either to/for the issuer, the investment itself or to/for any company commercially or financially affiliated to such investment.

At any time, investment decisions (including whether to buy, sell or hold investments) made by SEBA and its employees may differ from or be contrary to the opinions expressed in SEBA research publications.

Some investments may not be readily realizable since the market is illiquid and therefore valuing the investment and identifying the risk to which you are exposed may be difficult to quantify. Investing in digital assets including cryptocurrencies as well as in futures and options is not suitable for every investor as there is a substantial risk of loss, and losses in excess of an initial investment may under certain circumstances occur. The value of any investment or income may go down as well as up, and investors may not get back the full amount invested. Past performance of an investment is no guarantee for its future performance. Additional information will be made available upon request. Some investments may be subject to sudden and large falls in value and on realization you may receive back less than you invested or may be required to pay more. Changes in foreign exchange rates may have an adverse effect on the price, value or income of an investment. Tax treatment depends on the individual circumstances and may be subject to change in the future.

SEBA does not provide legal or tax advice and makes no representations as to the tax treatment of assets or the investment returns thereon both in general or with reference to specific investor’s circumstances and needs. We are of necessity unable to take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situation and needs of individual investors and we would recommend that you take financial and/or tax advice as to the implications (including tax) prior to investing. Neither SEBA nor any of its directors, employees or agents accepts any liability for any loss (including investment loss) or damage arising out of the use of all or any of the Information provided in the document.

This document may not be reproduced or copies circulated without prior authority of SEBA. Unless otherwise agreed in writing SEBA expressly prohibits the distribution and transfer of this document to third parties for any reason. SEBA accepts no liability whatsoever for any claims or lawsuits from any third parties arising from the use or distribution of this document.

Research will initiate, update and cease coverage solely at the discretion of SEBA. The information contained in this document is based on numerous assumptions. Different assumptions could result in materially different results. SEBA may use research input provided by analysts employed by its affiliate B&B Analytics Private Limited, Mumbai. The analyst(s) responsible for the preparation of this document may interact with trading desk personnel, sales personnel and other parties for the purpose of gathering, applying and interpreting market information The compensation of the analyst who prepared this document is determined exclusively by SEBA.

Austria: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in Austria nor is SEBA supervised by the Austrian Financial Market Authority (Finanzmarktaufsicht), to which this document has not been submitted for approval. France: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in France nor is SEBA supervised by French banking and financial authorities. Italy: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in Italy nor is SEBA supervised by the Bank of Italy (Banca d’Italia) and the Italian Financial Markets Supervisory Authority (CONSOB - Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa), to which this document has not been submitted for approval. Germany: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in Germany nor is SEBA supervised by the German Federal Financial Services Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht), to which this document has not been submitted for approval. Hong-Kong: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in Hong-Kong nor is SEBA supervised by banking and financial authorities in Hong-Kong, to which this document has not been submitted for approval. This document is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in Hong-Kong where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation or would subject SEBA to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction. This document is under no circumstances directed to, or intended for distribution, publication to or use by, persons who are not “professional investors” within the meaning of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (Chapter 571 of the Laws of Hong Kong) and any rules made thereunder (the “SFO”). Netherlands: This publication has been produced by SEBA, which is not authorised to provide regulated services in the Netherlands. Portugal: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in Portugal nor is SEBA supervised by the Portuguese regulators Bank of Portugal “Banco de Portugal” and Portuguese Securities Exchange Commission “Comissao do Mercado de Valores Mobiliarios”. Singapore: SEBA is not licensed to conduct banking and financial activities in SIngapore nor is SEBA supervised by banking and financial authorities in Singapore, to which this document has not been submitted for approval. This document was provided to you as a result of a request received by SEBA from you and/or persons entitled to make the request on your behalf. Should you have received the document erroneously, SEBA asks that you kindly destroy/delete it and inform SEBA immediately. This document is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in Singapore where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation or would subject SEBA to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction. This document is under no circumstances directed to, or intended for distribution, publication to or use by, persons who are not accredited investors, expert investors or institutional investors as defined in section 4A of the Securities and Futures Act (Cap. 289 of Singapore) (“SFA”). UK: This document has been prepared by SEBA Bank AG (“SEBA”) in Switzerland. SEBA is a Swiss bank and securities dealer with its head office and legal domicile in Switzerland. It is authorized and regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). This document is for your information only and is not intended as an offer, or a solicitation of an offer, to buy or sell any investment or other specific product.

SEBA is not an authorised person for purposes of the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA), and accordingly, any information if deemed a financial promotion is provided only to persons in the UK reasonably believed to be of a kind to whom promotions may be communicated by an unauthorised person pursuant to an exemption under the FSMA (Financial Promotion) Order 2005 (the “FPO”). Such persons include: (a) persons having professional experience in matters relating to investments (“Investment Professionals”) and (b) high net worth bodies corporate, partnerships, unincorporated associations, trusts, etc. falling within Article 49 of the FPO (“High Net Worth Businesses”). High Net Worth Businesses include: (i) a corporation which has called-up share capital or net assets of at least £5 million or is a member of a group in which includes a company with called-up share capital or net assets of at least £5 million (but where the corporation has more than 20 shareholders or it is a subsidiary of a company with more than 20 shareholders, the £5 million share capital / net assets requirement is reduced to £500,000); (ii) a partnership or unincorporated association with net assets of at least £5 million and (iii) a trustee of a trust which has had gross assets (i.e. total assets held before deduction of any liabilities) of at least £10 million at any time within the year preceding the promotion. Any financial promotion information is available only to such persons, and persons of any other description in the UK may not rely on the information in it. Most of the protections provided by the UK regulatory system, and compensation under the UK Financial Services Compensation Scheme, will not be available.

© SEBA / Grafenauweg 6, 6300 Zug, Switzerland

Research

more
Research
CBDCs and asset tokenisation kick off digital regulation in 2020
13 February, 2020
Central bank digital currency (CBDC) and tokenisation are dominating regulatory discussions. A wholesale CBDC is likely to come into being in 2020. Widespread asset tokenisation would give rise to numerous regulatory issues, making advanced jurisdictions such as Switzerland particularly attractive.
Read more
Research
Outlook 2020
28 January, 2020
In this publication we underscore the importance and the current state of digital assets against the backdrop of looming uncertainty in traditional asset classes. In our market outlook, we take the risk to combine a macro view with trends in the digital asset industry.
Read more
Research
Proof-of-Stake: Have skin in the game
23 January, 2020
This edition of the Bridge focuses on staking, a process at the heart of the proof-of-stake consensus mechanism. If this notion is foreign to you, then this article is for you.
Read more

Join us as we redefine finance.

Contact us
seba

SEBA Bank AG
Kolinplatz 15
6300 Zug
Switzerland

ServicesCompanyNews & InsightsCareersContact
Contact us
© 2020 SEBA Bank AG