Most people vastly underestimate counterparty risk in crypto. There's a critical distinction that often gets glossed over: bearer assets versus non-bearer assets. A bearer asset means you hold it directly—no intermediary, no trust required. A non-bearer asset, by contrast, depends entirely on a third party. That's where the risk lives. You're not just betting on the asset itself; you're betting on the counterparty never failing, never disappearing, never being compromised. Big difference. Understanding this gap isn't academic—it shapes your entire custody and allocation strategy.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
9 Likes
Reward
9
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
CafeMinor
· 14h ago
Really, how many people are sleeping through their trades on the exchange, never considering the possibility of the other party going bankrupt.
View OriginalReply0
ETH_Maxi_Taxi
· 14h ago
Really, most people are completely unaware of this trap. Self-custody is the way to go; everything else is just gambling.
View OriginalReply0
Rugman_Walking
· 15h ago
Rough language, but the reasoning is sound: self-custody is truly the only way out
Most people vastly underestimate counterparty risk in crypto. There's a critical distinction that often gets glossed over: bearer assets versus non-bearer assets. A bearer asset means you hold it directly—no intermediary, no trust required. A non-bearer asset, by contrast, depends entirely on a third party. That's where the risk lives. You're not just betting on the asset itself; you're betting on the counterparty never failing, never disappearing, never being compromised. Big difference. Understanding this gap isn't academic—it shapes your entire custody and allocation strategy.