Andre Cronje Says “DeFi” Is Gone, On-Chain Finance Now

Andre Cronje, founder of DeFi platform Flying Tulip and creator of the Fantom Network, says “most” decentralized finance no longer fits the strict definition of DeFi. Speaking during Cointelegraph’s Chain Reaction X Spaces event on Thursday, Cronje argued that true DeFi should be decentralized, immutable, and free of intermediaries—conditions he believes many major protocols no longer meet. His comments come as industry-wide concerns about concentration in DeFi governance and real-world controls continue to grow, alongside data showing DeFi activity has cooled substantially over the past year. According to DefiLlama, total value locked (TVL) in DeFi has fallen to about $75 billion, down from roughly $167 billion in early October 2025—more than a 50% decline. Key takeaways Andre Cronje argues that most current DeFi relies on intermediaries and decision-makers, undermining the “true DeFi” model. Cronje frames the shift as movement toward “onchain finance or open finance,” rather than the original DeFi ethos. DefiLlama data cited in the discussion shows DeFi TVL has more than halved over the past 10 months, reflecting weaker momentum. European Central Bank analysis has questioned DAO decentralization, suggesting top governance token holders control large shares of supply. The debate is increasingly about whether emergency controls, governance concentration, and protocol dependencies should keep DeFi outside regulation. From decentralized finance to “open finance” Cronje’s central claim is that DeFi has drifted away from its original design principles. In his view, many protocols that present themselves as decentralized now include centralized elements in practice—such as companies or other entities functioning as decision-makers, curators, or risk-management bodies. “We’ve long since moved on from [DeFi]. Because your intermediary now is a company, it’s a decision maker, it’s a curator, it’s a risk committee, it’s all the traditional kind of things we saw in banking.” That framing matters because it shifts the discussion away from user interfaces and token-based governance, toward the actual mechanisms that control execution and risk. When “decentralization” is defined as the absence of discretionary intermediaries, the question becomes whether today’s DeFi protocols are merely automated fronts for off-chain power—or truly credibly minimized in terms of who can intervene. Cronje also stopped short of saying the concept of true DeFi is dead. He argued that some protocols still show genuine innovation consistent with his definition, even if the broader ecosystem has moved toward a different model. Why the industry is arguing about circuit breakers and controls The critique is not new for Cronje. Earlier this year, he said much of DeFi is “no longer DeFi” in the strict sense while builders debate whether circuit breakers and other emergency measures are now necessary to protect users from exploits. Those controls can improve safety, but they also introduce practical questions: Who can trigger them? How discretionary are they?