The introduction of credit ratings in DeFi like what S&P Global did for Sky really puts the community at a crossroads:
Pros for adoption and trust:
The threshold for institutional investors is lowered. Banks, funds, and insurance companies are used to working with ratings like B- or AA+. For them, having such a metric in DeFi is a comprehensible "language of risk."
Liquidity and capital inflow. If large players start entering protocols with official ratings, DeFi will see more liquidity, which could enhance resilience.
Standardization. The presence of ratings may push for the emergence of industry standards for assessment, which will reduce instances of "opaque" or questionable protocols.
Risks to decentralization:
Centralization of trust. A rating from S&P is an assessment from one authoritative but centralized body. This can create "points of influence" and a hierarchy of trust, which contradicts the philosophy of DeFi.
Shift in focus. Protocols may start to "optimize for ratings" rather than for actual resilience and transparency of smart contracts.
Dependence on external regulators. If credit rating agencies become an important filter, DeFi will gradually find itself in the TradFi logic, where rules are dictated by centralized players.
Likely scenario:
In the coming years, we may see hybrid DeFi — some protocols will remain "purely decentralized" and will focus on the crypto-native community, while another part will create "regulator-friendly" versions with ratings, audits, and compliance to attract institutional investors.
It's like the emergence of stablecoins: there is USDC with full KYC and banking reports, and there is DAI, which is fully decentralized. Both models exist in parallel, serving different audiences.