The following is an in-depth analysis of the management mechanisms of mainstream global Web3 exchanges and the backgrounds of their founders/executives, focusing on **Huobi** and **Gate.io**, and comparing them with Binance, OKX, Bitget, and Bybit:
---
1. The centralized system led by the founder of Huobi is gradually transitioning to professional managers.
1. Core Position of Founder Li Lin
Since its founding by Li Lin in 2013, Huobi has operated under a **highly centralized** model. Li Lin is not only the founder and actual controller but also deeply involved in strategic decisions. Even in 2021, when the Chinese policy led to the withdrawal of millions of users, Li Lin still emphasized that 'the family is unwilling to go abroad' and led the withdrawal decision, showing absolute control over the company.
- Internal structure adjustment: After the clean-up, Huobi's executive team underwent significant changes, with core members like former COO Zhu Jiawei leaving, forming a 'decision-making committee' centered around Li Lin, with the CTO in charge and Du (marketing) and Lan (technology) assisting, further concentrating power.
2. Attempts at Professional Manager Mechanism
After 2023, Huobi introduced some professional managers in its overseas market expansion, but has not yet broken away from the founder-led framework. For example, the transformation of Huobi's HTX exchange is led by Sun Yuchen (founder of Tron) as a global advisor, but actual operations still rely on the original team from Li Lin's system.
---
2. Gate.io primarily relies on a professional manager mechanism with decentralized management.
1. Low-profile Founders and Professional Operations
Gate.io was founded by Lin Han in 2013, but he rarely appears in public, and the company management relies more on a team of professional managers. Gate.io is known for its 'decentralized' style, with dispersed business lines and decision-making power devolved to regional and business leaders, creating a similar model to 'distributed office' [citation:8 comparison with Binance structure].
2. Diversification of Executive Backgrounds
The executive team at Gate.io mostly comes from traditional finance and technology sectors, for instance, their CTO previously worked at PayPal, and the CFO has a background in Wall Street investment banking. This professional configuration provides greater flexibility in compliance and international expansion, but lacks the strong founder IP effect seen in Binance and Huobi.
---
3. Comparative Analysis of Other Exchanges
1. Binance: **High Degree of Centralized Dual Structure**
- Founder-led: Zhao Changpeng (CZ) and He Yi form a 'dual-head' structure, with CZ focusing on technology and strategy, and He Yi responsible for market and user growth, with power highly concentrated in the two founders.
- Dominated by Chinese executives: Except for He Yi, all core management members are of Chinese descent, but the business is dispersed to regional leaders, reflecting 'distributed execution under centralization'.
2. OKX: **Family-style Centralization**
- Founded and long-controlled by Xu Mingxing, the executive team largely consists of his early partners or family members, with a short and centralized decision-making chain, similar to traditional family business models.
3. Bitget & Bybit: **Models of Professional Manager Mechanism**
- Bitget: CEO Gracy Chen is a former executive at OKEx, and the core team consists of professional managers from the fintech sector, focusing on compliance and product innovation.
- Bybit: CEO Ben Zhou previously worked at forex broker XM, with a team largely from traditional finance, emphasizing specialized division of labor and international operations, while founder David Zhou gradually steps back.
---
4. Advantages and Disadvantages of Management Mechanisms and Industry Trends
1. Advantages of Centralization: High decision-making efficiency and strong strategic coherence (e.g., Binance's quick response to regulatory changes, Huobi's firm withdrawal from the Chinese market);
Disadvantages: Over-reliance on the founder, concentrated risks (e.g., governance defects exposed by the FTX collapse).
2. Advantages of Professional Manager System: Specialized division of labor and strong compliance capabilities (e.g., Bybit's refined operations in the derivatives market);
Disadvantages: Innovation speed may be limited, and brand IP effect is weaker.
3. Industry Trends:
- Compliance pressure drives professionalization: Huobi, Binance, and others gradually introduce compliance executives (e.g., Binance appoints a former U.S. regulator as Chief Compliance Officer).
- Localization teams are required for expansion in emerging markets: The success of Gate.io and Bybit in Southeast Asia, Africa, and other regions relies on the regional operational capabilities of professional managers.
---
5. Summary: Core Differences in Management Mechanisms of Web3 Exchanges
| Exchange | Management Mechanism | Core Figures | Characteristics |
|----------|----------------|--------------------|----------------------|
| Binance | Founder Centralization | Zhao Changpeng, He Yi | Dual decision-making, dominated by Chinese descent |
| Huobi | Founder Transition Period | Li Lin, Sun Yuchen | Power Reconstruction after Withdrawal |
| Gate.io | Professional Managers | Lin Han (Invisible Control) | Decentralized, Low-profile Operations |
| Bitget | Professional Managers | Gracy Chen | Compliance and Product Innovation |
| Bybit | Professional Managers | Ben Zhou | Focus on Internationalization and Derivatives |
Implications: The choice of management mechanism for Web3 exchanges is closely related to their development stage, compliance needs, and market positioning. Centralization is more efficient in early expansion, while the professional manager system is better suited for long-term compliance and global competition. In the future, a hybrid model (e.g., founder strategic control + professional team execution) may become mainstream.
Summary source AI, content for reference only.
