One year later: How proof of stake has changed Ethereum One year later: How proof of stake has changed Ethereum One year later: How proof of stake has changed Ethereum

One year later: How proof of stake has changed Ethereum

Mads Eberhardt

Cryptocurrency Analyst

Summary:  In September of last year, Ethereum replaced its proof of work consensus mechanism with proof of stake in a highly anticipated upgrade known as the merge. Since then, Ethereum has seen its circulating supply decrease by nearly 300,000 Ether, while consuming 99.95% less electricity. However, the network nears a potential point of no return that threatens its decentralization for years to come.

On September 15, 2022, Ethereum successfully changed its consensus mechanism by its transition away from proof of work to proof of stake. This transition was known as the merge. The latter was a goodbye to miners in verifying transactions but a welcome to stakers. Ethereum has now been running on proof of stake for about a year, so in this piece, we look back at tangible factors brought forward by the merge rather than describing the transition in detail. If you are interested in learning more about the transition, you can find a more in-depth analysis here, published a few months prior to the merge.

A financially sustainable cryptocurrency

During the proof of work era, Ethereum issued about 5.4mn new Ether yearly to reward miners for validating transactions. This is also known as the security cost, as it ensures sufficient security by a cost funded by inflation in the native cryptocurrency. To fund this security cost, Ethereum had a yearly inflation of about 3 - 4%. However, any cryptocurrency derives much greater security at a much lower cost by proof of stake compared to proof of work. This has allowed Ethereum to slash its yearly issuance to 816,000 Ether at the current staking ratio. As the latter is set to increase, Ethereum is likely to hit a yearly issuance of 1,000,000 Ether at some point, but that is still significantly below the pre-merge issuance of about 5.4mn yearly.

As the majority of Ether paid in transaction fees are burned, hence removed from the supply, Ethereum has seen a nearly 300,000 Ether reduction in its supply since the merge. This is in stark contrast to a supply increase of nearly 3.9mn Ether in the past year provided that the merge had not occurred. Not only has Ethereum been deflationary since the merge, but its issuance has also been rewarded to holders of Ether if staked rather than miners with no duty to hold Ether. This means that Ethereum has truly turned into a financially sustainable cryptocurrency, rewarding holders with a negative supply change, and staking rewards if they choose to stake. Barely any cryptocurrency can brag about this, particularly none even close to the size of Ethereum.

Energy consumption has been reduced by 99.95%

In proof of work, miners participated in a never-ending rivalry to be the ones to process a block. This rivalry was about computing a string below a target set by the network. The latter was computed using a mathematical function to mostly go through trial and error. This called for immense computational power, in Ethereum’s case, GPUs, using a great amount of electricity. Now, the network randomly chooses a validator every 12 seconds to process a block, so there are no battles for the blocks. The bottom line is that Ethereum has reduced its energy consumption by about 99.95%. This great reduction makes Ethereum much more appealing in a never-satisfied ESG world.

Another advantage of proof of stake is the consistency of 12-second blocks, so they do not fluctuate similar to during Ethereum’s proof of work era. This makes the network more predictable and easier to utilize for various protocols. The shift from average blocks of 13 seconds during proof of work to consistent 12-second blocks has also made Ethereum slightly more scalable, as block sizes have stayed the same.

Is Ethereum now more centralized?

This is a discussion largely beyond the scope of this piece; however, we will shortly touch upon the most critical considerations. Leaving the matter of decentralization aside for a second, Ethereum has certainly archived greater security by proof of stake. The network now reaches block finalization about 15 minutes after a block has been proposed. This is an extra layer of security not found in proof of work. It says that for a block to be altered or removed after reaching finalization at least 33% of the total staked Ether must be burned, effectively imposing a cost of at least $13bn for doing that. On top of that, the network can slash validators by burning some of their Ether in case they behave dishonestly or against the objectives of the network. In other words, by having collateral in something of great value from validators, in this case, Ether, the network can enforce much stricter rules for strong security.

Decentralization is another matter. This highly depends on who you ask. In our view, it is roughly the same as before the merge, as it is now. The challenge of the present staking distribution is that the largest staker is the liquid-staking provider Lido with around 32.5% network penetration, but still growing slowly. The Ether staked by Lido belongs to thousands of holders and is spread across 31 independent validators by smart contracts, so it is considerably better than if it was a single entity. The challenge, however, is that Lido may capture the consensus layer of Ethereum if it continues to grow, so the governance token of Lido suddenly decides much of the future of Ethereum. You had a somewhat similar situation during proof of work, as miners mingled their computational power to form so-called mining pools to enhance their chances of creating a block.

In both instances, the market operates with strong economies of scale. For mining pools, there are scale economies, as the capital flows to few but large mining pools to boost the chances of proposing a block. In proof of stake, there are no such advantages, but instead, large liquid-staking providers attain an upper hand in terms of liquidity. This enhances the ability of users to buy and sell the given liquid staking token without much price impact. The fear is that if Lido is not limited sooner rather than later, then it will continue to devour Ethereum with ever-increasing advantages for users by choosing Lido over other much smaller liquid staking providers.

Another challenge facing Ethereum in proof of stake is that its staking ratio continues to rise, meaning more and more Ether is staked. Most critically, this may lead to fewer Ether than optimal to be left to be paid in transaction fees to maintain the ecosystem, while liquid-staking providers, particularly Lido, archive damaging network penetration. Ethereum’s core developers decided last week to slow down the acceptance of new validators in Ethereum’s next upgrade to allow the community more time to figure out a proper solution.

Source: Saxo Group


The Saxo Bank Group entities each provide execution-only service and access to Analysis permitting a person to view and/or use content available on or via the website. This content is not intended to and does not change or expand on the execution-only service. Such access and use are at all times subject to (i) The Terms of Use; (ii) Full Disclaimer; (iii) The Risk Warning; (iv) the Rules of Engagement and (v) Notices applying to Saxo News & Research and/or its content in addition (where relevant) to the terms governing the use of hyperlinks on the website of a member of the Saxo Bank Group by which access to Saxo News & Research is gained. Such content is therefore provided as no more than information. In particular no advice is intended to be provided or to be relied on as provided nor endorsed by any Saxo Bank Group entity; nor is it to be construed as solicitation or an incentive provided to subscribe for or sell or purchase any financial instrument. All trading or investments you make must be pursuant to your own unprompted and informed self-directed decision. As such no Saxo Bank Group entity will have or be liable for any losses that you may sustain as a result of any investment decision made in reliance on information which is available on Saxo News & Research or as a result of the use of the Saxo News & Research. Orders given and trades effected are deemed intended to be given or effected for the account of the customer with the Saxo Bank Group entity operating in the jurisdiction in which the customer resides and/or with whom the customer opened and maintains his/her trading account. Saxo News & Research does not contain (and should not be construed as containing) financial, investment, tax or trading advice or advice of any sort offered, recommended or endorsed by Saxo Bank Group and should not be construed as a record of our trading prices, or as an offer, incentive or solicitation for the subscription, sale or purchase in any financial instrument. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, would be considered as a marketing communication under relevant laws.

Please read our disclaimers:
Notification on Non-Independent Investment Research (
Full disclaimer (
Full disclaimer (

Saxo Bank (Schweiz) AG
The Circle 38

Contact Saxo

Select region


All trading carries risk. Losses can exceed deposits on margin products. You should consider whether you understand how our products work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. To help you understand the risks involved we have put together a general Risk Warning series of Key Information Documents (KIDs) highlighting the risks and rewards related to each product. The KIDs can be accessed within the trading platform. Please note that the full prospectus can be obtained free of charge from Saxo Bank (Switzerland) ltd. or the issuer.

This website can be accessed worldwide however the information on the website is related to Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. All clients will directly engage with Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. and all client agreements will be entered into with Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. and thus governed by Swiss Law.

The content of this website represents marketing material and has not been notified or submitted to any supervisory authority.

If you contact Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. or visit this website, you acknowledge and agree that any data that you transmit to Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd., either through this website, by telephone or by any other means of communication (e.g. e-mail), may be collected or recorded and transferred to other Saxo Bank Group companies or third parties in Switzerland or abroad and may be stored or otherwise processed by them or Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. You release Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. from its obligations under Swiss banking and securities dealer secrecies and, to the extent permitted by law, data protection laws as well as other laws and obligations to protect privacy. Saxo Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. has implemented appropriate technical and organizational measures to protect data from unauthorized processing and disclosure and applies appropriate safeguards to guarantee adequate protection of such data.

Apple, iPad and iPhone are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. App Store is a service mark of Apple Inc.