Layer 2s: The new buzzword of Ethereum Layer 2s: The new buzzword of Ethereum Layer 2s: The new buzzword of Ethereum

Layer 2s: The new buzzword of Ethereum

Summary:  In February, Coinbase announced its intention to launch a layer 2 on Ethereum. In late March, two highly-anticipated layer 2s launched on Ethereum, and another launched its own token. Layer 2s have turned into the new buzzword of Ethereum to offer significantly more scalability, but it does not come without trade-offs, primarily less decentralization, and fragmented liquidity. In spite of these challenges, Ethereum has put all its eggs in one basket.


In February, Coinbase announced its plan to launch its own native blockchain comprised of a layer 2 on Ethereum. On March 23, another and probably the most prominent layer 2 called Arbitrum launched its own token, setting an all-time high of most transactions on any layer 2 the same day. The next day, zkSync launched its highly anticipated Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) compatible layer 2 based on zero-knowledge (zk) proof, followed up by a similar launch by Polygon on March 27. The last few months have without question been the most productive months for layer 2 technology. Although they offer superior scalability and enhanced competitiveness to other cryptocurrencies, they are not without consequences, but let us first put the record straight on layer 2s.

The Blockchain Trilemma: What are Layer 2s?

Since the genesis block of Bitcoin in January 2009, every permissionless blockchain has been haunted by the blockchain trilemma. The latter concerns that decentralized networks cannot offer decentralization, security, and scalability as one, but solely two of those factors, leaving one in the dust. The two largest blockchains Bitcoin and Ethereum have for years been severely challenged by this matter. From the start, both opted to sacrifice scalability to not compromise decentralization and security. In consequence, Bitcoin can merely handle about 5 transactions per second, whereas Ethereum can handle around 15 transactions per second. This is not anyhow sufficient for a medium of exchange or a global settlement layer, so the lack of scalability has arguably been the greatest hindrance to both cryptocurrencies. As opposed to Bitcoin and Ethereum, newly launched blockchains such as Solana and Avalanche have sacrificed decentralization to massively boost scalability. However, as decentralization is the main point of crypto, it is not a favorable outcome either.

To resolve the trilemma, a few years ago, the Ethereum community opted to scale through rollups, also known as layer 2s. The fundamental principle of layer 2 is rather simple. Instead of executing a single transaction at a time on Ethereum or layer 1 by another term, you bundle a bunch of transactions from layer 2 to execute them in a batch off-chain before posting the transaction data as a single transaction to Ethereum. Although the final transaction is larger and more expensive than a regular layer 1 transaction, it is technically hundreds of transactions from a rollup, altogether reducing transaction fees by between 5 to 20 times.

There are two main approaches to ensure the validity of transactions from rollups, namely optimistic – and zero-knowledge (zk) rollups. The former assumes that transactions are valid by default, yet transactions have a challenging period of often 7 days during which anyone may prove the invalidity of the transaction. This is contrary to zk rollups that automatically compute cryptographic proofs, so that it does not need a challenging period. There are multiple advantages and trade-offs with each approach, however, a thorough deep dive is out of the scope of this piece.

It is important to state, though, that zk rollups arguably are superior, all things considered. In early-2021, co-creator of Ethereum Vitalik Buterin wrote: “…in the medium to long term ZK rollups will win out in all use cases as ZK-SNARK technology improves”. However, zk rollups are technically more advanced than optimistic rollups, so it has been a severe challenge to make them equal to Ethereum’s computation engine for layer 1, also known as Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). This has forced developers to rewrite applications considerably before deploying to a zk rollup, causing them to achieve less traction than optimistic rollups such as Arbitrum and Optimistic, as a result of fewer decentralized applications on zk rollups. This is why the recently launched zkEVM rollups by zkSync and Polygon, respectively, are of great importance to the ecosystem. The transaction costs of these rollups are rather high and few applications are yet deployed on them, but it is a step in the right direction.

Offering scalability at the expense of liquidity and decentralization

As specified, rollups primarily offer greatly more scalability, allowing a greater transaction throughput alongside lower transaction fees. The greatest part of transaction fees on layer 2s is a result of posting the transaction data of the layer 2 batch to Ethereum as so-called calldata. The latter is expensive, as it is permanently stored on the blockchain. This is somewhat unnecessary because rollups only need this data for a short period to assure validity. To reduce this cost significantly, the Ethereum community is working on an update known as Proto-Danksharding or EIP-4844. The update is set to introduce data blobs, in which rollups may store nearly all data. The data blobs are deleted 1 to 3 months after creation, so these data blobs are much cheaper than regular calldata. This allows the cost of rollups to be greatly reduced later this year when EIP-4844 is planned for release.

Moreover, an often-overlooked advantage of layer 2s is that they allow for tailored execution layers for certain applications and use-cases, instead of a single execution environment on layer 1 that may simply be less than optimal for every use-case such as gaming, which, for instance, may need faster transaction finality.

The Ethereum community has somewhat put all its eggs in one basket, since its roadmap to greater scalability in the foreseeable future is nearly almost about rollups, but that is not without severe trade-offs. Since its genesis block, Ethereum has strongly benefited from its first-mover advantage, allowing it to achieve a solid network effect well before there were any alternatives. This network effect is what still makes Ethereum the absolute biggest cryptocurrency for decentralized applications, but layer 2s does not fully appreciate this. Although they post their transaction data on Ethereum, they largely operate as sovereign blockchains, so users cannot use identical applications across rollups. This fragments liquidity in decentralized applications and erodes the network effect of Ethereum. The rollups are likewise a UX nightmare for users since they need to bridge tokens from one chain to another, which often entails heavy transaction fees and a challenging period. The community looks to solve this, yet a thorough fix should not be expected in the foreseeable future.

Next, decentralization is another concern with rollups. By and large, rollups inherit the security of Ethereum by posting the batch of transaction data thereon, however, the batching of transactions off-chain is largely not decentralized, simply as the computing to perform the batch known as the sequencer has until now been fully centralized by the teams of the individual layer 2s. Since it is centralized, the teams can theoretically front-run and censor certain transactions, causing them to not reach layer 1 at all. This is very much against the philosophy of crypto as a neutral settlement layer without censorship. Every rollup is public about the aim to decentralize their sequencer over time, but nobody knows exactly what degree of decentralization they may achieve.

To make matters worse, as it is still experimental technology, some rollups may be instantly upgraded, causing the rules to be changed from one second to another. This may in the worst case lead to the loss of funds. It appears that most rollups are trustworthy, but the main point of crypto is to not have to put trust in anyone but code and rollups are simply not there yet. They may reach that point eventually, but other more scalable layer 1s are slowly catching up on Ethereum.

Disclaimer

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 (https://www.home.saxo/legal/niird/notification)
- Full disclaimer (https://www.home.saxo/en-gb/legal/disclaimer/saxo-disclaimer)

Saxo
40 Bank Street, 26th floor
E14 5DA
London
United Kingdom

Contact Saxo

Select region

United Kingdom
United Kingdom

Trade Responsibly
All trading carries risk. To help you understand the risks involved we have put together a series of Key Information Documents (KIDs) highlighting the risks and rewards related to each product. Read more
Additional Key Information Documents are available in our trading platform.

Saxo is a registered Trading Name of Saxo Capital Markets UK Ltd (‘Saxo’). Saxo is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, Firm Reference Number 551422. Registered address: 26th Floor, 40 Bank Street, Canary Wharf, London E14 5DA. Company number 7413871. Registered in England & Wales.

This website, including the information and materials contained in it, are not directed at, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in the United States, Belgium or any other jurisdiction where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to applicable law or regulation.

It is important that you understand that with investments, your capital is at risk. Past performance is not a guide to future performance. It is your responsibility to ensure that you make an informed decision about whether or not to invest with us. If you are still unsure if investing is right for you, please seek independent advice. Saxo assumes no liability for any loss sustained from trading in accordance with a recommendation.

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. Android is a trademark of Google Inc.

©   since 1992