- zkSync and Arbitrum emerge as top contenders in the Layer 2 space, leaving behind Polygon and Optimism.
- zkSync secures majority of Ethereum gas consumption, while Arbitrum dominates in overall fee generation.
zkSync and Arbitrum Show Promise in Crowded Layer 2 Space
As the competition in the Layer 2 space heats up, zkSync and Arbitrum have emerged as frontrunners in terms of growth and adoption. The increasing number of participants in the Layer 2 space has both positive and negative effects on the development of L2 scaling solutions.
Arbitrum Dominates in Overall Fee Generation
Arbitrum has dominated in overall fee generation among Layer 2 protocols, accounting for 41% of all L2 fees. While Polygon and Optimism lag behind, they must focus on providing competitive fee structures and improving their platform features to remain competitive.
The recent developments in the Layer 2 space have shown promising growth and adoption for zkSync and Arbitrum, leaving behind Polygon and Optimism. zkSync has emerged as the frontrunner in Ethereum gas consumption, securing 32% of the market share, surpassing both Arbitrum and Optimism.
Meanwhile, Arbitrum has dominated in overall fee generation among L2 protocols, accounting for 41% of all L2 fees. The increasing number of daily active addresses on the Arbitrum network has contributed to its high fee generation, with 249,900 daily active addresses.
While the majority of #Ethereum scaling projects have yet to publish their full implementation details, the bulk of them, including @Arbitrum, @zkSync, and @Starknet, intend to extract value by using their general-purpose L2s as a settlement layer upon which L3s can be deployed. pic.twitter.com/JOCKJWkmLq
— Messari (@MessariCrypto) April 17, 2023
ETHNews does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products, or other materials on this page. Readers should do their own research before taking any actions related to cryptocurrencies. ETHNews is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods, or services mentioned.