Generalized frontrunning is inevitable because the core infrastructure for extracting value from public mempools is becoming a commodity. Once searchers and block builders like Flashbots and bloXroute perfect the art of reordering transactions for profit, the next logical step is to frontrun any predictable on-chain event.
mev-the-hidden-tax-of-crypto
Blog
Why Generalized Frontrunning Is the Inevitable Endgame
MEV extraction is evolving from simple arbitrage to a generalized intelligence layer. Searchers will soon simulate and preempt any profitable on-chain action, forcing a fundamental redesign of user experience and protocol architecture.
introduction
THE ENDGAME
Introduction: The Slippery Slope from Sandwich Bots to On-Chain Oracles
The evolution of MEV from simple arbitrage to generalized frontrunning is a deterministic path dictated by infrastructure commoditization.
The target shifts from users to protocols. Sandwich attacks on DEX traders are a primitive application. The real prize is oracle price updates from Chainlink or Pyth, which trigger billions in automated DeFi liquidations and trades. A generalized frontrunner that predicts these updates extracts value directly from the protocol layer.
This creates a systemic risk. Protocols that rely on time-sensitive on-chain data become vulnerable. The security model of an oracle shifts from just data integrity to also requiring temporal integrity, forcing a redesign of systems like Aave and Compound that depend on these feeds.
Evidence: Flashbots' dominance in Ethereum block building demonstrates the specialization and centralization of MEV extraction. The next phase, seen in research by teams like Skip Protocol, is the formalization of intent-based systems where users cede transaction control to sophisticated solvers, accelerating this endgame.
key-trends
THE INEVITABLE ENDGAME
The Three Catalysts for Generalized Frontrunning
The MEV supply chain is consolidating. Here are the three structural forces making generalized, protocol-level frontrunning the dominant architecture.
01
The Problem: Fragmented Searcher Competition
Today's MEV landscape is a zero-sum war between thousands of independent searchers, each paying ~$1B annually in priority gas fees to validators. This is a massive, recurring tax on user transactions with no aggregate benefit.
- Inefficient Allocation: Billions in value are burned in gas auctions instead of being captured for protocol or user benefit.
- Unstable Revenue: Searcher profits are volatile and winner-take-all, discouraging sustainable infrastructure investment.
- Centralizing Force: High capital requirements for bidding favor a few large players, contradicting decentralization goals.
$1B+
Gas Burned Annually
~0%
User Benefit
02
The Solution: Protocol-Enforced Order Flow Auctions
Generalized frontrunning internalizes the auction. Protocols like UniswapX and CowSwap act as centralized order flow coordinators, running a sealed-bid auction among a permissionless set of solvers.
- Value Capture: Auction revenue (the spread) is returned to the user or the protocol treasury, not burned.
- Efficiency Gains: Solvers compete on execution quality, not just gas bids, leading to better prices via JIT liquidity and cross-chain routing via Across or LayerZero.
- Fairer Distribution: Creates a predictable, recurring revenue stream for a decentralized network of solvers.
>90%
Fill Rate
$500M+
User Savings
03
The Catalyst: Intents as the New Transaction Primitive
The shift from transactions (hardcoded instructions) to intents (declarative goals) is the enabling technology. It turns every user action into a bundle that must be fulfilled, creating a natural market for generalized frontrunners.
- Composability: An intent to "swap X for Y at best price" can be filled via DEX, OTC pool, or private market, maximizing extractable value for the filler.
- User Experience: Abstracts away complexity (gas, slippage, failed tx) while improving outcomes.
- Architectural Lock-In: Once a protocol (e.g., a wallet or dApp) adopts an intent-based standard, its order flow is permanently routed through a solver network.
10x
More Complex Bundles
~100ms
Solver Latency
THE ENDGAME
The Evolution of MEV: From Exploit to Intelligence
Comparing the architectural paradigms for extracting and distributing value from transaction ordering, from adversarial to cooperative.
| Core Mechanism | Traditional MEV (Dark Forest) | Order Flow Auctions (OFAs) | Generalized Frontrunning (Intent-Based) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Actor | Searchers & Block Builders | Wallets & Applications | Protocols & Solvers |
Value Source | Arbitrage, Liquidations, Sandwiching | Auctioned User Transaction Flow | Cross-Domain Optimization & Bundle Execution |
Extraction Latency | < 1 second (in-block) | Pre-block (1-12 seconds) | Cross-block (minutes to hours) |
User Experience Impact | Negative (slippage, failed tx) | Neutral to Positive (fee rebates) | Positive (guaranteed outcomes, gasless) |
Key Enabling Tech | Flashbots MEV-Boost, Private RPCs | CowSwap, UniswapX, RPC Providers | Anoma, SUAVE, Across, LayerZero OFT |
Economic Efficiency | Low (value leaks to searchers/builders) | Medium (value shared with users) | High (value optimized for intent fulfillment) |
Composability Scope | Single-chain, single-block | Single-chain, multi-block | Cross-chain, cross-rollup, cross-domain |
End State | Zero-sum game | Cooperative marketplace | Generalized intent settlement network |
deep-dive
THE EXECUTION LAYER
The Mechanics of the Endgame: Simulation as a Service
Generalized frontrunning, powered by universal transaction simulation, will subsume all on-chain execution.
Universal transaction simulation is the core primitive. Every wallet, dApp, and searcher will query a shared, high-fidelity simulation engine to preview state changes before signing, creating a unified execution preview layer.
Intent-based architectures like UniswapX and CowSwap are the prototype. Users submit desired outcomes, not transactions, delegating pathfinding to a competitive solver network that simulates all possible routes.
The MEV supply chain collapses into a single service. Searchers, builders, and validators merge into generalized solvers that compete on simulation quality and execution guarantees, not just block space.
Evidence: Flashbots' SUAVE aims to be this canonical mempool. Its design mandates simulation for all transactions, proving the model's inevitability for optimal execution.
counter-argument
THE INEVITABLE LEAK
Counterpoint: Can't Privacy or Intent-Based Systems Stop This?
Privacy and intent-based architectures shift, but do not eliminate, the fundamental information asymmetry that generalized frontrunning exploits.
Privacy protocols leak intent. Systems like Aztec or ZK-proofs hide transaction details but not the fact of a transaction. The MEV supply chain observes gas price spikes, wallet interactions with DEX routers, and contract deployments, inferring intent from metadata. Privacy creates a new, lucrative market for intent inference engines.
Intent-based systems centralize the auction. UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across abstract execution but consolidate order flow into a single, powerful solver network. This transfers the frontrunning problem from the public mempool to a private bidding war among a few privileged solvers. The economic rent extraction persists; it just changes venue.
The endpoint is always public. An intent must resolve into an on-chain settlement transaction. The final state change is visible, creating a last-mile arbitrage opportunity. Generalized frontrunners will attack this settlement layer, exploiting the delta between the intent's promised outcome and the real-time blockchain state.
Evidence: The 51% of Uniswap volume now routed through private RPCs like Flashbots Protect demonstrates the market's shift to hiding, not solving, the problem. This merely obfuscates the mempool, pushing sophisticated frontrunning upstream.
protocol-spotlight
THE INTENT-CENTRIC SHIFT
Protocols Racing for the Post-Frontrunning Future
Generalized frontrunning is the logical conclusion of MEV extraction, forcing a fundamental redesign of transaction flow from user-submitted bundles to user-expressed intents.
01
UniswapX: The Aggregator as the New Settlement Layer
Decouples order routing from execution, outsourcing competition to a network of fillers. This turns toxic MEV into a competitive fee for the user.\n- User submits signed intent, not a transaction.\n- Fillers compete on-chain for best net price.\n- Settles via Dutch auction, capturing MEV as price improvement.
$10B+
Volume
-90%
Slippage
02
Flashbots SUAVE: The Neutral Mempool & Executor
Aims to become a decentralized block builder and encrypted mempool for all chains. It commoditizes MEV infrastructure to prevent centralized capture.\n- Universal encrypted mempool hides transaction intent.\n- Decentralized block building market for cross-chain bundles.\n- Execution against the best price across any integrated chain.
~500ms
Latency
All Chains
Scope
03
Anoma & Essential: The Intent-Centric Architecture
Builds blockchains from first principles around intents, not transactions. Uses a solver network to find optimal execution paths for complex user constraints.\n- Declarative paradigm: User states 'what', not 'how'.\n- Multiparty coordination for complex swaps and privacy.\n- Native cross-chain intent settlement without bridges.
10x+
Complexity
Zero-Knowledge
Privacy
04
The Inevitability of Generalized Frontrunning
If a searcher can profit by frontrunning your transaction, they will. The only sustainable endgame is to formalize this competition and return the value to the user.\n- MEV is intrinsic to any state-changing system with public data.\n- Frontrunning becomes a feature: competitive execution as a service.\n- Winners will own the intent flow, not just the execution layer.
100%
Inevitable
$1B+
Daily MEV
takeaways
THE ARCHITECTURAL IMPERATIVE
TL;DR for Builders and Investors
The current transaction-based paradigm is a leaky abstraction. The endgame is a network where users express desired outcomes, not manual steps.
01
The MEV Problem is a UX Problem
Frontrunning and sandwich attacks are symptoms of a system where user intent is transparent and slow. Every DEX trade leaks value to searchers.
- Cost: Extracts $1B+ annually from users via arbitrage and liquidations.
- Inefficiency: Adds 100-500ms+ latency as bots race to exploit intent.
- Friction: Forces users into complex strategies (e.g., private RPCs) just for basic fairness.
$1B+
Annual Extract
500ms+
Latency Tax
02
Intent-Centric Architectures (UniswapX, CowSwap)
Shift from submitting transactions to declaring desired end states. Solvers compete to fulfill the intent optimally.
- Efficiency: Solvers find optimal paths across Uniswap, Curve, Balancer in one bundle.
- Cost: Users get better prices via competition; pay only for solved outcome.
- Simplicity: Abstraction layer enables gasless, cross-chain swaps (see Across, Socket).
~0
Gas for User
Best Price
Execution Guarantee
03
The Solver Network is the New Mempool
The critical infrastructure shifts from block builders to a decentralized network of solvers. This is where EigenLayer, Espresso are playing.
- Scale: Requires high-performance off-chain computation and fast attestation.
- Incentives: Solvers stake to participate; slashed for misbehavior.
- Composability: A solver's output (a bundle) becomes the atomic unit for Ethereum, Arbitrum, layerzero.
Decentralized
Solver Set
Staked
Economic Security
04
Endgame: Application-Specific Intents
Generalized frontrunning dies when every major app uses its own intent layer. The future is vertical integration.
- Lending: "Maintain my health factor >1.5" auto-triggers rebalances.
- Trading: "Get me 1 ETH, max cost $3,200" across any venue.
- Yield: "Auto-compound to the highest safe yield" across Aave, Compound, Morpho.
Vertical
Integration
Auto-Executed
User Goals
05
Build Here: The Intent Infrastructure Stack
Invest in layers that abstract complexity. The stack mirrors web2's cloud evolution.
- Solver SDKs: Tools for building efficient solvers (akin to The Graph for querying).
- Intent Standardization: A common language for expressing goals (ERC-7521).
- Settlement Layer: Fast, secure finality for intent bundles (leveraging EigenDA, Celestia).
New Primitives
To Build
ERC-7521
Emerging Standard
06
The Investor Takeaway: Follow the Abstraction
Value accrual shifts up the stack. The winners own the intent layer, not just the execution layer.
- Moats: Network effects of solver competition and user intent volume.
- Metrics: Track intent fill rate, solver profitability, cross-chain volume.
- Risks: Centralization in solver sets, complexity of cryptographic attestation.
Up-Stack
Value Accrual
Fill Rate
Key Metric
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall