MEV is the new yield. The $1B+ annualized extractable value from Ethereum is a structural inefficiency that protocols like Uniswap and Aave currently leak to searchers and validators. The future belongs to designs that capture this value for users and the protocol itself.
prediction-markets-and-information-theory
Blog
The Future of DeFi: Protocols as MEV Sinks
An analysis of how next-generation DeFi protocols will architecturally internalize Maximal Extractable Value (MEV), transforming a parasitic externality into a sustainable, on-chain revenue stream.
introduction
THE SHIFT
Introduction
The next DeFi infrastructure war will be won by protocols that internalize MEV as a core primitive, transforming from passive victims into active economic engines.
Protocols become MEV sinks. Instead of resisting MEV, next-generation architectures like CowSwap and UniswapX will internalize it. They use intent-based systems and auction mechanisms to turn transaction ordering into a revenue stream, directly competing with standalone searcher networks.
The battleground is execution. This is not about consensus-layer changes like proposer-builder separation (PBS). It is an application-layer war over who controls and profits from the flow of user transactions. Protocols that fail to adapt will subsidize their competitors.
Evidence: Flashbots' SUAVE and Across Protocol's bonded relayers demonstrate the economic viability of internalizing MEV. Their models show that user costs drop when the protocol, not a third party, captures the arbitrage and ordering value.
thesis-statement
THE VALUE CAPTURE FLIP
The Core Thesis: MEV as Protocol-Owned Liquidity
The next evolution of DeFi protocols will treat extracted MEV as a native revenue stream, flipping a systemic cost into a core asset.
MEV is a native yield source. Protocols like Uniswap and Aave currently leak value to external searchers and builders. By internalizing this extraction, protocols transform a parasitic tax into protocol-owned liquidity.
The model inverts traditional finance. In TradFi, market makers are paid for liquidity. In this future state, liquidity pays the protocol via captured arbitrage, liquidations, and order flow.
Evidence: CowSwap and UniswapX demonstrate the blueprint. Their intent-based architectures and solver networks internalize MEV, redirecting value from searcvers back to users and the protocol treasury.
This creates a flywheel. Captured MEV funds protocol-owned vaults, subsidizes better user rates, and funds public goods like MEV burn, directly increasing the protocol's intrinsic value and sustainability.
market-context
THE LEAKAGE
The Current State: MEV as a Leaky Pipe
Today's DeFi protocols passively leak value to external searchers and validators, creating a structural inefficiency.
Value extraction is externalized. Protocols like Uniswap and Aave generate MEV through arbitrage and liquidations, but this value flows to third-party searcher bots and block builders, not the protocol treasury or its users.
The infrastructure is adversarial. MEV supply chains—from Flashbots' SUAVE to private order flow auctions—optimize for validator and searcher profit, treating protocols as passive data sources rather than active participants.
The cost is quantifiable. Over $1.2B in MEV was extracted from Ethereum DEXs in 2023 alone, representing a direct tax on user transactions that protocols currently subsidize.
Evidence: The rise of intent-based architectures like UniswapX and CowSwap proves the demand for abstraction, but they still rely on external solvers, merely shifting—not capturing—the MEV.
key-trends
FROM EXTRACTION TO UTILITY
Architectural Shifts Enabling MEV Sinks
The next DeFi primitive is the MEV sink: protocols that internalize and repurpose extractable value for user and network benefit.
01
The Problem: Unbundled Execution
Users broadcast raw transactions, exposing intent to public mempools. This creates a $1B+ annual opportunity for generalized frontrunning and sandwich attacks. The value is extracted by third parties, not the protocol or its users.
$1B+
Annual Extract
0%
User Capture
02
The Solution: Intent-Based Architectures
Protocols like UniswapX and CowSwap shift from transaction execution to intent fulfillment. Users declare desired outcomes (e.g., "swap X for Y"), delegating pathfinding and execution to a competitive solver network. This creates a native auction for flow, turning MEV into a protocol revenue stream.
~90%
MEV Capture
0 Slippage
User Guarantee
03
The Problem: Fragmented Liquidity
Value is trapped in isolated pools across L2s and app-chains. Cross-chain arbitrage is a dominant MEV category, but the profits go to searchers, not the underlying liquidity providers or the bridges facilitating the transfer.
50+
Active L2s
$100M+
Arb Value
04
The Solution: MEV-Aware Bridges & Shared Sequencers
Infrastructure like Across and LayerZero's DVN model can internalize cross-chain arbitrage. Shared sequencers (e.g., Espresso, Astria) for rollups create a unified, auctionable block space, allowing value from cross-domain arbitrage to be captured and redistributed to the rollup's economic stack.
10-30%
Fee Reduction
Native Yield
For Stakers
05
The Problem: Opaque Order Flow
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) created efficient markets for block building, but order flow is still a blind auction to the highest-bidding builder. The value of user transactions is not attributed back to the source application.
Centralized
Flow Auction
No Attribution
To dApps
06
The Solution: Encrypted Mempools & Flow Auctions
SUAVE envisions a decentralized block builder and encrypted mempool. dApps can route order flow through it, creating a transparent marketplace where they can auction their flow and capture a share of the builder profits, directly monetizing their user base.
dApp Revenue
New Line
User Privacy
Enhanced
PROTOCOLS AS MEV SINKS
MEV Leakage vs. Potential Capture: A Protocol Analysis
Comparative analysis of how major DeFi protocols currently leak value to searchers versus their architectural potential to internalize and redistribute MEV.
| Protocol / Metric | Uniswap V3 (AMM) | CowSwap (Batch Auction) | Aave V3 (Lending) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary MEV Leakage Vector | Frontrunning & Backrunning on DEX Aggregators | Out-of-band liquidity (RFQ) for failed trades | Liquidator arbitrage & Oracle latency |
Leakage Quantification (Est. % of Swap Volume) | 0.3% - 0.8% | 0.05% - 0.15% | 0.1% - 0.5% of liquidated debt |
Native MEV Capture Mechanism | None (Passive LP) | Surplus from batch clearing & CoW flows | Liquidation penalty (protocol treasury) |
Architecture for Future Sink | Requires external solver network (e.g., UniswapX) | Native intent-based solver competition | Integrated Keeper network with fee sharing |
User Rebate Potential | None | Up to 100% of traditional MEV via better prices | None (fees accrue to protocol/keepers) |
Time to Finality Impact | < 12 seconds (Ethereum block time) | ~1-2 minutes (batch window) | < 12 seconds (Ethereum block time) |
Reliance on External Infrastructure | High (Block Builders, Searchers) | Medium (Solver Network) | High (Keeper Networks, Oracles) |
deep-dive
THE ARCHITECTURE
The Blueprint: How to Build an MEV Sink
Protocols must architecturally internalize MEV extraction to transform a systemic cost into a sustainable revenue stream.
Internalize the searcher role. A protocol becomes an MEV sink by operating its own block-building infrastructure, like Flashbots SUAVE or a private mempool. This captures the value of its own order flow before external searchers can arbitrage it.
Design for atomic composability. The sink must enable complex, multi-step transactions that are impossible for users to execute alone. This creates proprietary MEV opportunities that the protocol exclusively monetizes, similar to how UniswapX bundles intents.
Redistribute value on-chain. Captured MEV must be programmatically directed back to protocol stakeholders. This creates a positive-sum feedback loop where user activity generates protocol revenue, which subsidizes future activity, directly countering the extractive model of public mempools.
Evidence: dYdX v4's Cosmos-based chain and its planned order book demonstrate this shift, moving critical logic off-chain to a sovereign execution environment where the protocol controls the entire transaction lifecycle and its associated value.
protocol-spotlight
PROTOCOL STRATEGIES
Early Adopters: Who's Building MEV Sinks Today?
Leading DeFi protocols are no longer passive victims of MEV; they are actively designing systems to capture and redistribute it.
01
CowSwap & UniswapX: The Intent-Based Sink
The Problem: Traditional DEX swaps are atomic, predictable, and easily front-run.\nThe Solution: These protocols use batch auctions and intent-based architecture. Users submit desired outcomes, not specific transactions. Solvers compete off-chain to fill the batch, with MEV captured as part of the competition and returned to users as better prices.\n- Key Benefit: User trades are MEV-resistant and often get price improvements.\n- Key Benefit: The protocol becomes the natural venue for complex, multi-leg arbitrage, internalizing value.
$10B+
Volume
~$200M
Saved in MEV
02
EigenLayer & Restaking: The Economic Sink
The Problem: MEV extraction is a public good problem—value leaks to searchers/validators without securing the broader ecosystem.\nThe Solution: EigenLayer's restaking allows ETH stakers to opt into validating new services (AVSs), including MEV-Boost++. This creates a cryptoeconomic sink where MEV revenue can be slashed or redirected to secure other protocols.\n- Key Benefit: Aligns validator incentives with protocol health, not just maximal extraction.\n- Key Benefit: Creates a new yield source for restakers from captured MEV streams.
$15B+
TVL
New AVS
Revenue Model
03
Flashbots SUAVE: The Universal Sink
The Problem: MEV infrastructure is fragmented and opaque, controlled by a few private mempools.\nThe Solution: SUAVE is a dedicated blockchain acting as a decentralized, neutral marketplace for MEV. It aims to become the preference layer for all user transactions, where MEV is auctioned transparently and revenue can be directed by user or dapp policy.\n- Key Benefit: Democratizes access to MEV extraction, breaking private mempool oligopolies.\n- Key Benefit: Enables protocols to set rules (e.g., "send 50% of MEV to our treasury") programmatically.
Universal
Chain Agnostic
Auction-Based
Revenue Redist.
04
MakerDAO & Spark Protocol: The On-Chain Treasury Sink
The Problem: Protocol treasuries are idle capital, while their own operations generate MEV for third parties.\nThe Solution: Maker's Spark Protocol and its DSR (Dai Savings Rate) mechanism can be funded by directly capturing MEV from its lending/borrowing activity. The protocol acts as its own searcher, using its capital to perform profitable arbitrage and liquidations, funneling profits back to the treasury and DSR.\n- Key Benefit: Turns protocol activity into a revenue center, subsidizing user rates.\n- Key Benefit: Reduces reliance on volatile token emissions for yield.
$8B+
DSR Supply
Direct Capture
Model
counter-argument
THE INCENTIVE MISMATCH
The Rebuttal: Isn't This Just Rent-Seeking?
Protocols capturing MEV is not rent-seeking; it is a fundamental realignment of value accrual from parasitic extractors to the underlying infrastructure.
Protocols are the source of value. MEV exists because protocols create composable, transparent state. Searchers extract this value without contributing to protocol security or development. Capturing this value is a direct reclamation of protocol-owned liquidity.
Compare to traditional finance. In TradFi, exchanges capture fees from order flow. In DeFi, that value leaks to third-party searchers. Protocols like Uniswap and Aave are the primary liquidity venues; they deserve the economic rent their existence creates.
The evidence is in the data. Flashbots' SUAVE and protocols like CowSwap demonstrate that intent-based flow routed to on-chain solvers increases user surplus. This proves value capture improves outcomes, unlike passive rent-seeking which degrades them.
risk-analysis
CENTRALIZATION VECTORS
The Bear Case: Risks of Protocol MEV Capture
Protocols capturing MEV for themselves creates new systemic risks that could undermine DeFi's core value propositions.
01
The New Cartel: Validator-Protocol Collusion
When protocols like UniswapX or CowSwap rely on a centralized solver network, they create a privileged class of actors. This centralizes power and creates a single point of failure, moving away from permissionless composability.
- Risk: Solvers can form cartels, extracting supra-competitive rents.
- Consequence: ~70% of intent volume could be controlled by <5 entities, mirroring Lido's staking dominance.
<5
Dominant Solvers
70%+
Volume Control
02
Protocol Sovereignty vs. Chain Security
MEV revenue is a critical subsidy for Proof-of-Stake validator security. If major protocols like Aave or Compound internalize all value, they starve the base layer, creating a tragedy of the commons.
- Risk: Reduced validator rewards lower the cost of a 51% attack.
- Data Point: On Ethereum, MEV represents ~10-20% of validator rewards. Capturing it degrades L1 security budgets.
10-20%
Of Validator Rewards
↓ Security
Base Layer Impact
03
The Regulatory Siren Call
A protocol that actively captures and redistributes MEV looks less like neutral infrastructure and more like a financial intermediary. This paints a target for regulators (SEC, CFTC) seeking to classify DeFi activity as securities dealing.
- Risk: Protocols become liable for 'fair' execution, inviting Howey Test scrutiny.
- Precedent: The more a protocol 'does', the more it resembles a traditional broker-dealer.
High
Regulatory Risk
Howey Test
Legal Trigger
04
Innovation Stagnation & Rent Extraction
Captured MEV revenue becomes a protocol's primary profit center, disincentivizing risky R&D and creating a rent-seeking monopoly. This is the opposite of the competitive, modular ecosystem that birthed Flashbots, MEV-Share, and SUAVE.
- Risk: Protocol treasury becomes addicted to MEV cash flow, stifling product innovation.
- Example: A DEX with a $50M/year MEV sink has less reason to improve its core AMM logic.
$50M+
Annual Rent
↓ Innovation
Long-Term Cost
05
Composability Fragmentation
When every major protocol runs its own sealed-bid auction or solver network (e.g., Across on Optimism, UniswapX everywhere), it fragments liquidity and execution. This breaks the "money Lego" model, forcing users to bridge between isolated MEV ecosystems.
- Risk: Cross-chain intent systems like LayerZero or Chainlink CCIP become less efficient, as value is trapped in protocol-specific silos.
High
Integration Friction
Siloed Liquidity
Network Effect
06
The Moral Hazard of Redistribution
Protocols that redistribute captured MEV to token holders (e.g., via buybacks) create a perverse incentive to maximize extractable value, not user welfare. This aligns governance with predatory trading, not optimal execution.
- Risk: Governance votes prioritize MEV extraction tweaks over fee reductions or UX improvements, directly harming the end-user.
Token Holders
Misaligned Incentive
↑ User Cost
End Result
future-outlook
THE STANDARDIZATION
The 2024-2025 Outlook: Sinks Become Standard
MEV-aware revenue distribution will become a core protocol primitive, transforming economic models and governance.
Protocols become MEV-aware treasuries. The next evolution is not just capturing MEV, but programmatically distributing it. Protocols like Uniswap and Aave will integrate MEV-aware revenue streams directly into their treasury management, using on-chain logic to fund development or buy back governance tokens.
Sinks shift from optional to mandatory. The competitive landscape forces adoption. A protocol without a native MEV sink will hemorrhage value to extractors, making it a feature as fundamental as a fee switch. This creates a new design space for sink primitives like MEV-Share and SUAVE.
Governance is the new bottleneck. The hardest problem is not the technical capture, but the political distribution. On-chain governance frameworks must evolve to manage these new, volatile revenue streams without centralizing power, a challenge protocols like Arbitrum and Optimism are already facing.
Evidence: Flashbots' MEV-Share and CoW Swap's solver competition demonstrate the viability of programmable MEV redistribution. The $1B+ in MEV extracted annually is the market forcing function for this standardization.
takeaways
THE MEV SINK THESIS
TL;DR for Builders and Investors
The next wave of protocol design will be defined by capturing and redistributing MEV, turning a systemic inefficiency into a core revenue stream.
01
The Problem: MEV is a $1B+ Annual Leak
Value extracted by searchers and validators is a direct tax on users and a subsidy for L1 security. Protocols are passive bystanders.
- Uniswap alone leaked ~$120M in MEV in 2023.
- This is non-revenue that could fund protocol development or user rewards.
- Creates toxic order flow and worse execution for end-users.
$1B+
Annual Leak
-120M
Uniswap 2023
02
The Solution: Protocol-Controlled Order Flow
Aggregate user intents and auction execution rights. This turns the protocol into the primary MEV sink.
- CowSwap and UniswapX demonstrate the model with intent-based architectures.
- Enables batch auctions and cross-chain MEV capture via solvers like Across and LayerZero.
- Revenue can be directed to treasury, staking rewards, or user rebates.
90%+
Efficiency Gain
Solver Net
New Market
03
The Blueprint: MEV-Aware State Design
Architect state machines where valuable ordering is an explicit, auctionable resource.
- Flashbots SUAVE aims to be a decentralized block builder and mempool.
- Chainlink's FSS and Oracle Extractable Value (OEV) recapture value from oracle updates.
- Future DEXs will have native auction layers, not just AMM curves.
Native
Auction Layer
OEV
New Frontier
04
The Metric: MEV-Captured / TVL
Forget just TVL and fees. The new KPI is the percentage of extractable value the protocol retains.
- A high ratio signals strong economic design and user alignment.
- Drives a flywheel: better execution attracts more volume, increasing capturable MEV.
- Investors must audit a protocol's MEV surface and redistribution mechanism.
Key KPI
For VCs
Flywheel
Growth Engine
05
The Risk: Centralization & Regulatory Attack Vectors
Concentrating MEV capture creates powerful, regulated entities. The sink can become a target.
- OFAC-compliance becomes a protocol-level decision (see Tornado Cash).
- Requires decentralized solver networks and credibly neutral auction mechanics.
- Builders must design for censorship resistance from day one.
OFAC
Compliance Risk
Solver Risk
Centralization
06
The Frontier: Cross-Chain MEV Sinks
The largest arbitrage opportunities are between chains. Protocols that own cross-domain liquidity become super-sinks.
- LayerZero's OFT and Across's bridge auction are early examples.
- Requires unified liquidity and shared sequencing (explored by EigenLayer, Astria).
- Winners will capture the inter-blockchain value flow.
Cross-Chain
Arbitrage
Shared Seq.
Key Primitive
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