PBS creates a new financialization layer. It formalizes the block production market, turning MEV extraction from a side effect into the primary business model for entities like Flashbots and bloXroute.
The Future of PBS: Will Builders Become the New Miners?
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) solves validator centralization by outsourcing block construction. This analysis argues it creates a new, more opaque centralization layer: professionalized builder cartels that capture MEV and dictate chain economics, mirroring the mining pool problem.
Introduction
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) is architecting a new, extractive financial layer atop blockchains, shifting power from validators to specialized builders.
Builders are the new miners. Their capital-intensive, latency-sensitive operations mirror ASIC farms, creating a centralizing force that contradicts Ethereum's original validator-centric decentralization.
The endgame is vertical integration. Top builders like Jito Labs and Titan will vertically integrate with staking pools (e.g., Lido, Coinbase) to control the entire value chain from stake to execution.
Evidence: The Jito MEV auction on Solana already captures over 90% of priority fees, demonstrating the inevitability of this model once PBS is formalized.
The Inevitable Consolidation: Three Trends
Proposer-Builder Separation is not the end-state; it's the catalyst for a new power struggle where builders compete on vertical integration and capital efficiency.
The Vertical Integration Playbook
Top builders like Flashbots and bloXroute are no longer just software providers. They are becoming full-stack infrastructure operators, controlling everything from relays and block-building algorithms to private orderflow and cross-chain messaging. This vertical stack creates insurmountable moats for new entrants.
- Key Benefit: Captures the entire MEV supply chain, from sourcing to execution.
- Key Benefit: Enables proprietary optimizations (e.g., MEV-Share, SUAVE) that commoditize other builders.
Capital as the Ultimate Barrier to Entry
The era of pure software builders is over. Winning auctions now requires billions in staked ETH for credible commitment (crLists) and tens of millions in operational capital for cross-domain arbitrage and fast liquidity. This mirrors the capital-intensive evolution of Proof-of-Work mining.
- Key Benefit: Deep capital reserves enable builders to guarantee block inclusion and win top-of-block positions.
- Key Benefit: Allows for sophisticated cross-chain strategies via LayerZero and Axelar, turning latency into profit.
The Rise of the Builder Cartel
Economic pressure will drive consolidation into a few dominant builder cartels. These entities will operate like mining pools, aggregating block-building resources and orderflow to outcompete solo builders. Protocols like EigenLayer will enable restaking of builder trust networks, further centralizing power.
- Key Benefit: Cartels achieve economies of scale, reducing costs and increasing profitability.
- Key Benefit: Can enforce standardized rules (e.g., censorship resistance, fee structures) across the network, becoming de facto regulators.
The Builder's Edge: Why Scale Wins
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) is creating a new, capital-intensive mining industry where builders with superior scale and infrastructure capture outsized value.
Builders are the new miners. The economic core of block production shifts from raw hashing power to optimization and data processing. This requires specialized software, high-performance hardware, and deep liquidity access, creating a significant barrier to entry that favors large, institutional players.
Vertical integration is the moat. The winning builders are not just block builders. They are vertically integrated MEV searchers like Flashbots, operating their own relays and private orderflows. This control over the entire pipeline, from transaction sourcing to final inclusion, creates an unassailable data advantage.
Scale dictates profitability. A builder's revenue is a direct function of its ability to process more transactions, access more private orderflow, and execute more complex MEV strategies. This creates a positive feedback loop: higher profits fund better infrastructure, which captures more market share, as seen with builders like Titan and beaverbuild.
Evidence: The top 5 builders on Ethereum consistently produce over 80% of post-merge blocks. This concentration mirrors early Bitcoin mining pools, but the capital requirements are now for tech stacks, not ASIC farms.
Builder Market Share & Concentration Metrics
A comparison of market concentration and economic dynamics across major PBS builders, analyzing whether they are evolving into the new mining cartels.
| Metric / Feature | Top Builder (e.g., Titan) | Mid-Tier Builder (e.g., beaverbuild) | Searcher / DIY (e.g., Flashbots Protect) |
|---|---|---|---|
Avg. Relayed Block Share (Last 30d) |
| 5-15% | < 1% |
Avg. MEV-Captured per Block (ETH) |
| 0.02-0.05 ETH | 0.001-0.01 ETH |
Requires Custom Hardware/Infra | |||
Operates Private Orderflow | |||
Integrated with SUAVE | |||
Avg. Builder Payment to Proposer (ETH) | 0.05-0.08 ETH | 0.02-0.04 ETH | 0.01-0.02 ETH |
Dominant Block Source | Private Mempool (e.g., via RPC) | Public Mempool + Bundles | User-Submitted Bundles |
Risk of Censorship (OFAC compliance) |
The Counter-Argument: SUAVE & Decentralized Builders
Proposer-Builder Separation's centralization risk is being countered by protocols like SUAVE that aim to democratize block building.
SUAVE is the canonical counter-force. Flashbots' SUAVE (Single Unifying Auction for Value Expression) is a dedicated mempool and decentralized block builder network designed to break the builder oligopoly. It creates a competitive marketplace where anyone can submit computation or liquidity.
Decentralized builders are the new miners. The endgame is a network of specialized, permissionless builders competing on execution quality, not capital. This mirrors the transition from ASIC mining to pooled staking, shifting power from a few hardware owners to a distributed service layer.
The competition is execution, not inclusion. In a mature PBS ecosystem, builders win by maximizing extractable value through superior MEV capture and cross-domain arbitrage, not by controlling transaction flow. Protocols like CoW Swap and UniswapX that settle via intents become primary liquidity sources.
Evidence: Flashbots' dominance already proves the model. Before SUAVE's launch, their centralized builder controlled ~90% of Ethereum blocks, demonstrating both the demand for and the centralization risk of optimized block production that SUAVE must solve.
The Cartel Playbook: Risks of Builder Dominance
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) was meant to decentralize power, but the builder market is consolidating into an oligopoly with its own extractive playbook.
The MEV Cartel: Flashbots & Friends
The dominant builder, Flashbots SUAVE, and a handful of others like bloxroute and Titan, control >80% of Ethereum blocks. This centralization creates systemic risk and rent-seeking behavior.
- Risk: Single point of failure for censorship resistance.
- Tactic: Exclusive order flow deals with major DEXs like Uniswap and Curve.
- Outcome: MEV extraction becomes a formalized, institutional revenue stream.
The Problem: Vertical Integration & Enshrined Rent
Builders are integrating upwards into proposer roles (via mev-boost relays) and downwards into searcher/application layers, creating vertically-stacked cartels.
- Risk: Neutral, public block space becomes a private, pay-to-play marketplace.
- Example: A builder-owned relay prioritizing its own blocks.
- Consequence: Stakers become passive rent collectors, not active validators.
The Solution: Credible Neutrality via PBS 2.0
The endgame is enshrined PBS at the protocol level, moving the builder market on-chain to break cartel control. This is Ethereum's PBS 2.0 roadmap.
- Mechanism: In-protocol block auction with cryptographic commit-reveal.
- Benefit: Eliminates trusted relays, enables permissionless builder entry.
- Goal: Aligns builder incentives with chain liveness, not extractive efficiency.
The Builder-as-a-Service (BaaS) Trap
Rollups like Arbitrum, Optimism, and zkSync often outsource block building to centralized sequencers, replicating the L1 cartel problem on L2.
- Risk: BaaS providers (e.g., Caldera, Conduit) become the de facto miners.
- Vulnerability: Single sequencer can censor or reorder transactions.
- Irony: L2s solve scalability but often regress on decentralization.
The Counter-Strategy: Intents & Solving
Applications are bypassing the builder market entirely via intent-based architectures. Users express desired outcomes, and solvers compete off-chain.
- Protocols: UniswapX, CowSwap, Across (via Across Orbits).
- Benefit: Shifts competition from block space to solver algorithms.
- Result: Better prices for users, reduced extractable MEV for builders.
The Regulatory Moat: OFAC Compliance
Builder cartels actively comply with OFAC sanctions, creating a regulatory moat that excludes permissionless builders. This formalizes a two-tier block-building system.
- Mechanism: Relays like Flashbots, Bloxroute Max Profit, and Titan censor OFAC-listed transactions.
- Outcome: >50% of Ethereum blocks are compliant, creating de facto legal separation.
- Danger: Protocol neutrality is eroded by off-chain legal pressure.
Future Outlook: The Path to Regulated Infrastructure
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) will consolidate block production into a regulated, institutional service, mirroring the financialization of Bitcoin mining.
Builders become regulated entities. The technical and capital requirements for competitive MEV extraction will force builder specialization. This creates a natural moat for firms like Flashbots and Jito Labs, turning block building into a licensed financial service akin to high-frequency trading.
Vertical integration defines the stack. The future is not just builders, but integrated MEV supply chains. Entities will control the full pipeline from searcher strategies to relay operations and execution client development, similar to how mining pools consolidated hardware, software, and energy.
Decentralization shifts to the consensus layer. With builders centralized, validator decentralization becomes the primary security guarantee. The network's liveness and censorship resistance will depend entirely on a globally distributed set of proof-of-stake validators, not block producers.
Evidence: Flashbots' dominance post-Merge, controlling ~90% of Ethereum blocks, demonstrates the inevitable centralization of this specialized, capital-intensive role. Jito's $10B+ validator stake via its Solana MEV program shows the capital scale required.
Key Takeaways for Architects & VCs
PBS is not just a feature; it's a fundamental re-architecting of block production that creates new power dynamics and business models.
The Problem: MEV is a Tax, PBS is the Settlement
Unchecked MEV acts as a latency tax on users and a centralization force for validators. PBS formalizes this market, moving extraction from the shadows into a transparent auction.
- Key Benefit 1: User experience improves as front-running is commoditized and minimized.
- Key Benefit 2: Validator decentralization is preserved by separating block proposal from construction.
The Solution: Builders as Specialized Infrastructure
Builders are not miners; they are high-frequency optimization engines. Their edge comes from data pipeline latency, arbitrage algorithm sophistication, and cross-domain liquidity access.
- Key Benefit 1: Enables complex, cross-chain atomic bundles (see: Flashbots Suave, Across).
- Key Benefit 2: Creates a B2B market for block space, separating economic from consensus security.
The Risk: Builder Cartels & Centralization
The natural endpoint of PBS is oligopoly. The builder with the best data feeds, order flow, and capital will win most blocks, recreating miner centralization at a new layer.
- Key Benefit 1: This forces innovation in decentralized builder networks and MEV smoothing.
- Key Benefit 2: Creates investment thesis around vertical integration (e.g., searcher-builder-exchange).
The Future: Intents & Enshrined PBS
The endgame shifts from transaction execution to intent fulfillment. Users express desired outcomes; a network of solvers (builders/aggregators) compete to fulfill them optimally (see: UniswapX, CowSwap).
- Key Benefit 1: Radically better UX; abstraction of wallet gas and slippage.
- Key Benefit 2: Enshrined PBS (e.g., Ethereum's roadmap) bakes the auction into protocol, mitigating trust assumptions.
The Vertical: Cross-Chain MEV & Shared Sequencing
The largest MEV opportunity is atomic arbitrage across rollups. This demands a shared sequencer or interoperability layer that builders can plug into (see: Espresso, Astria, LayerZero).
- Key Benefit 1: Unlocks interchain value flow as a primary revenue stream.
- Key Benefit 2: Makes rollups more economically secure by attracting professional block producers.
The VC Playbook: Back the Enablers, Not Just the Builders
Invest in the infrastructure layer that builders depend on: ultra-low-latency data (e.g., Blocknative), RPC optimization, secure hardware (SGX/TEEs for encrypted mempools), and solver SDKs.
- Key Benefit 1: Infrastructure has higher defensibility than a single builder strategy.
- Key Benefit 2: Captures value across the entire PBS stack, not just the auction winner.
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.