Monolithic architecture creates congestion. Every dApp on a general-purpose L1 like Ethereum or Solana competes for the same global state and virtual machine. This creates a zero-sum game for block space, where a DeFi yield farm directly slows down an NFT mint.
prediction-markets-and-information-theory
Blog
Why Generalized Layer 1s Will Lose to Specialized Scaling Stacks
The one-size-fits-all virtual machine is a fatal flaw for high-performance on-chain markets. Specialized scaling stacks, from rollups to appchains, are architecturally superior for prediction markets and derivatives. This is a first-principles analysis of compute specialization.
introduction
THE MONOLITHIC TRAP
The VM Bottleneck
Generalized Layer 1s are structurally incapable of scaling because their monolithic architecture forces every transaction through a single, congested execution environment.
Specialized stacks separate concerns. A modular stack like Celestia for data, EigenDA for availability, and an Arbitrum Orbit for execution splits the workload. This allows each layer to optimize for its specific function, eliminating the single-point bottleneck.
The VM is the chokepoint. The EVM or SVM must process every opcode sequentially within a block. Parallel execution engines like Solana's Sealevel or Monad's MonadVM demonstrate the fix, but they remain bound by a single state model. True specialization requires separate VMs.
Evidence: Ethereum's base fee spikes during market volatility prove the bottleneck. In contrast, Arbitrum Nitro processes ~40k TPS internally but settles only proofs to Ethereum, demonstrating how decoupling execution from consensus bypasses the L1 VM limit.
key-trends
WHY GENERALIZED L1S ARE LOSING
The Specialization Imperative: Three Trends
Monolithic blockchains are collapsing under the weight of their own generality, creating a vacuum for purpose-built architectures to dominate.
01
The Problem: The Scalability Trilemma is a Design Flaw
Generalized L1s force decentralization, security, and scalability to compete for the same physical resources. This creates an inescapable trade-off.\n- Security is a Fixed Cost: A chain securing $50B+ TVL cannot afford to compromise its validator set for speed.\n- Throughput is a Variable Cost: Demand spikes (e.g., NFT mints) congest the base layer for all applications, creating $100+ gas wars.
~15 TPS
Ethereum Base
99%+
L2 Share
02
The Solution: Sovereign Execution & Data Layers
Specialization decouples the trilemma by assigning each component to an optimized layer. Execution, data availability, and settlement are unbundled.\n- Rollups (Arbitrum, zkSync): Handle execution at ~10,000 TPS with fraud/validity proofs.\n- Data Layers (Celestia, EigenDA): Provide cheap, scalable data availability for ~$0.001 per KB.\n- Settlement Layers (Ethereum, Bitcoin): Act as a secure, neutral court of final appeal.
100x
Cheaper DA
~2s
Finality
03
The Trend: Application-Specific Chains & Rollups
The endgame is vertical integration. Major apps are building their own optimized environments, rejecting the shared, congested sandbox.\n- dYdX Chain: A Cosmos app-chain achieving CEX-like throughput and zero gas fees for users.\n- Lens Protocol: Migrating to a dedicated zkRollup to scale social graph operations.\n- The 'Rollup-as-a-Service' Boom: Platforms like AltLayer and Caldera let any team launch a custom rollup in hours, not months.
$0
User Gas
10k+ TPS
Peak Capacity
deep-dive
THE ARCHITECTURAL IMPERATIVE
First Principles: Why Specialization Wins
Generalized Layer 1s are structurally incapable of winning the scaling race against specialized, modular stacks.
The Trilemma is a Design Constraint. A monolithic chain must make trade-offs between decentralization, security, and scalability within a single state machine. Ethereum chose security and decentralization, ceding scalability to specialized layers like Arbitrum and Optimism.
Specialization Enables Optimization. A dedicated ZK-rollup like zkSync or Starknet optimizes its virtual machine and prover for a specific use-case, achieving lower costs and higher throughput than a general-purpose chain ever could for that task.
Modularity is the Scaling Endgame. The future is a modular stack: Celestia for data availability, EigenLayer for shared security, and Arbitrum Orbit for execution. This decouples and optimizes each resource, making monolithic L1s obsolete.
Evidence: Ethereum's L2s now process over 90% of its transactions. The cost to launch a specialized app-chain via OP Stack or Arbitrum Orbit is trivial compared to bootstrapping a new L1.
WHY GENERALIZED L1S LOSE
Architectural Trade-Offs: L1 vs. Specialized Stack
A data-driven comparison of monolithic Layer 1s versus modular, specialized execution layers (e.g., Arbitrum, zkSync) and application-specific chains (e.g., dYdX v4).
| Architectural Feature | Generalized L1 (e.g., Ethereum, Solana) | Specialized L2 / Rollup (e.g., Arbitrum, zkSync) | App-Specific Chain (e.g., dYdX v4, Aevo) |
|---|---|---|---|
Execution Environment | Single, general-purpose VM (EVM, SVM) | Optimized VM (Arbitrum Stylus, zkEVM) | Custom VM tailored for a single dApp |
State Bloat Management | All dApps pollute shared global state | Sequencer can prune/compress state | State is 100% relevant to the application |
MEV Capture & Redistribution | Extractable Value leaks to searchers/validators | Native MEV auctions (e.g., Flashbots SUAVE) | 100% of MEV can be captured and redistributed to protocol/users |
Upgrade Flexibility & Forking | Hard forks require ecosystem-wide consensus | Upgrades via DAO governance or multisig | Core dev team has full sovereignty; instant upgrades |
Data Availability Cost | ~$0.36 per 100k gas (Ethereum calldata) | < $0.01 per 100k gas (via Celestia, EigenDA) | ~$0.001 per 100k gas (optimized for specific data types) |
Time-to-Finality for Users | ~12 minutes (Ethereum) | < 1 hour (via Ethereum settlement) | < 5 minutes (via fast-finality settlement like Cosmos) |
Developer Constraint Surface | Limited to L1 VM opcodes and gas costs | Can introduce new precompiles, data structures | Unconstrained; can implement any logic natively |
Protocol Revenue Retention | Fees paid to base layer validators | Sequencer/Prover captures fee surplus | 100% of fees accrue to the protocol treasury |
protocol-spotlight
THE ARCHITECTURAL SHIFT
Case Studies in Specialization
Generalized Layer 1s are losing the scaling war to purpose-built stacks that optimize for specific use cases.
01
Solana: The High-Throughput Singleton
The Problem: Ethereum's monolithic design creates a single, congested resource pool for execution, settlement, and data availability. The Solution: Solana's monolithic architecture is a specialized trade-off—optimizing for raw speed and low cost by using a single global state. It's a performance-specialized L1.
- ~50k TPS theoretical throughput via parallel execution.
- ~$0.0001 average transaction cost.
- Dominant for high-frequency DeFi (Jupiter, Raydium) and consumer apps.
400ms
Block Time
$0.0001
Avg. Cost
02
dYdX Chain: The App-Specific L1
The Problem: Running a high-performance orderbook DEX on a general-purpose chain like Ethereum is economically and technically prohibitive. The Solution: dYdX migrated to a Cosmos SDK chain, gaining full control over its stack. It specializes in centralized-exchange-grade performance for a single application.
- ~2,000 TPS capacity for order matching.
- Zero gas fees for traders, funded by protocol revenue.
- Validator set is incentivized purely by the success of the dYdX application.
2k TPS
Order Capacity
$0
Trader Fees
03
Base: The Rollup Scaling Factory
The Problem: Building a secure, high-capacity consumer application requires Ethereum's security but not its constrained execution environment. The Solution: Base, an Optimism OP Stack rollup, specializes in providing a low-cost, developer-friendly Ethereum L2. It leverages Ethereum for security and decentralization while outsourcing execution.
- ~$0.01 average transaction fee.
- Inherits security from Ethereum's $100B+ staked economic security.
- Serves as a hub for mass-market apps (Friend.tech, Farcaster) that would be impossible on L1.
-99%
vs L1 Fees
2 Sec
Time to Finality
04
Celestia: The Data Availability Specialists
The Problem: Launching a new blockchain requires bootstrapping a costly and complex security layer for data availability. The Solution: Celestia decouples and specializes solely in data availability (DA). It provides cheap, scalable DA as a pluggable module for rollups like Arbitrum Orbit and OP Stack chains.
- ~$0.01 per MB of data posted, vs. ~$1,000+ on Ethereum.
- Enables modular rollups to scale execution independently.
- Fundamentally changes the economic model for launching a new chain.
-99.9%
DA Cost
Modular
Architecture
05
Ethereum L1: The Settlement & Security Hub
The Problem: Trying to be the best at execution, settlement, and security simultaneously leads to unacceptable trade-offs in each. The Solution: Ethereum is now specializing upwards, becoming the canonical settlement and security layer for a constellation of rollups. Its new role is maximizing decentralization and security.
- ~$100B in staked ETH securing all L2s.
- Censorship resistance and liveness guaranteed by thousands of nodes.
- Final arbiter for disputes via fraud proofs and validity proofs (zk-rollups).
$100B+
Economic Security
Sovereign
Settlement
06
The Inevitable Conclusion: Vertical Integration Wins
The Problem: A one-size-fits-all blockchain cannot optimize for every use case without fatal compromise. The Solution: The future is vertical integration: specialized layers (DA, execution, settlement) composing into bespoke stacks. Teams choose optimal components (Celestia for DA, Arbitrum Nitro for execution, Ethereum for settlement).
- Best-in-class components beat integrated mediocrity.
- Enables application-specific optimization (e.g., a gaming chain using a fast DA layer and a custom VM).
- Results in exponential scaling as each layer innovates independently.
10-100x
Efficiency Gain
Composable
Stacks
counter-argument
THE NETWORK EFFECT FALLACY
The Liquidity Fragmentation Counter-Argument (And Why It's Wrong)
Generalized L1s claim a unified liquidity pool is superior, but specialized stacks create more efficient, composable capital through superior infrastructure.
Liquidity follows yield, not chains. Capital is fungible and migrates to the venue with the lowest execution cost and highest returns, enabled by intent-based solvers from UniswapX and CowSwap and secure bridges like Across and LayerZero.
Fragmentation is a protocol-level problem, not a chain-level one. A user's funds on ten rollups are useless if protocols like Aave or Uniswap V3 are only deployed on one. Universal deployment via rollup stacks like Arbitrum Orbit or OP Stack solves this.
Shared sequencing and settlement create unified liquidity. Stacks like EigenLayer and Espresso Systems provide cross-rollup atomic composability, making ten specialized chains behave like one logical system for DeFi applications.
Evidence: Ethereum L2s now command over 90% of all rollup TVL, demonstrating that liquidity consolidates around the strongest settlement and security layer, not a monolithic execution environment.
takeaways
THE END OF THE MONOLITH
TL;DR for Builders and Investors
The era of the 'do-it-all' L1 is over. The future belongs to specialized stacks that optimize for specific use cases.
01
The Modular Thesis: Celestia, EigenDA, Avail
Generalized L1s are constrained by the blockchain trilemma. Modular architectures separate execution, consensus, data availability, and settlement into specialized layers.\n- Unlocks hyper-scalability via data availability sampling (DAS).\n- Enables sovereign rollups with custom governance and fee markets.\n- Reduces node hardware requirements, promoting decentralization.
~$0.10
Per MB Data Cost
100x
Throughput Gain
02
The App-Specific Rollup: dYdX, Lyra, Aevo
One-size-fits-all VMs and fee markets are inefficient. App-specific rollups (ASRs) are the ultimate specialization.\n- Tailored execution environment for optimal performance (e.g., a CLOB for perps).\n- Captures maximal value without leaking MEV to a general-purpose L1.\n- Predictable, low-cost UX via controlled state growth and native account abstraction.
-99%
vs. L1 Fees
~10ms
Latency
03
The Vertical Integration Problem
Generalized L1s force all activity through a single, congested mempool and state tree. This creates systemic bottlenecks.\n- Inefficient resource pricing: NFT mint competes with DeFi arbitrage.\n- Inflexible security model: All apps pay for maximal security, even if they don't need it.\n- Innovation lag: Protocol upgrades require hard forks, slowing iteration.
$100M+
Daily MEV Extraction
Weeks
Upgrade Cycle
04
The Capital Efficiency Mandate
Investors and users demand capital-efficient infrastructure. Staked capital on a monolithic L1 is trapped.\n- Restaking (EigenLayer) allows ETH security to be reused for AVSs and rollups.\n- Modular stacks let validators provide services (DA, sequencing) across multiple chains.\n- Specialization reduces redundant security spend, freeing capital for yield.
$15B+
TVL in Restaking
3-5x
Capital Reuse
05
The Interoperability Layer: LayerZero, Axelar, Wormhole
Monolithic L1s are silos. Specialized stacks require robust, trust-minimized communication. This creates a massive TAM for interoperability protocols.\n- Generalized messaging enables composability across specialized execution environments.\n- Unified liquidity via cross-chain intent solvers (e.g., UniswapX, Across).\n- Security is outsourced to a dedicated network, not bolted onto an L1.
50+
Chains Connected
$30B+
Value Secured
06
The Developer Experience Trap
Building on a monolithic L1 means fighting for block space and adapting to its constraints. Specialized stacks flip the model.\n- Rollup-As-A-Service (RAAS) providers like Caldera and Conduit abstract infra complexity.\n- Custom gas tokens and fee logic are possible, improving user onboarding.\n- Faster iteration cycles with upgradeable contracts and dedicated throughput.
<1 Week
Chain Deployment
~$0
Gas for Users
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