Execution layer fragmentation is intentional. Monolithic blockchains like Ethereum L1 are designed for security and decentralization, not speed. This creates a vacuum for specialized chains like Arbitrum (optimistic rollup) and zkSync Era (ZK-rollup) to capture specific use cases.
the-modular-blockchain-thesis-explained
Blog
Why Execution Layer Fragmentation is a Feature, Not a Bug
The proliferation of rollups and VMs is not a scaling failure—it's a deliberate design outcome enabling specialization. The modular stack's real test is seamless interoperability, not forced unification.
introduction
THE FRAGMENTATION THESIS
Introduction
The proliferation of execution layers is a deliberate architectural outcome that optimizes for specialized performance and user choice.
Fragmentation creates competitive markets. Users and developers vote with their capital and code, forcing chains to compete on fees, speed, and features. This dynamic pressures Solana to optimize for raw throughput while driving Polygon zkEVM to improve Ethereum compatibility.
The bridge is the new bottleneck. This multi-chain reality shifts the core infrastructure challenge from L1 scaling to secure cross-chain communication. Protocols like LayerZero and Axelar are building the messaging layers that make this fragmented world usable.
Evidence: Over 60% of Ethereum's TVL now resides on its L2 rollups, a direct metric of capital migration to specialized execution environments. This is not a bug; it's the system working as designed.
key-trends
WHY EXECUTION LAYER FRAGMENTATION IS A FEATURE, NOT A BUG
The Fragmentation Thesis: Three Core Trends
Monolithic chains optimize for consensus, not execution. Fragmentation unlocks specialized performance.
01
The Problem: The Monolithic Bottleneck
A single execution thread cannot be optimized for all tasks. General-purpose EVM chains force DeFi, gaming, and social apps to compete for the same congested, expensive blockspace.
- Throughput Ceiling: EVM L1s like Ethereum are capped at ~15-30 TPS for complex transactions.
- Cost Inefficiency: Users pay for universal security even for low-value, latency-sensitive applications.
- Innovation Stagnation: New VM designs (e.g., SVM, MoveVM) are stifled by backwards compatibility demands.
15-30 TPS
EVM Bottleneck
$50+
Peak TX Cost
02
The Solution: Specialized Execution Layers (Rollups, Appchains)
Fragmentation allows execution to be unbundled and optimized for specific use-cases, while shared settlement (e.g., Ethereum) provides security.
- Performance Specialization: Gaming rollups (e.g., Immutable zkEVM) achieve ~9k TPS with sub-second latency.
- Cost Specialization: L2s like Arbitrum and Base reduce fees by 10-100x vs. L1.
- Sovereign Experimentation: Appchains (e.g., dYdX v4, Axelar) can implement custom VMs and governance without forking.
9k TPS
Specialized Peak
-90%
Avg. Cost
03
The Enabler: Universal Interoperability Protocols
Fragmentation is useless without seamless connectivity. A new stack of intent-based bridges and shared sequencing is emerging to unify liquidity and state.
- Intent-Based Flow: Protocols like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across route users to the optimal chain/liquidity source automatically.
- Shared Sequencing: Projects like Espresso and Astria provide cross-rollup atomic composability and MEV resistance.
- Unified Liquidity: LayerZero and CCIP enable $10B+ in cross-chain value movement by standardizing message passing.
$10B+
Cross-Chain TVL
~2s
Bridge Finality
deep-dive
THE EXECUTION LAYER
From Monolithic Prototype to Modular Production
Execution layer fragmentation is the necessary, high-performance output of a modular blockchain stack.
Fragmentation is a feature because it decouples execution from consensus and data availability. This separation allows specialized rollups like Arbitrum and zkSync to optimize for speed and cost without compromising the security of the underlying settlement layer, Ethereum.
The monolithic model fails at scale. A single chain must process every transaction, creating a bottleneck. A modular stack with fragmented execution layers, connected via shared security from Celestia or EigenDA, achieves higher aggregate throughput than any single chain.
Interoperability solves fragmentation. Users don't interact with chains; they interact with applications. Intents-based systems like UniswapX and shared sequencing layers (e.g., Espresso) abstract away the underlying execution environment, making the fragmentation invisible.
Evidence: The combined daily transaction volume of Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base frequently surpasses Ethereum L1. This proves demand flows to the most efficient execution layer, not to a single canonical chain.
THE MODULAR TRADEOFF
Execution Layer Specialization Matrix
Comparing core execution layer architectures by their specialized performance, cost, and programmability characteristics.
| Primary Metric / Feature | General-Purpose L1 (e.g., Ethereum Mainnet) | High-Performance L2 (e.g., Arbitrum, Optimism) | Application-Specific Rollup (e.g., dYdX, Immutable) |
|---|---|---|---|
Block Time / Finality | 12 sec | < 1 sec | < 1 sec |
Avg. User Tx Cost (Swap) | $5-50 | $0.10-$1.50 | < $0.01 |
Throughput (TPS, Theoretical) | 15-30 | 2,000-4,000+ | 10,000+ |
Sovereignty / Forkability | |||
Native MEV Resistance | |||
Custom Precompiles / Opcodes | |||
Sequencer Decentralization | |||
Time-to-Market for New Apps | Months | Weeks | Days |
counter-argument
THE REALITY
The Interoperability Challenge: Reframing the Problem
Execution layer fragmentation is a deliberate architectural outcome that enables specialized performance, not a design flaw to be papered over.
Fragmentation enables specialization. Monolithic L1s like Ethereum cannot simultaneously optimize for security, throughput, and cost. Rollups like Arbitrum and zkSync Era fragment execution to offer specific trade-offs, creating a competitive market for block space.
The problem is coordination, not fragmentation. Users need a unified interface to this fragmented landscape. The core challenge is building intent-based coordination layers that abstract away chain selection, similar to how UniswapX or Across Protocol abstracts bridge routing.
Bridges are a symptom, not a solution. Infrastructure like LayerZero and Axelar are plumbing for asset transfer, but they do not solve the user experience of discovering and accessing optimal execution environments across hundreds of chains.
Evidence: Ethereum L2s now process over 90% of all EVM transactions. This proves demand has shifted to specialized execution layers, making interoperability a post-trade settlement problem, not a pre-trade constraint.
protocol-spotlight
THE NEW STACK
Interoperability Builders: The New Critical Infrastructure
As execution layers proliferate, the value accrues to the protocols that abstract away the complexity of a multi-chain world.
01
The Problem: The Liquidity Fragmentation Tax
Every new L2 or appchain creates isolated liquidity pools, forcing users and protocols to pay a capital efficiency penalty. Bridging assets is slow, expensive, and insecure.
- Cost: Users pay 1-3% slippage + gas on every hop.
- Time: Native bridges can take 10-30 minutes for finality.
- Risk: Over $2B+ has been stolen from bridges since 2021.
1-3%
Slippage Tax
$2B+
Bridge Hacks
02
The Solution: Intent-Based Routing (UniswapX, CowSwap)
Instead of users manually bridging and swapping, they submit an intent (e.g., 'Swap 1 ETH for ARB on Arbitrum'). Specialized solvers compete to fulfill it via the optimal path across all chains and DEXs.
- Efficiency: Solvers aggregate liquidity, reducing price impact.
- UX: Users get one-click, cross-chain swaps with guaranteed rates.
- Innovation: Enables gasless transactions and MEV protection.
~500ms
Quote Latency
-50%
Effective Cost
03
The Solution: Universal Messaging Layers (LayerZero, Axelar)
These are the TCP/IP for blockchains, providing a generic communication primitive. Any app on any chain can send arbitrary data/messages to any other.
- Composability: Enables native cross-chain DeFi (e.g., lending on Aave using collateral from another chain).
- Security: Moves risk from individual bridge contracts to a shared security model (oracles/validators).
- Developer Adoption: 1000+ dApps integrated, making it the default standard.
1000+
dApp Integrations
~15s
Message Time
04
The Solution: Shared Sequencing (Espresso, Astria)
Fragmented rollup sequencers create cross-chain MEV and poor user experience. A shared sequencer processes transactions for multiple rollups simultaneously, enabling atomic cross-rollup composability.
- Atomic Composability: Enables a single transaction that interacts with dApps on Optimism, Arbitrum, and zkSync at once.
- MEV Redistribution: Captures and democratizes cross-domain MEV.
- Speed: Users experience near-instant confirmation across all connected chains.
Near-Instant
Cross-Chain TX
>50%
MEV Reduction
takeaways
EXECUTION LAYER FRAGMENTATION
TL;DR for Busy Builders
The proliferation of rollups, app-chains, and L2s isn't a scaling failure—it's a competitive market for execution resources, driving innovation at the protocol level.
01
The Problem: Monolithic Chains are a Single Point of Failure
A single execution environment forces all dApps to compete for the same congested blockspace, leading to volatile fees and unpredictable performance for users.\n- Guaranteed Liveness: A dedicated rollup (like dYdX's Cosmos app-chain) never gets front-run by an NFT mint.\n- Predictable Economics: Apps can subsidize or set their own gas fee markets, a key driver for Starknet's fee market revamp.
1000x
Fee Spikes
~0s
Downtime Risk
02
The Solution: Specialized Execution for Dominant Use-Cases
Fragmentation allows chains to optimize their virtual machine and data availability trade-offs for specific applications.\n- Hyper-Optimized VMs: zkSync Era and Starknet use custom LLVM compilers for superior performance in DeFi and gaming.\n- Cost-Effective DA: Celestia and EigenDA enable validiums/sovrollups to cut data costs by ~90% for social or high-throughput apps.
-90%
DA Cost
10x+
Throughput
03
The Infrastructure: Aggregation Layers Unify the Fragments
Fragmentation's value is unlocked by layers that abstract away chain complexity, making the ecosystem feel unified to users and developers.\n- Unified Liquidity: LayerZero and Axelar enable omnichain dApps, treating all chains as a single pool of liquidity.\n- Intent-Based UX: UniswapX and CowSwap abstract cross-chain swaps into declarative intents, letting solvers compete on Across and other bridges.
$10B+
Bridged TVL
~1 Click
User UX
04
The Result: A Darwinian Market for Blockspace
Execution layers now compete on cost, speed, and features, forcing rapid innovation. Users and developers vote with their capital and deployment choices.\n- Fee Market Competition: Arbitrum and Optimism have driven base fee reductions through sustained tech upgrades.\n- Architectural Experimentation: Fuel's parallel execution and Monad's pipelined EVM prove there is no 'one true VM'.
<$0.01
Avg. TX Cost
100+
Active L2s
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