Security is a commodity that sovereign rollups and appchains cannot afford to produce in-house. The capital and operational overhead for a standalone validator set creates an existential cost barrier for new chains.
the-modular-blockchain-thesis-explained
Blog
Why Sovereign Chains Will Pay a Premium for Hub Security
The modular thesis is creating a market for security-as-a-service. For sovereign chains and rollups, leasing consensus from a reputable hub is a rational, capital-efficient choice that mitigates the existential risk of validator set bootstrapping.
introduction
THE SECURITY PREMIUM
Introduction
Sovereign chains will pay for shared security because the cost of failure exceeds the cost of outsourcing.
Shared security hubs like Ethereum and Celestia transform capital expenditure into operational expenditure. A chain rents finality from a battle-tested network instead of bootstrapping its own.
The premium paid is not for raw compute, but for credible neutrality and liveness. A chain like dYdX pays for the assurance its state transitions are irreversible and its sequencer cannot be censored.
Evidence: The 2022 Wormhole bridge hack ($325M) demonstrates the catastrophic cost of a failed security assumption. Chains will pay a premium to avoid being the next headline.
key-trends
WHY SECURITY IS THE ULTIMATE COMPOSABILITY LAYER
The Security Premium Thesis: Three Core Trends
As modular stacks proliferate, the cost of securing a sovereign chain's state is becoming its primary economic differentiator and a non-negotiable expense.
01
The Problem: The Shared Sequencer Security Trap
Relying on a third-party shared sequencer like Astria or Espresso for cheap ordering creates a critical dependency. The chain's liveness and censorship-resistance are outsourced, creating a single point of failure that sophisticated users and institutions will not tolerate for high-value applications.
- Liveness Risk: Your chain halts if the sequencer network fails.
- Censorship Vector: A malicious or compliant sequencer can reorder or exclude transactions.
- Value Leakage: You pay rent for a core security function you don't control.
1
Critical SPOF
0%
Sovereignty
02
The Solution: Hub Security as a Sovereign Asset
Paying a premium to post state commitments and proofs to a high-security hub like Celestia or EigenLayer transforms security from an operational cost into a composable asset. This creates a verifiable security credential that attracts capital and developers.
- Verifiable Security: Finality is backed by $1B+ in staked capital, auditable on-chain.
- Composability Premium: Secure state proofs enable native trust-minimized bridges to other chains in the ecosystem.
- Institutional On-Ramp: Clear security provenance meets regulatory and institutional due diligence requirements.
$1B+
Stake Backing
Trustless
Bridges
03
The Trend: The Re-Bundling of Security and Sovereignty
The initial modular thesis championed extreme specialization. The next phase, led by projects like Dymension and Sovereign Labs, re-bundles execution with a purpose-built security layer. This isn't a rollup—it's a sovereign chain that chooses to lease security from a hub, maintaining full sovereignty over upgrades and governance.
- Sovereign Upside: Capture full MEV and gas revenue, not just a portion.
- Hub Security: Lease battle-tested validator sets and consensus.
- Market Signal: Chains that pay for premium security will command a higher valuation multiple than those that don't.
100%
Revenue Capture
Premium
Valuation
deep-dive
THE CAPITAL TRAP
The Real Cost of Sovereignty: Bootstrapping vs. Leasing
Sovereign chains trade operational simplicity for massive, upfront capital expenditure to bootstrap credible security.
Bootstrapping security is capital-inefficient. A new sovereign chain must attract and lock billions in native token value to achieve credible Nakamoto Consensus. This capital sits idle, generating zero yield, solely to deter attacks.
Leasing security is operationally complex. Chains like Celestia rollups lease data availability, but must still assemble a security stack from disparate providers like EigenLayer for restaking, Hyperlane for interoperability, and AltLayer for sequencing.
The premium is paid in time and trust. Bootstrapping requires years to build validator legitimacy. Leasing shifts the risk to third-party cryptoeconomic security, creating systemic dependencies on protocols like EigenLayer and Across.
Evidence: A new L1 needs a $10B+ market cap to match Ethereum's Nakamoto Coefficient. An appchain leasing from EigenLayer and Celestia spends capital on service fees, not equity.
SOVEREIGN VS. SHARED SECURITY
Security Model Cost-Benefit Matrix
Quantifying the trade-offs between sovereign chain security models, highlighting why projects pay a premium for hub-based validation.
| Security Feature / Metric | Sovereign Validator Set (e.g., Polygon PoS, Avalanche C-Chain) | Hub-Based Security (e.g., Cosmos Hub, Ethereum via EigenLayer) | Shared Sequencer (e.g., Espresso, Astria) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capital Cost to Launch ($M) | 10-50 | 0.1-5 | 0.1-2 |
Time to Finality | 2-6 seconds | 1-2 seconds | 2-12 seconds |
Economic Security (TVL Staked) | Chain-specific, $50M-$500M | Hub-derived, $10B+ | Sequencer-set specific, $10M-$100M |
Validator Decentralization (Node Count) | 50-150 | 100-200+ | 10-50 |
Cross-Chain Trust Assumption | Bridges (External Trust) | Native IBC / Light Clients (Minimal Trust) | Shared DA + Prover (Minimal Trust) |
Sovereignty Over Upgrades | |||
MEV Capture & Redistribution | Sovereign control | Subject to hub governance | Managed by sequencer set |
Protocol Revenue Leakage | 0% (Retained by chain) | 5-20% (Paid to hub) | 2-10% (Paid to sequencer service) |
protocol-spotlight
THE SECURITY PREMIUM
Hub Security in Practice: Celestia, EigenLayer, and Beyond
Sovereign chains are opting to rent security from specialized hubs, creating a multi-billion dollar market for shared cryptoeconomic safety.
01
The Problem: The Solo Chain Security Trap
Launching a standalone L1 requires bootstrapping a new validator set and token, creating massive capital inefficiency and existential risk.
- Cost: Securing a modest chain requires $500M+ in staked value to deter attacks.
- Fragility: New tokens are volatile, leading to >50% validator churn during bear markets.
- Distraction: Teams spend years on security mechanics instead of core application logic.
$500M+
Stake Required
>50%
Validator Churn
02
The Solution: Celestia's Data Availability Cartel
Celestia provides a neutral, modular security layer for data availability (DA), allowing rollups to inherit security from its $2B+ staked validator set.
- Pricing: Rollups pay ~$0.10 per MB for verified, available data.
- Guarantee: Security scales with the hub; a larger Celestia stake means stronger guarantees for all connected chains.
- Ecosystem: This model is adopted by Eclipse, Dymension, and Fuel, creating a network effect.
$2B+
Staked Security
$0.10/MB
DA Cost
03
The Solution: EigenLayer's Restaking Super-App
EigenLayer enables Ethereum stakers to re-stake their ETH to secure new "Actively Validated Services" (AVSs), creating a marketplace for pooled security.
- Scale: Taps into Ethereum's $100B+ staked ETH base, the largest crypto-economic pool.
- Flexibility: AVSs can rent security for diverse needs: new L1s, oracles (like eoracle), and bridges.
- Yield: Stakers earn additional yield, creating a flywheel for the security supply side.
$100B+
Base Capital
15+
Live AVSs
04
The Premium: Why It's Worth 5-20% of Chain Revenue
Paying for hub security is not an expense; it's a strategic investment that directly impacts chain valuation and user trust.
- Trust Minimization: Users and developers flock to chains backed by Ethereum or Celestia over unknown validators.
- Capital Efficiency: Frees 90%+ of treasury for growth, not staking incentives.
- Composability: Secure integration with the hub's ecosystem (e.g., shared bridges, liquidity) is a force multiplier.
5-20%
Revenue Premium
90%+
Capital Freed
05
The Competitor: Babylon's Bitcoin Time-Stamping
Babylon leverages Bitcoin's $1T+ security not for live validation, but for slashing and checkpointing via timestamping protocols.
- Model: Chains post checkpoints to Bitcoin; a fraudulent chain can have its stake slashed via Bitcoin script.
- Asset: Unlocks security from otherwise idle Bitcoin capital.
- Trade-off: Offers strong economic finality but not real-time validation, suitable for less frequent settlement.
$1T+
Base Asset
~1hr
Finality Latency
06
The Future: Interhub Security Markets
The endgame is not a single winner, but a competitive market where security is a commodity traded between Celestia, EigenLayer, Cosmos, and Babylon.
- Arbitrage: Chains will dynamically source the cheapest adequate security, driving efficiency.
- Specialization: Hubs will differentiate on latency (Celestia), capital scale (EigenLayer), or asset type (Babylon).
- Valuation: Hub tokens will be valued as security cash-flow engines, not mere governance tokens.
4+
Major Hubs
Commodity
Security Model
counter-argument
THE TRADE-OFF
The Counter-Argument: Is Hub Security a Centralization Vector?
Sovereign chains trade political autonomy for a more robust, market-tested security model than they can achieve alone.
Hub security is not centralization; it is a specialized security market. A rollup's native validator set is a single point of failure, while a shared security hub like Ethereum or Celestia aggregates thousands of validators and billions in stake.
Sovereign validators are a luxury. A new chain cannot credibly bootstrap a decentralized validator set with meaningful economic security. The cost to attack a small sovereign chain is trivial compared to attacking a major hub.
The premium is for liveness guarantees. Chains pay for the hub's battle-tested liveness and censorship resistance. A sovereign chain halting is catastrophic; a hub halting triggers a global, coordinated response from the entire ecosystem.
Evidence: Ethereum's beacon chain has over 1 million validators. A new L1 like Berachain or Monad must spend years and billions to approach this Nakamoto Coefficient. The security premium is the cost of time.
takeaways
THE HUB SECURITY PREMIUM
TL;DR for Builders and Investors
Sovereign chains are discovering that outsourcing security to a battle-tested hub is a capital-efficient scaling strategy, creating a new market for shared security.
01
The Validator Capital Problem
Bootstrapping a decentralized, high-stake validator set is a $100M+ capital formation problem. Sovereign chains like dYdX and Celestia rollups avoid this by leasing security from a hub like Cosmos or EigenLayer.\n- Eliminates the need for a native token for PoS security.\n- Reduces time-to-launch from years to months.
$100M+
Capital Avoided
-90%
Launch Time
02
Interoperability as a Revenue Stream
A secure hub isn't just a cost center; it's a revenue-generating platform via IBC or shared sequencers. Hubs like Polygon AggLayer and Cosmos monetize cross-chain communication and liquidity flow.\n- Enables trust-minimized bridging, unlike opaque LayerZero oracles.\n- Creates sustainable fee models from interchain activity.
10-100x
More TPS
~$0.01
Bridge Cost
03
The Shared Sequencer Arbitrage
Rollups pay ~30% of their revenue to centralized sequencers (e.g., Ethereum L2s). Shared sequencer networks like Astria or Espresso offer decentralized sequencing at a discount, paid to the hub's stakers.\n- Turns security cost into a competitive service.\n- Prevents MEV extraction by a single entity.
-30%
Sequencing Cost
100%
Uptime SLA
04
EigenLayer's Restaking Flywheel
EigenLayer allows Ethereum stakers to re-stake ETH to secure new chains (AVSs), creating a $10B+ security marketplace. This commoditizes crypto-economic security.\n- Sovereign chains bid for security from a pooled capital base.\n- Stakers earn premium yields for taking on additional slashing risk.
$10B+
Security Pool
2-5x
Yield Boost
05
The Modular Security Stack
Just as Celestia modularized data availability, hubs are modularizing security. Chains can mix-and-match components: Celestia for DA, EigenLayer for validation, Polygon for interoperability.\n- Enables best-in-class infrastructure per function.\n- Prevents vendor lock-in to a single monolithic chain.
5+
Specialized Providers
-70%
Infra Cost
06
The Premium is Inevitable
The market will price security as a commodity. Hubs with the highest TVL, most decentralized validation, and proven liveness will command a premium. This is the AWS model applied to blockchain consensus.\n- Builders get bulletproof security without the capex.\n- Investors get exposure to the underlying utility layer of Web3.
100x
More Secure
Premium
Priced In
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