Shared sequencers commoditize bridging. Protocols like Across, Stargate, and LayerZero derive security and finality from the underlying L1 or L2 they bridge. A shared sequencer like Espresso or Astria provides a canonical, cross-rollup ordering layer, making the sequencing component of these bridges redundant.
the-modular-blockchain-thesis-explained
Blog
Why Interoperability Protocols Are Threatened by Shared Sequencing
The modular stack's evolution introduces a new primitive: shared sequencing. Its native ability to order transactions across multiple rollups creates atomic composability, a core function currently monopolized by bridging protocols. This is an existential technological bypass.
introduction
THE THREAT
Introduction
Shared sequencing is a systemic risk that commoditizes and centralizes the value proposition of interoperability protocols.
Interoperability becomes a sequencing game. The primary technical challenge shifts from secure message passing to securing fast, cheap sequencing. This redefines competition; protocols must integrate with or become sequencers to capture value, moving up the stack.
Evidence: The Ethereum rollup roadmap explicitly pushes for decentralized sequencing. Shared sequencers are the logical endpoint, creating a single point of failure and economic capture that Across and Connext must now architect around or become obsolete.
key-trends
WHY SHARED SEQUENCERS WIN
The Inevitable Shift: Three Market Forces
The current interoperability model of bridges and messaging protocols is a temporary patch, not a final solution. Shared sequencers are emerging as the superior primitive, directly attacking the core inefficiencies of the cross-chain status quo.
01
The Atomicity Problem
Bridges like LayerZero and Axelar enable asset transfers, but complex cross-chain actions (e.g., swap USDC on Arbitrum for ETH on Base) require multiple, non-atomic steps. This creates settlement risk and MEV extraction opportunities.
- User Risk: Failed partial execution leaves funds stranded.
- MEV Leakage: Front-running and sandwiching between chain hops.
- Solution: A shared sequencer (e.g., Espresso, Astria) orders transactions destined for multiple rollups before they hit L1, guaranteeing atomic execution across chains.
~0s
Atomic Window
-99%
Settlement Risk
02
The Liquidity Fragmentation Tax
Every major bridge and DEX aggregator (Across, Socket, LI.FI) must maintain liquidity pools on both sides of a chain connection. This capital is idle and fragmented, representing a multi-billion dollar inefficiency.
- Capital Cost: $10B+ TVL locked in bridge contracts, earning minimal yield.
- User Cost: Fees include LP spreads and relayers' profit margins.
- Solution: Shared sequencing enables native cross-rollup composability. Liquidity stays in productive DeFi pools on the destination chain, slashing the need for dedicated bridge capital.
$10B+
Inefficient TVL
-80%
Bridge Tax
03
The Latency & Cost Spiral
Current cross-chain flows are a series of sequential L1 settlements. A user action from Optimism to Polygon requires two separate L1 confirmations, resulting in high latency (~10-20 min) and compounded gas fees.
- Speed: Bottlenecked by the slowest chain's finality.
- Cost: Users pay for multiple L1 txs.
- Solution: Shared sequencers batch and order cross-rollup transactions off-chain, submitting a single, efficient proof to L1. This collapses latency to ~1-2s and distributes L1 cost across thousands of transactions.
~2s
Cross-Chain Latency
-90%
Gas Cost
thesis-statement
THE ARCHITECTURAL SHIFT
The Core Argument: Native Beats Bolted-On
Shared sequencing erodes the value proposition of standalone interoperability protocols by integrating their core function into the settlement layer.
Shared sequencers preempt interoperability protocols. Protocols like Across, Stargate, and LayerZero exist to solve the atomic composability problem between sovereign rollups. A shared sequencer, like Espresso or Astria, provides atomic cross-rollup execution natively, making their bridging logic redundant.
Native atomicity destroys the bolted-on business model. The economic moat for an interoperability protocol is its ability to guarantee atomic state transitions across chains. A shared sequencing layer bakes this guarantee into the data availability and ordering primitive, collapsing the fee market for third-party bridging.
The threat is existential, not incremental. This is not a competition on latency or cost. It is architectural obsolescence. A rollup stack with a native shared sequencer has no need to route user intents through an external Across relayer or a LayerZero Oracle.
Evidence: The migration is already visible. Arbitrum's BOLD consensus and Optimism's Superchain vision explicitly design for native cross-chain messaging via a shared sequencer, directly competing with the Stargate router network.
THE ENDGAME FOR INTEROPERABILITY
Atomic Composability: Bridge vs. Sequencer
Compares the architectural approaches for achieving atomic cross-chain composability, the core battleground for user experience and protocol sovereignty.
| Critical Feature / Metric | Intent-Based Bridges (e.g., UniswapX, Across) | Shared Sequencer Networks (e.g., Espresso, Astria) | Centralized Sequencer (Status Quo) |
|---|---|---|---|
Atomic Execution Guarantee | |||
Settlement Finality Time | 2-5 min (Optimistic) | < 1 sec (ZK-Proof) | ~12 sec (L1 Block Time) |
Protocol Sovereignty | High (Chooses solver) | Medium (Votes in network) | None (Sequencer dictates) |
MEV Resistance / Redistribution | Yes (via auction) | Yes (via MEV-Boost++ | No (Sequencer captures) |
Cross-Domain State Access | No (Message-passing only) | Yes (Native read/write) | No (Isolated execution) |
Infrastructure Cost | ~0.3% of tx value | Fixed gas + staking cost | Negligible (bundled) |
Adoption Hurdle | Liquidity Fragmentation | Validator Coordination | Vendor Lock-in |
deep-dive
THE ARCHITECTURAL SHIFT
How Shared Sequencing Eats The Bridge
Shared sequencers render cross-chain bridges obsolete by moving liquidity and execution to a single atomic layer.
Shared sequencing eliminates the bridge. It creates a single, sovereign sequencing layer for multiple rollups, enabling atomic composability across chains without asset bridging. This makes the trust-minimized bridge a redundant middleman.
Liquidity fragments across bridges. Today, assets are locked in silos like Across, Stargate, and LayerZero. Shared sequencers pool liquidity at the sequencing layer, collapsing the fragmented bridge market into a single settlement primitive.
Atomic execution kills arbitrage. Bridges like Wormhole enable slow, risky multi-step transactions. A shared sequencer enables atomic cross-rollup transactions, making front-running and MEV extraction across chains structurally impossible.
Evidence: Espresso Systems' shared sequencer demo with Arbitrum and Optimism testnets processed atomic cross-rollup swaps, a transaction type impossible for AnySwap or Celer Network without centralized coordination.
protocol-spotlight
THE INTEROPERABILITY DISRUPTION
The New Stack: Shared Sequencers in Action
Shared sequencers like Espresso, Astria, and Madara are not just scaling tools; they are a direct threat to the economic and security models of cross-chain messaging protocols.
01
The Problem: The MEV Bridge Tax
Interoperability protocols like LayerZero, Axelar, and Wormhole monetize by securing cross-chain message ordering—a role now directly competed for by shared sequencers. Their fees are a tax on cross-domain MEV extraction.
- Current Model: Bridges capture value from $100M+ annual cross-chain MEV.
- New Threat: A shared sequencer with fast finality can internalize this value, slashing bridge revenue by ~30-50%.
$100M+
Annual MEV
-50%
Fee Pressure
02
The Solution: Native Cross-Rollup Atomic Composability
Shared sequencers enable atomic transactions across multiple rollups (e.g., a swap on Arbitrum and a mint on zkSync in one block), making asynchronous bridging obsolete for high-value DeFi flows.
- Eliminates Bridge Risk: No more $2B+ in bridge hack liabilities.
- Unlocks New Apps: Enables cross-rollup DEXs and leveraged positions impossible with 10-minute bridge delays.
Atomic
Execution
~2s
Settlement
03
The Problem: Fragmented Security Budgets
Each interoperability protocol must bootstrap its own validator set and stake, fragmenting economic security. Chainlink CCIP, Wormhole, and others compete for the same $50B+ in staked capital.
- Inefficient Capital: Security is siloed and non-composable.
- Shared Sequencer Advantage: A single, high-stake sequencer set (e.g., EigenLayer AVS) secures all connected rollups, creating a 10x+ denser security pool.
$50B+
Fragmented Stake
10x
Security Density
04
The Solution: Intents as the New Messaging Primitive
Shared sequencing makes intent-based architectures like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across more viable by providing a neutral, fast ordering layer. Solvers compete on a level playing field.
- Better UX: Users get optimal cross-rollup routes without managing liquidity.
- Protocols Become Solvers: Bridges must evolve into generalized solvers or become irrelevant.
~500ms
Auction Time
0
Slippage
05
The Problem: The Oracle Finality Dilemma
Light-client bridges and optimistic verification schemes (e.g., IBC) rely on source chain finality, which can take minutes. In a fast, shared sequencing environment, this latency is unacceptable.
- Speed Mismatch: 1-2 second sequencer output vs. 1-2 minute bridge finality.
- Arbitrage Window: Creates risk-free arbitrage opportunities, undermining bridge integrity.
1-2s
Seq. Output
60s+
Bridge Delay
06
The Solution: Shared Sequencing as the Canonical Data Layer
A shared sequencer's mempool and block data become the single source of truth for cross-rollup state. Projects like Espresso and Astria are building this, making external data attestation from Chainlink or LayerZero redundant for rollup-to-rollup communication.
- Unified Liquidity: Enables a single cross-rollup orderbook.
- Redundancy for Legacy Bridges: Forces them into niche, non-rollup use cases.
1
Source of Truth
100%
Data Redundancy
counter-argument
THE NETWORK EFFECT
The Rebuttal: Why Bridges Won't Die Quietly
Shared sequencing threatens interoperability protocols, but entrenched liquidity and specialized use cases ensure bridges remain vital infrastructure.
Bridges own liquidity moats. Protocols like Across and Stargate have billions in TVL and established user flows. Shared sequencers must bootstrap equivalent liquidity pools and security models from zero, a multi-year challenge.
Specialized intents require specialized solvers. General-purpose shared sequencing cannot optimize for niche cross-chain intents like limit orders or NFT bridging. Dedicated solvers in systems like Across and LayerZero will outperform generic sequencing for these tasks.
Shared sequencing is a complement, not a replacement. It solves for atomic composability within a rollup superhighway, but bridges solve for universal asset portability. The future is a hybrid model where shared sequencers handle fast L2-to-L2 flows and bridges handle everything else.
takeaways
THE SEQUENCER POWER GRAB
TL;DR for Builders and Investors
Shared sequencers like Espresso, Astria, and Radius are commoditizing block production, creating an existential threat to the business models of interoperability protocols.
01
The End of the Cross-Chain MEV Cartel
Protocols like LayerZero and Axelar monetize by being the sole, trusted relay of messages and value. A shared sequencer with fast finality (e.g., ~500ms) enables native cross-rollup atomic composability, making their relay layer redundant for high-value transactions.\n- Eliminates the need for a trusted third-party message bus.\n- Redirects MEV revenue from the bridge to the shared sequencer and its users.
~500ms
Atomic Latency
$0
Relayer Tax
02
Intent-Based Architectures Win
Shared sequencing is the perfect settlement layer for intent-based systems like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across. Solvers can now guarantee execution across multiple rollups atomically, without relying on slow, expensive optimistic or zk-bridges.\n- Unlocks cross-rollup fillable liquidity.\n- Reduces user gas costs by -30%+ via optimized routing.
-30%+
Gas Cost
10x
Liquidity Access
03
The New Security Primitive: Sequencing-as-a-Service
Builders must treat the sequencer as a critical, replaceable infrastructure component. Relying on a single L2's sequencer (e.g., OP Stack, Arbitrum) creates centralization risk and limits interoperability. Shared sequencers like Espresso offer decentralized sequencing sets that rollups can permissionlessly join.\n- Mitigates $10B+ TVL single-point-of-failure risk.\n- Future-proofs rollups for a multi-chain ecosystem.
$10B+
TVL at Risk
1 -> N
Sequencer Model
04
VCs: Bet on the Settlement Layer, Not the Bridge
The long-term value accrual shifts from application-specific bridges to the base sequencing and data availability layer. Investment theses must pivot from 'who moves the message' to 'who orders the transactions'. This favors protocols like Celestia (data), EigenLayer (restaking for security), and the shared sequencers themselves.\n- Obsolesces pure messaging middleware.\n- Consolidates value in the base sequencing market.
100x
TAM Expansion
Layer 0
New Battleground
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