MEV-Boost Relay Networks excel at maximizing extractable value by aggregating bids from a competitive marketplace of professional searchers and builders like Flashbots, bloXroute, and Agnostic. This specialization results in higher, more consistent rewards for validators, with top relays like Flashbots regularly contributing over 90% of blocks in their relay set. The primary advantage is outsourcing the complex, resource-intensive task of MEV extraction to experts, allowing validators to focus on core duties.
LABS
Comparisons
MEV Monitoring: MEV-Boost Relay Performance vs Local Block Building
A technical analysis for validators comparing the performance, reliability, and economic trade-offs of using external MEV-Boost relays versus building blocks locally. This guide provides a decision framework based on data, risk, and operational complexity.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Validator's MEV Dilemma
Choosing between MEV-Boost relays and local block building is a fundamental decision impacting validator revenue, decentralization, and operational complexity.
Local Block Building takes a different approach by having the validator's node construct blocks directly from its local mempool and private orderflow. This strategy eliminates reliance on third-party relays, enhancing censorship resistance and strengthening network decentralization. The trade-off is significant: validators must invest in sophisticated infrastructure—high-performance hardware, advanced MEV software suites like mev-rs or Reth—and expertise to compete with professional builders, often resulting in lower and more volatile MEV capture.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing predictable revenue with minimal operational overhead, choose MEV-Boost. If your priority is maximizing network sovereignty and censorship resistance, even at the cost of potential revenue and higher complexity, choose Local Building. For most validators, the revenue delta favors MEV-Boost, but protocols with strict neutrality requirements or access to exclusive orderflow may justify the local path.
tldr-summary
MEV-Boost Relay Performance vs Local Block Building
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A direct comparison of the two dominant MEV monitoring strategies for Ethereum validators, highlighting their core operational trade-offs.
01
MEV-Boost Relay Performance
Pros: Maximizes Revenue: Access to a competitive marketplace of professional builders (e.g., bloXroute, Flashbots, Ultrasound). This matters for validators prioritizing top-line staking yield. Cons: Censorship & Centralization Risk: Relies on a small set of relay operators. This matters for validators with OFAC compliance concerns or those prioritizing network neutrality.
02
MEV-Boost Relay Performance
Pros: Operational Simplicity: Offloads complex block building and optimization. This matters for solo stakers or small pools without dedicated MEV engineering resources. Cons: Relay Dependency & Latency: Subject to relay uptime and network propagation delays. This matters for validators in regions with poor connectivity to major relay hubs.
03
Local Block Building
Pros: Full Control & Censorship Resistance: Validator selects and orders transactions directly. This matters for protocols like Tornado Cash or validators committed to credible neutrality. Cons: Lower MEV Capture: Typically yields less revenue than specialized builders. This matters for validators in competitive pools where yield impacts delegation.
04
Local Block Building
Pros: Reduced Latency & Reliability: Eliminates reliance on external network hops. This matters for maximizing proposal success rate and avoiding missed slots. Cons: High Engineering Overhead: Requires expertise in transaction pool management, arbitrage detection, and PBS (e.g., using SUAVE, MEV-Share). This matters for teams without dedicated blockchain R&D.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
MEV-Boost Relay Performance vs Local Block Building
Direct comparison of key metrics for outsourced vs in-house MEV extraction strategies.
| Metric | MEV-Boost Relay | Local Block Building |
|---|---|---|
Avg. Block Reward Boost | 10-20% | 0-5% |
Latency to Proposer | < 1 sec | ~12 sec |
Censorship Resistance | ||
Required Infrastructure | Relay API | Full Node + Builder |
Avg. Builder Fee | 0.1-0.3 ETH | 0 ETH |
Max Extractable Value (MEV) | High (Multi-relay) | Low (Single builder) |
Operational Complexity | Low | High |
PERFORMANCE & RELIABILITY BENCHMARKS
MEV-Boost Relay Performance vs Local Block Building
Direct comparison of key metrics for outsourced vs in-house block production strategies on Ethereum.
| Metric | MEV-Boost Relay (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute) | Local Block Building |
|---|---|---|
Median Block Win Rate (Top Tier) |
| ~5-15% |
Avg. Block Proposal Latency | < 100 ms | ~500-1000 ms |
Censorship Resistance | ||
Max Extractable Value (MEV) Capture | High (Access to 90%+ of searcher flow) | Low (Reliant on local mempool) |
Required Infrastructure & Expertise | Low (API integration) | High (Requires builder & PBS software) |
Relay Failure Risk | Medium (Dependent on 3rd-party uptime) | None (Self-reliant) |
Avg. Payment to Validator (Priority Fee + MEV) | ~0.1 - 0.3 ETH/block | ~0.05 - 0.15 ETH/block |
pros-cons-a
PERFORMANCE & TRADE-OFFS
MEV-Boost Relays vs Local Block Building
A data-driven comparison for validators choosing between outsourcing block production via MEV-Boost relays or building blocks locally. Key metrics include extracted value, latency, and operational complexity.
01
MEV-Boost Relay: Higher Extracted Value
Access to competitive builder market: Relays like Flashbots, bloXroute, and Agnostic aggregate bids from professional builders, consistently delivering higher MEV rewards. This matters for validators prioritizing maximizing staking APR. Average block value can be 10-20% higher versus basic local building.
10-20%
Higher Block Value
02
MEV-Boost Relay: Reduced Operational Overhead
Outsource complex optimization: No need to run sophisticated block-building software (e.g., MEV-Geth, MEV-Boost) or manage transaction pools. This matters for validators with limited engineering resources who want a set-and-forget integration via their consensus client.
03
Local Block Building: Latency & Censorship Resistance
Full control over inclusion: Build blocks directly from your local mempool, eliminating relay latency (typically 100-500ms). This matters for high-frequency trading bots and protocols requiring sub-second finality. Also ensures censorship-resistant transaction ordering, a key concern for OFAC compliance debates.
< 100ms
Local Build Latency
04
Local Block Building: Protocol & Fee Revenue
Capture 100% of priority fees: No sharing with builders or relays. This matters when network base fees are high or for validators running their own private order flow (e.g., from a DEX or bridge). Direct integration with EigenLayer, EIP-1559 burn mechanics is also simpler.
05
MEV-Boost Relay: Centralization & Trust Risks
Relay dependency: You trust the relay's attestation and block validity. Dominant relays create centralization vectors. This matters for validators adhering to credible neutrality principles. Outages at major relays (historical events with bloXroute) can impact proposal success.
06
Local Block Building: High Engineering Cost
Requires expert configuration: To be competitive, you must run and tune SUAVE, MEV-Boost builder software, or proprietary strategies. This matters for solo stakers or small ops where dev time exceeds potential MEV gains. Initial setup and maintenance is non-trivial.
$50K+
Est. Dev/Op Cost
pros-cons-b
MEV-Boost Relay Performance vs Local Block Building
Local Block Building: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for block proposers evaluating MEV extraction strategies.
01
MEV-Boost: Maximized Revenue
Access to competitive builder market: Taps into a network of specialized builders (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute) competing for block space, often yielding higher rewards. This matters for validators prioritizing fee revenue maximization over control.
>90%
Ethereum Blocks via Relays
03
Local Building: Full Control & Censorship Resistance
Sovereign transaction ordering: Validator controls the entire block production pipeline, enforcing their own policy (e.g., OFAC compliance choice). This matters for protocols or validators with strict ethical or regulatory requirements.
0%
Relay Dependency
04
Local Building: Reduced Latency & Trust Assumptions
Eliminates relay network hops: Block construction happens locally, removing a potential point of failure or manipulation. This matters for maximizing proposer timing efficiency and minimizing reliance on external, potentially centralized services.
05
MEV-Boost: Centralization & Relay Risk
Concentrates power in relay-builder cartels: Top 3 relays (Flashbots, bloXroute, Agnostic) dominate, creating systemic risk. Validators are exposed to relay downtime, filtering, or malicious behavior. This matters for network health and decentralization.
06
Local Building: Revenue Leakage & Complexity
Requires sophisticated MEV software: To compete with professional builders, validators must run tools like SUAVE, MEV-Share, or custom searcher bundles, incurring R&D and operational overhead. This often leads to lower extracted value versus the open market.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Strategy Selection: When to Choose Which
MEV-Boost Relay for Validators
Verdict: The default choice for maximizing revenue with minimal operational overhead. Strengths: Access to a competitive marketplace of professional block builders (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute, Eden) ensures you capture near-optimal MEV rewards without building expertise in-house. Relays handle censorship resistance lists (crLists) and provide attestations. This is the path of least resistance for most solo stakers and staking pools. Trade-offs: You cede block-building control and introduce relay dependency. You must trust the relay's uptime and its adherence to crLists. Revenue is subject to builder and relay fees.
Local Block Building for Validators
Verdict: For sophisticated operators prioritizing maximum control, censorship resistance, and fee capture.
Strengths: Eliminates relay risk and fees. Enables full control over transaction ordering and bundle inclusion, allowing for custom strategies (e.g., own DEX arbitrage). Essential for validators with a high-value order flow or those building for specific communities.
Trade-offs: Requires significant engineering resources to build and maintain a competitive builder (using frameworks like mev-rs or mev-boost). Risk of suboptimal block construction leading to lower rewards versus the professional market.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
Choosing between MEV-Boost relays and local block building is a strategic decision between outsourced optimization and sovereign control.
MEV-Boost Relay Performance excels at maximizing validator revenue through specialized, competitive markets. By outsourcing block construction to a network of professional builders like Flashbots, BloXroute, and Titan, validators access a high-density stream of value. For example, during periods of high network congestion, relays can deliver blocks with MEV rewards that are 20-50% higher than basic local building, directly boosting APR. This approach leverages economies of scale and sophisticated algorithms like PBS (Proposer-Builder Separation) to extract optimal value from every slot.
Local Block Building takes a different approach by prioritizing sovereignty, censorship resistance, and protocol alignment. This strategy involves running your own builder software, such as mev-geth or Reth, to construct blocks from your local mempool. This results in a critical trade-off: you forgo the peak revenue potential of the competitive relay market to gain full control over transaction inclusion, ensuring compliance with OFAC sanctions lists is your own choice and reducing reliance on external infrastructure.
The key architectural trade-off is between optimization and control. MEV-Boost provides a plug-and-play revenue boost but introduces external dependencies and potential centralization risks within the builder market. Local building fortifies network decentralization and validator independence at the cost of requiring more engineering resources and accepting lower, more predictable rewards.
Consider MEV-Boost Relays if your priority is maximizing staking yield with minimal operational overhead. This is the default and rational choice for most validators, especially those using services like Lido or Rocket Pool, where performance is benchmarked against peers. The ecosystem of relays and builders is mature, with tools like mevboost.org providing transparent performance dashboards.
Choose Local Block Building if you prioritize censorship resistance, are building a mission-critical protocol that requires maximum liveness guarantees, or are conducting advanced MEV research. This path is essential for entities like censorship-resistant dApps or validators adhering to strict regulatory policies, as it ensures unconditional transaction inclusion. It also serves as a vital hedge against the centralization of the builder market.
Final Decision Framework: For CTOs managing large staking operations, the revenue delta from MEV-Boost is typically compelling. For Protocol Architects whose dApp's integrity depends on uncensored blockspace, local building is a non-negotiable dependency. Evaluate your tolerance for third-party risk against your revenue requirements to make the strategic choice.
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