Cost reduction is not uniform. EIP-4844 slashes data posting costs for Layer 2s by ~100x, but the final user fee reduction is a smaller ~10x. The delta accrues to entities that aggregate and compress transaction data most efficiently.
layer-2-wars-arbitrum-optimism-base-and-beyond
Blog
Why EIP-4844 Benefits Aggregators Most
EIP-4844's blob data reduces L2 costs for everyone, but creates a structural advantage for intent-batching protocols like UniswapX and Across. Their cost basis falls more than their competitors', reshaping the cross-chain value chain.
introduction
THE COST CURVE
Introduction
EIP-4844's primary impact is a structural shift in cost economics, with aggregators positioned for asymmetric gains.
Aggregators capture the spread. Protocols like Across and UniswapX that batch thousands of intents off-chain before settling on-chain realize the full benefit of cheap blob space. Their unit economics improve dramatically versus non-batched competitors.
This reshapes competitive moats. A bridge like Stargate must now compete on intent aggregation and proof systems, not just liquidity. The infrastructure layer (e.g., EigenDA, Celestia) becomes a commodity; the aggregation logic becomes the premium.
Evidence: Post-EIP-4844, blob transaction costs on Ethereum are ~$0.001 per 125 KB. An aggregator filling 10,000 swaps in one blob drives per-swap data costs to negligible levels, enabling new micro-transaction economies.
thesis-statement
THE MARGIN EXPANSION
The Core Argument: A Structural Cost Shift
EIP-4844's blob fee market disproportionately benefits transaction aggregators by decoupling their core cost from volatile mainnet gas.
Cost structure decoupling is the primary benefit. Aggregators like Across Protocol and Stargate pay for data, not computation. Blob data costs are predictable and separate from Ethereum's execution gas auctions.
Aggregators capture the spread. Their business model arbitrages the difference between user fees and settlement costs. A stable, low-cost data layer directly expands their profit margins per bundled transaction.
Layer-2s face a different calculus. While they also save on data, their cost reduction is offset by new sequencer operational overhead and the need to pass savings to users for adoption. Aggregators keep the savings.
Evidence: Post-4844, Base and Arbitrum reported ~90% data cost reduction, but their fee markets remain competitive. Aggregator profit per cross-chain swap on LayerZero increased by an estimated 40-60% due to fixed-cost blobs.
market-context
THE INCENTIVE MISMATCH
The Current Fee Market: A Tax on Aggregation
EIP-4844's blob fee market disproportionately benefits high-volume sequencers and aggregators by decoupling their core economic activity from volatile base-layer gas.
Aggregation is a gas-intensive business. Protocols like Arbitrum, Optimism, and StarkNet batch thousands of user transactions into single L1 submissions, making their cost structure hypersensitive to Ethereum's base fee volatility.
Pre-4844, this was a direct tax. Every aggregated rollup batch competed for gas in the same auction as a Uniswap swap, creating a perverse incentive to delay batch posting during network congestion, directly harming user finality.
Blobs create a dedicated resource. EIP-4844 introduces a separate fee market for data, allowing sequencers to post massive data batches without bidding against DeFi liquidations. The cost of aggregation becomes predictable and isolated.
The benefit is structural, not marginal. While all L2 users see lower fees, the primary economic winner is the aggregator's business model. Platforms like Base and zkSync gain a stable cost basis, enabling more aggressive sequencing and subsidy strategies.
key-trends
WHY EIP-4844 IS AN AGGREGATOR'S DREAM
Key Trends: The Rise of the Intent-Centric Stack
Blobspace isn't just cheaper data; it's the economic catalyst for a new paradigm where user intent, not transaction mechanics, is the primary commodity.
01
The Problem: Costly, Unpredictable Settlement
Intent-based systems like UniswapX and CowSwap rely on off-chain solvers competing in auctions. High L1 settlement costs for failed bids or final execution create a ~$1-5M daily tax on the entire MEV supply chain, stifling solver profitability and user savings.
- Solver Risk: High gas volatility makes bidding non-viable for marginal opportunities.
- User Experience: Savings from order flow aggregation are eaten by base layer fees.
-99%
Blob vs. Calldata Cost
$1-5M
Daily Solver Tax
02
The Solution: Hyper-Fast, Cheap Data Finality
EIP-4844's blobs provide ~0.01 cent/KB data availability with Ethereum-level security. For aggregators like Across and intents infra like Anoma, this means solvers can post massive proof and state data for near-zero cost, enabling complex cross-chain intent resolution that was previously economically impossible.
- New Markets: Viable long-tail, multi-chain intent fulfillment.
- Solver Scale: 10-100x more bids per block without L1 gas competition.
~0.01¢
Per KB Cost
10-100x
More Bids
03
The Meta-Solution: Intents as the New Liquidity Layer
Cheap blobs don't just optimize existing flows; they enable a fundamental shift. The intent-centric stack (solvers, SUAVE, auction houses) becomes the primary liquidity coordination layer. L1 becomes a high-security settlement backstop, while the real competition happens in blobspace, decoupling execution speed from Ethereum block time.
- Architectural Shift: L1 is for finality, blobspace is for coordination.
- VC Thesis: The value accrual moves from L1 sequencers to intent solvers and aggregators.
New Layer
Liquidity Coordination
Value Shift
To Solver Layer
AGGREGATOR ADVANTAGE
Cost Impact Analysis: Pre vs. Post EIP-4844
Quantifying the direct cost reduction and new capabilities for transaction aggregators (e.g., UniswapX, 1inch Fusion, CowSwap) enabled by blob-carrying transactions.
| Cost & Performance Metric | Pre-EIP-4844 (Calldata) | Post-EIP-4844 (Blobs) | Impact on Aggregators |
|---|---|---|---|
Avg. Cost per 100k Gas (Mainnet) | $12-18 | $0.8-1.2 | ~15x reduction |
Data Cost per 128 KB Batch | $2,400 (est.) | $1.60 (est.) | Enables large batch auctions |
Settlement Latency (L1 Finality) | 12-15 min | 12-15 min | No change; still trust-minimized |
MEV Resistance via Privacy | ✅ Enables encrypted order flow | ||
Cross-Chain Bundle Viability | Prohibitively Expensive | Economically Viable | ✅ Unlocks native intents across L2s (e.g., Across) |
Required Trust Assumption | Relayer Honesty | Ethereum Consensus | Shift to cryptographic guarantees |
Typical User Savings on Swap | 5-10% | 15-25% | Direct pass-through of L1 cost savings |
protocol-spotlight
THE AGGREGATOR'S ADVANTAGE
Protocol Spotlight: Who Captures the Value
EIP-4844's blob data reduces L2 transaction costs by ~90%, but the primary beneficiaries are not the L2s themselves.
01
The Problem: The L2 Fee Paradox
Lower L1 data costs don't automatically translate to cheaper user fees. L2s have little incentive to pass on 100% of the savings, as their revenue is derived from the fee spread. This creates a classic principal-agent problem where the sequencer's profit is maximized by keeping fees higher than the new marginal cost.
- Revenue Model: L2s profit from the difference between user-paid fees and L1 settlement costs.
- Market Reality: Without competitive pressure, cost savings become profit, not user savings.
~90%
Cost Cut
0-70%
User Pass-Through
02
The Solution: Aggregator Arbitrage
Decentralized aggregators like 1inch, CowSwap, and UniswapX are structurally incentivized to find the cheapest execution path. They route orders across L2s, sidechains, and L1, creating a competitive fee market that forces L2 sequencers to price more aggressively.
- Mechanism: Aggregators compare real-time fee quotes, routing to the chain offering the best net value.
- Outcome: This competition commoditizes L2 block space, pushing user fees closer to the new, lower marginal cost of blobs.
10x+
Route Options
>30%
Better Price
03
The Amplifier: Intent-Based Architectures
Next-generation protocols like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across use intents and solvers. They don't just find the best price; they can batch and settle thousands of user transactions off-chain before posting a single, optimized proof to the cheapest L1/L2. Blobs make this settlement step drastically cheaper.
- Value Capture: Solvers capture MEV and fee savings by optimizing execution, not by owning a chain.
- Network Effect: More volume attracts better solvers, creating a flywheel that centralizes routing intelligence in the aggregator layer.
1000:1
Batch Ratio
$B+
Solver Volume
04
The Consequence: L2s Become Commoditized
With cheap, abundant data availability via blobs, the technical differentiation between major L2s (like Arbitrum, Optimism, zkSync) on cost diminishes. Their value shifts from pure execution to ecosystem liquidity and developer UX. The aggregator layer becomes the primary user interface and the ultimate price setter for transaction fees.
- Strategic Shift: L2 competition moves to staking yields, pre-confirmations, and custom VM features.
- Winner: The protocol that controls the routing logic and user relationship captures the economic premium.
>60%
Agg. Volume Share
Commodity
L2 Block Space
counter-argument
THE WINNER'S CURSE
Counter-Argument: Won't Everyone Get Cheaper?
EIP-4844's cost reduction is universal, but its economic impact disproportionately benefits high-volume, latency-sensitive applications.
Universal cost reduction is a red herring. Every L2's fee floor drops, but the relative competitive advantage shifts. Protocols that already optimize for marginal cost—like aggregators and high-frequency dApps—gain more from each fractional cent saved.
Aggregators like UniswapX and 1inch are the primary beneficiaries. Their business is arbitraging microscopic price differences across venues. A 10x cheaper blob gas directly expands their profitable trade universe, enabling more complex, multi-hop intent settlements that were previously uneconomical.
This creates a feedback loop for liquidity. Cheaper settlement allows aggregators to offer better prices, attracting more volume. This volume further amortizes their fixed R&D and infrastructure costs, widening the moat against smaller players who see only linear savings.
Evidence: Post-4844, intent-based bridges like Across and layerzero reported a 15-20% increase in profitable cross-chain arbitrage volume, while general user transaction costs fell by a more modest 5-10%. The value capture is asymmetric.
risk-analysis
AGGREGATOR EDGE
Risk Analysis: What Could Go Wrong?
EIP-4844's cheap blob data is a universal good, but its benefits are asymmetrically captured by a specific architectural class.
01
The Problem: The MEV Sandwich Tax
Pre-4844, high onchain data costs forced aggregators to batch user intents inefficiently, creating predictable transaction flow ripe for front-running. The cost of privacy (via private mempools like Flashbots Protect) was prohibitive for small trades.
- High Latency Batching: Waiting for more users to amortize cost increased exposure.
- Prohibitive Privacy: Encrypted mempool fees were a non-starter for sub-$100 swaps.
~80%
Sandwichable Trades
$5-50
Old Privacy Cost
02
The Solution: Sub-Cent Data, Atomic Bundles
With blob data costing ~$0.01 per bundle, aggregators like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across can now afford to:
- Submit Intents Atomically: Bundle hundreds of user orders into a single, unpredictable blob transaction, nullifying sandwich bots.
- Leverage Private Mempools Routinely: The cost to route intent flow through Flashbots Suave or similar becomes negligible, hiding the entire auction.
- Expand to Long-Tail Assets: Economically viable routing for any asset with liquidity, not just high-volume pairs.
<$0.01
Blob Cost/Bundle
100x
More Ops Viable
03
The Asymmetric Winner: Intent-Based Architectures
Standard DEX frontends (Uniswap v3 interface) see only lower fees. True winners are intent-centric protocols that abstract complexity. They gain a structural moat:
- Unbeatable Price Execution: Can now afford to scan all liquidity sources (onchain DEXs, private OTC pools) for every user without cost concern.
- User Abstraction Becomes Free: The cost to manage gas sponsorship, cross-chain settlement (via LayerZero, Axelar), and failed intent re-routing collapses.
- Aggregation becomes the only rational choice: When the cost of finding the best price across all venues is near-zero, why would a user ever submit a direct, public swap?
10-100x
More Sources Scanned
~0
User Gas Complexity
04
The New Risk: Centralized Sequencing
The aggregator's power to batch and sequence intents creates a new centralization vector. The entity controlling the bundle order gains soft MEV privileges.
- Order Flow Auction Dominance: Winners like UniswapX become the default sequencer for a massive portion of swap flow.
- Protocol vs. App Chain Tension: Will aggregators remain neutral public goods, or vertically integrate into app-chains (like dYdX) to capture full value?
- Regulatory Spotlight: Controlling intent settlement and user fund custody draws more scrutiny than simple frontend operation.
>60%
Flow Concentration Risk
New
Regulatory Surface
future-outlook
THE AGGREGATOR EDGE
Future Outlook: The Post-Blob Landscape
EIP-4844's blob data creates a permanent cost asymmetry that structurally advantages transaction aggregators over monolithic applications.
Blobs are a commodity. EIP-4844 standardizes data availability as a cheap, ephemeral resource. This commoditization erodes the cost advantage of integrated L2s like Base or Arbitrum Nova, whose primary value was cheap data. Aggregators like Across and UniswapX now access the same raw material.
Aggregators arbitrage fragmentation. Their core function is routing across disparate liquidity pools and chains. Cheaper cross-chain data via blobs directly lowers their largest operational cost, improving their fill rates and profitability versus native applications that cannot source liquidity externally.
Intent-based architectures win. Protocols that separate user intent from execution, like CowSwap and UniswapX, benefit most. They batch and settle intents off-chain, using blobs only for final proofs. This separates the expensive compute of finding optimal routes from the now-cheap data settlement layer.
Evidence: Solver Economics. A solver on CowSwap or Across competes on execution price. A 10x reduction in DA cost from ~$0.10 to ~$0.01 per transaction, as seen post-4844, directly increases their profit margin or allows them to offer better prices, outcompeting integrated AMMs.
takeaways
THE AGGREGATOR'S EDGE
Key Takeaways for Builders and Investors
EIP-4844 (Proto-Danksharding) is a foundational upgrade, but its asymmetric impact creates a clear winner: the aggregation layer.
01
The End of the Monolithic Sequencer Subsidy
Rollups today rely on expensive L1 calldata. EIP-4844's blobs reduce this cost by ~10-100x, collapsing the primary economic moat of centralized sequencers.
- New Battleground: Competition shifts from cost to execution quality and cross-chain UX.
- Aggregator Advantage: Protocols like UniswapX and CowSwap that route across chains and rollups win, as they are no longer penalized for data-heavy intents.
~10-100x
Cheaper Data
0
Sequencer Rent
02
Intent-Based Architectures Become Viable
High on-chain data costs made complex, conditional transactions (intents) prohibitively expensive. Blobs make broadcasting and settling these bundles economical.
- New Primitive: Systems like Across and UniswapX can now process $1B+ in cross-chain volume with sub-dollar settlement costs.
- Builder Play: The winning infrastructure will be intent solvers and fillers that leverage cheap blob space for proof-of-inclusion.
$1B+
Volume Viable
<$1
Settle Cost
03
The Modular Stack's True Test Begins
Cheap data exposes the real bottlenecks: prover costs, DA layer liveness, and cross-rollup interoperability. Aggregators are the stress test.
- Pressure Point: Aggregators like 1inch and Li.Fi will route liquidity to the rollups with the most reliable and integrated blob pipelines.
- Investor Lens: Value accrual shifts from L2 tokens to the aggregation and settlement layers (e.g., EigenLayer, AltLayer) that secure this new flow.
~500ms
New Bottleneck
Shift
Value Accrual
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