MEV is a tax on user transactions, extracted by sophisticated bots through front-running and sandwich attacks. This value leakage creates a systemic inefficiency that degrades network trust and user experience.
mev-the-hidden-tax-of-crypto
Blog
The Future of MEV: Obfuscation or Elimination?
The crypto ecosystem faces a fundamental fork: hide MEV with encryption or design it out with intent-based architectures. We analyze the trade-offs between obfuscation (Shutter Network, bloXroute) and elimination (CowSwap, UniswapX) to determine the path forward.
introduction
THE FRONTIER
Introduction
The battle for blockchain's economic surplus is shifting from extraction to prevention.
Obfuscation is the dominant strategy, using encryption and private mempools like Flashbots SUAVE to hide transaction intent. This approach treats MEV as an unavoidable market force to be managed, not solved.
Elimination is the purist's goal, pursued by protocols like Anoma and Shutter Network. Their architectures use threshold cryptography to make transaction content unknowable until execution, aiming to make extraction impossible.
The future is a hybrid: SUAVE will dominate short-term infrastructure, but intent-based architectures represent the endgame. The winner determines who controls the billions in annual value transfer.
thesis-statement
THE CORE DILEMMA
Thesis Statement
The future of MEV is not a binary choice between obfuscation and elimination, but a strategic shift towards its commoditization and fair redistribution.
MEV is inescapable thermodynamics. Any system with ordering and latency will create extractable value; the goal is managing its externalities, not achieving a perfect vacuum.
Obfuscation is a temporary arms race. Protocols like Shutter Network and Flashbots SUAVE use encryption to hide transactions, but this creates complexity and shifts, rather than solves, the coordination problem.
Elimination is a market design failure. Attempts to architect it out, like CowSwap's batch auctions, simply internalize and redistribute the value, proving MEV is a fundamental market feature.
The endgame is commoditization. The winning approach abstracts MEV into a predictable, auctioned resource, as seen with EigenLayer's restaking and intent-based architectures like UniswapX, which turn searchers into a utility.
key-trends
THE FUTURE OF MEV
Key Trends: The MEV Arms Race Escalates
The battle over blockchain extractable value is shifting from public auctions to private infrastructure, forcing a fundamental choice: hide it or kill it.
01
The Problem: The Dark Forest of Public Mempools
Public mempools are a free-for-all where sophisticated searchers with ~500ms latency advantages front-run and sandwich retail trades. This creates a toxic environment for users and centralizes block building power.
- User Cost: Sandwich attacks extract ~$1B+ annually from traders.
- Network Effect: Top searchers control >80% of profitable MEV on Ethereum.
- Centralization Vector: Builders with the best MEV flow win auctions, creating a feedback loop.
$1B+
Annual Extract
>80%
Market Share
02
The Solution: Encrypted Mempools & Obfuscation
Protocols like Shutter Network and EigenLayer's MEVM encrypt transactions until they are included in a block, blinding searchers. This preserves the fee market while eliminating front-running.
- Privacy Layer: Uses Threshold Encryption (TEEs or MPC) to hide intent.
- Builder Integration: Requires adoption by major builders like Flashbots' SUAVE or bloXroute.
- Trade-off: Adds ~1-2 second latency but protects user orders.
1-2s
Added Latency
100%
Front-run Proof
03
The Solution: Intent-Based Architectures & Elimination
Systems like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across move execution off-chain. Users submit signed intents ("I want this output"), and a network of solvers competes to fulfill them optimally, atomically settling on-chain.
- MEV Absorption: Solvers internalize and compete away value, returning it as better prices.
- User Experience: Gasless, cross-chain swaps with guaranteed execution.
- Paradigm Shift: Transforms MEV from a leak into a competitive efficiency subsidy.
~$10B+
Processed Volume
0 Gas
For Users
04
The Wildcard: Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) & SUAVE
PBS (Ethereum's roadmap) and Flashbots' SUAVE attempt to democratize block building by creating a centralized marketplace for block space. This doesn't eliminate MEV but aims to make its distribution fairer and more transparent.
- Centralized Liquidity: SUAVE aims to become the dominant MEV marketplace across chains.
- Builder Monopoly Risk: Could consolidate power in a few neutral builders if not designed correctly.
- Economic Shift: Turns MEV into a visible, auction-based commodity rather than a hidden tax.
1
Universal Auction
High
Centralization Risk
STRATEGIC APPROACHES TO MEV
The Obfuscation vs. Elimination Matrix
Comparing core architectural philosophies for managing Miner Extractable Value, from hiding transaction intent to redesigning the block building process.
| Core Metric / Feature | Obfuscation (e.g., SUAVE, Shutter) | Elimination (e.g., MEV-Burn, MEV-Smoothing) | Hybrid (e.g., MEV-Share, PBS with Commitments) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Goal | Hide transaction intent from searchers & builders | Remove economic incentive for MEV extraction | Redistribute extracted value to users/protocol |
Architectural Change Required | New pre-confirmation layer (encrypted mempool) | Consensus/Protocol-level (e.g., fee burn, ordered blocks) | Auction redesign (separate builder/proposer roles) |
User Experience Impact | Delayed finality (2-30 sec for decryption) | Predictable, uniform inclusion latency | Variable; depends on auction competitiveness |
Searcher Profit Pool | Shifts to solving encrypted computation | Reduces to near-zero | Captured and partially redistributed |
Builder Profit Pool | Eliminated or severely reduced | Eliminated | Formalized and transparent |
Max Theoretical MEV Extracted |
| Approaches 0% for targeted MEV types | 50-80% captured by system, not searchers |
Key Trade-off | Latency for privacy & fairness | Protocol complexity & potential rigidity | Centralization pressure on professional builders |
Exemplar Projects/Research | SUAVE, Shutter Network, Fairblock | Ethereum's EIP-1559 (partial), MEV-Burn, Chainlink FSS | Flashbots SUAVE/PBS, CowSwap, MEV-Share, OEV |
deep-dive
THE FUTURE OF MEV
Deep Dive: The Mechanics of the Fork
The blockchain ecosystem is bifurcating into two distinct futures: one that obfuscates MEV and one that aims to eliminate it.
MEV obfuscation is the dominant path. Protocols like Flashbots SUAVE and CowSwap do not remove value extraction; they democratize and privatize the search process. This creates a professionalized searcher ecosystem where value leaks to the edges, not the core.
MEV elimination requires protocol redesign. This is the intent-based architecture championed by Anoma and UniswapX. Users express desired outcomes, and solvers compete to fulfill them off-chain, theoretically removing the toxic arbitrage opportunity from the public mempool.
The fork is structural. Obfuscation works within today's public mempool model, making it the pragmatic choice for Ethereum and its L2s. Elimination requires abandoning this model, a bet only new L1s or radical applications like Dflow can make.
Evidence: The SUAVE testnet has over 75% of Ethereum's block builders integrated, proving obfuscation's immediate traction. In contrast, Anoma's Namada shield airdrop demonstrates the complexity of bootstrapping an elimination-based ecosystem from zero.
protocol-spotlight
THE FUTURE OF MEV
Protocol Spotlight: The Vanguard
The $1B+ MEV market is a tax on users and a systemic risk. The vanguard is building infrastructure to either hide transactions or make extraction permissionless and fair.
01
The Problem: Dark Forests & Centralization
Sealed-bid auctions on Ethereum concentrate MEV profits with a few sophisticated searchers and builders, creating a centralizing force on consensus. This opaque process leads to censorship and unpredictable, often negative, outcomes for end-users.
- Centralized Control: Top 5 builders control ~80%+ of blocks.
- User Harm: Front-running and sandwich attacks extract ~$100M+ annually from retail.
80%+
Builder Control
$100M+
Annual Extract
02
The Solution: Encrypted Mempools (Obfuscation)
Protocols like Shutter Network and EigenLayer's MEVM encrypt transactions until block inclusion, preventing searchers from seeing and front-running user intent. This shifts power from extractors back to users.
- Privacy-Preserving: Uses threshold cryptography (e.g., Ferveo) for transaction encryption.
- Composability Risk: Can break DeFi arbitrage and liquidations, requiring careful integration with protocols like Aave and Uniswap.
0ms
Frontrun Window
T+
Latency Added
03
The Solution: SUAVE (Elimination & Redistribution)
Flashbots' SUAVE is a dedicated mempool and decentralized block builder that aims to democratize MEV. It turns extraction into a permissionless, competitive market and can redistribute profits via mechanisms like MEV-Share.
- Universal Preferences: A cross-chain intent layer for expressing user preferences.
- Redistribution: Protocols like CowSwap and UniswapX can use it to refund MEV back to users.
100%
Permissionless
Multi-Chain
Scope
04
The Pragmatic Path: Hybrid Architectures
The end-state is not pure obfuscation or elimination, but a hybrid. Obfuscation protects sensitive transactions, while SUAVE-like platforms create efficient, fair markets for necessary MEV (e.g., arbitrage).
- Intent-Based: Solutions like Across and LayerZero's DVN abstract execution, letting specialized solvers compete.
- Regulatory Shield: Obfuscation provides a compliance narrative by default, reducing regulatory surface area.
Hybrid
Model
Intent
Future Primitive
counter-argument
THE REALITY CHECK
Counter-Argument: The Case for Pragmatic Obfuscation
Complete MEV elimination is a theoretical ideal; practical systems require robust obfuscation to function at scale.
Obfuscation is operationally viable where elimination is not. Fully encrypted mempools like Shutter Network or threshold encryption schemes provide immediate, deployable protection for users without requiring a fundamental re-architecture of block production.
Elimination creates systemic fragility. Protocols like Flashbots SUAVE or pure order-fairness consensus introduce new bottlenecks and centralization vectors in the block-building layer, trading one problem for another.
The market selects for pragmatism. The dominance of private RPCs (e.g., Flashbots Protect) and intent-based systems (UniswapX, CowSwap) proves builders and users optimize for cost reduction, not purity.
Evidence: Over 90% of Ethereum blocks are built via MEV-Boost relays, a centralized obfuscation layer. This is the equilibrium state, not a transitional phase.
risk-analysis
THE FUTURE OF MEV
Risk Analysis: What Could Go Wrong?
The battle over transaction ordering pits privacy against efficiency, with the core risk being that 'solutions' create new, more centralized attack vectors.
01
The Obfuscation Trap: Encrypted Mempools
Privacy-preserving mempools like Shutterized Aave or Ethereum's Pectra upgrade aim to hide transactions until inclusion. The risk is shifting trust from validators to a small committee running Threshold Encryption. This creates a single point of failure and censorship, potentially worse than the MEV it solves.\n- Centralization Risk: A 9-of-16 committee holds ultimate power.\n- Latency Tax: Adds ~1-2 seconds of encryption/decryption delay per block.
1-2s
Latency Tax
9-of-16
Trust Assumption
02
The Elimination Fallacy: SUAVE's Central Planner
SUAVE aims to eliminate searcher competition by creating a neutral, decentralized block builder. The systemic risk is that it becomes the universal sequencing layer, a single economic conduit for all chains. If compromised, it would be a catastrophic failure point for cross-chain liquidity and settlement.\n- Single Point of Failure: A $10B+ cross-chain liquidity hub.\n- Regulatory Target: Becomes the obvious entity for enforcement action.
$10B+
Risk Surface
1
Universal Layer
03
The Inevitable Re-Centralization
Both obfuscation and elimination architectures inherently favor large, capital-heavy operators. Encrypted mempools require expensive SGX/TEE infrastructure. SUAVE-style building requires massive scale. The result is a new oligopoly of block builders, replicating the miner centralization problem from Proof-of-Work.\n- Capital Barrier: Requires $10M+ in hardware/staking.\n- Oligopoly Risk: ~3-5 entities control majority of block space.
$10M+
Entry Cost
3-5
Dominant Entities
04
Intent-Based Systems: The New Slippage
Solving MEV for users via intents (like UniswapX or CowSwap) outsources complexity to solvers. The risk is that solvers extract value through opaque routing and cross-domain arbitrage, hiding costs in worse execution. The 'MEV-free' promise becomes a marketing gimmick for a new form of rent extraction.\n- Opaque Fees: Hidden in ~5-30 bps of slippage.\n- Solver Cartels: Flashbots SUAVE could dominate this market.
5-30 bps
Hidden Cost
Cartel
Market Structure
future-outlook
THE ENDGAME
Future Outlook: The Convergence
The MEV landscape will converge on a hybrid model where obfuscation and elimination strategies coexist, driven by specialized infrastructure.
MEV will not be eliminated. The fundamental economic incentive for transaction ordering exists in any decentralized system. Protocols like Flashbots' SUAVE aim to democratize access, not remove the value extraction itself.
Obfuscation becomes the dominant strategy. Widespread adoption of encrypted mempools and private transaction channels (e.g., Shutter Network) will shift MEV from public sniping to probabilistic, off-chain games.
Application-layer elimination creates islands. Chains with native order flow auctions (e.g., Canto's L1 design) or intent-based architectures (e.g., UniswapX, CowSwap) will internalize and redistribute value, creating MEV-free zones for specific use cases.
Evidence: The rise of shared sequencers (like Astria) and specialized L2s (like Espresso) proves the market demands infrastructure that commoditizes block production, separating execution from MEV capture.
takeaways
THE FUTURE OF MEV
Takeaways for Builders and Architects
The extractive nature of Maximal Extractable Value is a fundamental design flaw in transparent blockchains. The path forward is not a single solution, but a strategic choice between obfuscating the value or eliminating the opportunity.
01
The Obfuscation Path: Encrypted Mempools
Hide transaction content from searchers and builders until block inclusion, forcing them to bid blindly. This preserves the competitive builder market but adds cryptographic overhead.
- Key Benefit: Maintains ~$1B+ annual builder revenue for chain security.
- Key Benefit: Compatible with existing PBS (Proposer-Builder Separation) frameworks like Ethereum's mev-boost.
+200-500ms
Latency Added
0%
MEV Eliminated
02
The Elimination Path: SUAVE
Separate the chain for transaction ordering (SUAVE) from execution. A decentralized network of executors competes to fulfill user intents, baking optimal execution into the protocol.
- Key Benefit: Redirects billions in MEV back to users via better prices.
- Key Benefit: Creates a universal, chain-agnostic liquidity layer for intents, challenging UniswapX and Across.
>90%
Extraction Reduced
New Market
For Solvers
03
The Pragmatic Path: MEV-Aware Application Design
Architect dApps to internalize and redistribute value, making extraction pointless. Use private RPCs, batch auctions, and commit-reveal schemes.
- Key Benefit: Immediate user protection without waiting for L1 upgrades.
- Key Benefit: Proven model by CowSwap (batch auctions) and Flashbots Protect (private RPC).
-99%
Sandwich Risk
App-Specific
Solution Scope
04
The Inevitable: Cross-Chain MEV & Intents
MEV is not an Ethereum problem. As activity fragments across rollups and app-chains, cross-domain arbitrage becomes the dominant game. This demands new infrastructure.
- Key Benefit: Drives adoption of generalized messaging (e.g., LayerZero, CCIP) and shared sequencers.
- Key Benefit: Creates a $100M+ market for cross-chain solvers and intent-based bridges.
10x
Complexity Increase
Multi-Chain
Required Design
05
The Regulatory Shield: Fair Sequencing Services
Use a trusted, legally accountable entity (or decentralized quorum) to order transactions fairly (e.g., by receipt time). This is the nuclear option for compliance-heavy sectors like RWA.
- Key Benefit: Provides a clear legal audit trail for transaction ordering.
- Key Benefit: Eliminates front-running with deterministic, verifiable fairness.
~100%
Front-Run Proof
Centralized
Trust Assumption
06
The Bottom Line: MEV is Protocol Revenue
For chain architects, MEV is a critical security budget. Eliminating it entirely may require subsidizing security via inflation. The choice is economic: user savings vs. validator incentives.
- Key Benefit: Clear framework for tokenomics design (e.g., burn vs. distribute).
- Key Benefit: Aligns long-term security with the chosen MEV strategy (obfuscation vs. elimination).
$1B+
Annual Security Budget
Core Trade-Off
Design Philosophy
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